Zelda earned that prestige. Simple as that. It's probably much cooler and fun playing as Link, in the classic Zelda universe, with classic Zelda music, with classic Zelda sound effects, with classic weapons, classic Zelda enemies, at the same time with new things in all those categories in each new game, than to play a rehashed game that adds very little to the genre and offers no, let's say... mythology.

It's the same as Modnation vs Mario Kart... it doesn't matter if a missile do the same as a turtle shell... it's not a turtle shell. Turtles shells are cool because they have history.

I don't know about that. Phantom Hourglass currently has a metascore of 90 and Spirit Train has 87. I wouldn't say they ended up there because of a "free-ride".

Some reviewers might give it a few points extra because of the name, but at the same time some reviewers are more harsh just because it's a well-known series of very high quality.

As some have already pointed out the retro style might stand in the way of higher scores.

Exactly

Both those games were really fun with just the right amount of innovation to make them addictively enjoyable for pretty much anyone, ESPECIALLY Spirit Tracks, with Phantom Hourglass I can understand going thought hat same dungeon again & again was annoying.

I'm sure 3D Dot Heroes is amazing, I think sometimes critics find it hard to give a game a score over 9 unless it really innovates in some way & breaks itself from the game its trying to pay a homage too. Remember Lost Oddessy it faced similar criticisms if I remember correctly (gamespots review said Final Fantasy more times in its review than anything else).

But even a new 2D Zelda won't have a free ride just like NSMB Wii didn't get a "free ride"

Big franchise usually gets it easier when it comes to score, so yea.

It would have a much lower review, because there would have been much higher expectations...

I don't know dude. The game was much shitter than any Zelda game I've ever played. It was a tad antiquated but my main gripe about it, was that it was rather shallow, compared to the actual game it copied. That said, it was a good game, but it was also a bargin title, and deservedly so. If a real Zelda game came out on consoles, and was exactly as good as 3DDH, I believe it would be roasted hardcore by Zelda haters and reviewers alike. There is a large anti-Zelda community out there just waiting for any Zelda game not to live up to the hype, and despite all this game does well....it's no Zelda game.

I would assume it would still be about the same. There are reviewers that were harsh on it now because it copies Zelda, and if it was Zelda there would be reviewers who would be more harsh because of higher expectations. Since I don't have evidence that one of these groups is larger than the other I would have to assume that the two would largely cancel each other out.

If this was a Zelda title people would criticise the quality of the dungeons-after spending several hours on a copy of the game at a friends' house, I love the style and retro Zelda homages of the title, but the dungeons just aren't up to the same standards as those of Zelda.

It'd be rated much much lower.

Isn't 3DDGH a tribute to Zelda?
It would be rated higher if it wasn't considered a rip-off by the media.