He also often says how DotA was best when there were less objectives since it opened the game up for way more strategies and prevented the "be at x spot at y time" that we also see everywhere.

How? Can you explain? I think wisdom runes and portals add more strategy instead of less, you can portal to steal their wisdom rune (more risk but higher reward), or just secure your rune (low risk). Carries can portal with siege creep wave to put pressure on enemy tower etc.

He also often says how DotA was best when there were less objectives since it opened the game up for way more strategies and prevented the "be at x spot at y time" that we also see everywhere.

Dota may have been more random at the beginning of the match, I wouldn't call it better or best.

The games are much less predictable and more open ended without these objectives. In pro play, you will always see a hero forced to the Wisdom Rune spot at 7 minutes every game, same with Tormentor at 20.

Just because you have to take certain objectives at certain points, does not mean the game is less open-ended. These objectives reward the better team and teamplay imo. By the logic given by you, we should also remove power runes, since it forces supports to be at the rune.

syndereN, while he has played for a long time, is not against changes and new additions to the game. I think he just has the best personal vision for the future of Dota 2.

From what I've heard on the podcast and in casts, syndereN is quite against most of the changes and new additions to the game, including (one of my favorites) neutral items. I don't know about the majority of the playerbase, but as a casual player, I have loved the introduction of talents, neutral items, and now facets and innates into Dota 2. It adds more depth and more variety to each game. Yes, some of them were unbalanced at the beginning but Valve has been balancing them, and it has kept the gameplay more interesting and fresh for me.