Gotta get dem views.

I think the problem is that Jimquisition is not actually a real review source, it is just some really whiney guy on YouTube. The sort whose age you can't tell because he looks like he's 45 but acts like he's 15.

The point was that all games which have 10/10 scores have faults. The 10's here are perfectly consistent.

I already made a post about what I think is wrong  (and right) with his criticisms in this thread. I am not going to retype all of it. 

The most egregious example is he says the gane is only difficult because enemies one-shot you/do a lot of damage. This is only true when you first start the game, have bad gear, and only have three hearts, like in pretty much every role-playing or actions adventure game. After you get to the first town you can collect fairies which revive you when you die. And depending on which dungeon you go to first there is a skill which revives you. It is really hard (you have to be unprepared) to get OHKOed. Additionally a lot of the difficulty is derived from avoiding enemy's teleprompted attacks. 

His entire tidbit trying to make it seem like the game is only difficult because the enemies hit hard and there is nothing you can do about it is a big misrepresentation of facts. 

Likewise with the facts surrounding when and how you fight Ganon. 

These aren't things which can be amounted to "he has a different opinion." These are claims about what the game is like, which can be refuted or supported. 

I literally laughed out loud when I saw that was the "featured comment".

I haven't played Zelda but, after reading Sterling's review, I've got to agree with him about weapon durability that eventually breaks the weapon.  I said the same thing about Fallout NV (one of my favorite games).  It's a mechanic that needs to be left in the past.  Pausing in the middle of combat to go into your inventory in order to equip a new weapon is immersion-breaking.

Going through the entire comment section makes me go wtf. What's funny is that the "drink bleach" thing was a one off joke from a Youtuber, but it eventually became a meme.

And it's a commercial success. The game was selling like hotcakes well before either review came out, and it's not going to lose its legs because of 2 reviewers very few people have ever heard of. Who is the average consumer going to care about? Time Magazine or Slant? The Guardian or Jimquisition?

 No need to call him miserable.

The moment I read Jim's review earlier today I knew that a whole bunch of people would go up a wall over the score, even though he still says that he likes the game. It's another pointless outrage over a score that in the end doesn't really matter. Why do people get angry at something like this just because it doesn't go in line with what they think about the game? Because the score on metacritic went down a point? What does it matter?

i just read the Jim Sterling review, and kind of agree with some of the points he made, especially about the weapon degradation and stamina meter. although i don't think the game deserves a 7/10.

Even with print media dying, there are more people who care about what actual newspapers have to say than what specific youtubers have to say.  A casual or a non-gamer considering getting a game or a console is far more likely to be swayed one way or another by a review in Time Magazine or the Washington Post than by a youtuber.  Metacritic doesn't determine overall sales, but it does have an effect on sales.