I guess ultimately it is down to user preference as to how you choose to use Areas, however I would strongly suggest that in this instance you should create a parent case, NOT an area.
The reason for this is that you do not want to clutter your areas list with each feature, if you create one for each "large" case (that requires sub-cases) then you would end up with a lot of unmanageable areas, and you don't have all the features with an area that you get the a case - such as being able to close an area, for whatever reason.
In my opinion, areas should be used to divide up a project as a whole. For example, you might have an area for "Design" and one for "Development". Or you might go even deeper and have areas like "Development - Database" and "Development - Application". Or perhaps if it is primarily focused on coding, you could create areas for each part of the system, such as "Admin", "Users", "Customers" etc.
As a side note, I have actually used parent cases in this way before and they work well. One extra benefit of the parent case approach is when it comes to recording time spent on a case. Any time spend on sub-cases is also visible (as a total) on the parent case. This is useful for reporting where you can easily see the overall time taken for a feature without having to worry about the time taken for each sub-case, which in some cases there can be many - even sub-sub-cases!