I'm not particularly concerned with people deciding to disregard certain opinions if they feel their experience has or is likely to be different. What does bother me is users, particularly in the video game community, trying to delegitimize a review for everyone simply because it doesn't line up with their opinion (perhaps the most notable recent example occurring with IGN's Uncharted 4 review). If you want to personally ignore a review because you don't think their experience won't line up with your own, or even if you suspect them of being dishonest, that's fine. But telling other people that they are definitively being dishonest (and therefore discrediting their opinion) with nothing to back it up besides your impression is something else entirely.

I laid out where I believe Jim is misleading people. You disagreeing with that is fine, but it's part of the basis for which I've formed my opinion. I could also point out Jim's little Horizon vs Zelda rant where he cherry picked information to paint one fanbase in a negative light. I'm sure you've seen this article

http://www.thejimquisition.com/the-sad-ghost-war-between-breath-of-the-wild-and-horizon-zero-dawn/

“So I guess Jim is going to use this comment section to justify how Zelda fans are toxic and all that, yet he still hasn’t commented on the Metabombing of the Metacritic user score by Horizon: Zero Dawn fans,” wrote one responder to The Jimquisition’s Breath of the Wild review.

This sentiment is not uncommon amongst those Zelda fans who genuinely are toxic, the fans I guess I’ll just call Fucking Slithering Pricks.

This is a sentiment almost anyone following metacritic has, and there is just as much evidence of Horizon fans "metabombing" Zelda BotW. Mathematically speaking, Zelda has a higher percentage of 'metabomb' scores than Horizon does. But this entire article was written to make one fanbase look bad regardless of the facts. I truly do believe he has something against the game and it's fans. 

At the very least, Jim has gone far beyond discrediting one's opinions and has gone on to directly insulting users on his site and Zelda fans (who believe the game is also being 'metabombed'). 

I'm sorry but I completely discredit the opinion on individuals who act like this, and I truly believe he's showing a VERY clear bias. It's fine if you disagree with me, but my accusation certainly is not baseless. 

Nope, never bothered getting bugs. I've cleared two beasts, without doing any of that. I just looked it up now. I'd need a cricket. Never got that before. didn't even know you could upgrade the slate to add bug as a sensor. I never even used the camera function.

That's what open world is about. I had no idea what's hard or not. I just choose: Let me unlock all the towers. I'll deal with the farthest one (top left), first. I was like. Let me get the big headache out of the way. Got stuck, with limitations. Went to the right side, of the world. Did some shrines, cleared one beast. Then I was like: This isn't really do whatever. I still have to do certain requirements.

I know. I've cleared it. I'm just saying you really can't fight them directly. The big guys have way too much HP. ANd fighting 4 of them is way too rediculess.

I'll admit I haven't played THAT many open world games, but I've never played a game where you can just jump to any segment without having to learn anything about the game. Even in open world games, you can't just do any segment you want...you still have to get there, and there may be some challenge along the way.

Still, the game didn't force you to deviate from your plans, it was just too (understandably) hard for you to do at the time. It could still be done without going out of your way. The tutorial area teaches you everything you need to know in order to accomplish pretty much any task in the game.

It didn't though. I didn't know anything about bugs, till now. Because I thought they were not important. Just background things. I never bothered to think. To run after a butterfly, or a cricket. Just focused on towers. And was in the mind set. Everythings different from past zelda games. Bugs are probably gone.

Well, it does...you don't need to use bugs to accomplish anything in the game. There is an area that introducing you to cooking. Obviously it's not going to give you all the recipes, but you learn the fundamentals that you need to succeed in the game. You learn how to cook and the benefits of doing so in the tutorial area, whether or not you choose to explore the mechanic further is up to the player.

If I didn't think there was anything else to do, with cooking. I'm not gonna try anything else. You won't learn that, intill you run into the other NPC's. Which is what I didn't do lol. I picked a way, that avoided contact, with the basic game elements. Till I got stuck. Now, that I know this, that, and the other stuff. Ofcourse I can do all the towers without upgrading stamina and hearts. But, that knollege is still apart of following the games basic path. I didn't think going for the map, was gonna cause this issue. I'm also not saying I want dumb things like Fi. The game is already easy, as it is. The bird beast was really stupid easy... It just has annoying aspects, I don't like.

So you thought there was just one recipe used for just the tutorial area of the game and that's all? I'm actually fairly confident that the old man mentions other recipes during that segment (just that they exist). It's also in the description of items you pick up. Obviously you gain things by exploring the game. I'm really not sure I understand your criticism and how you expect a game to work. Perhaps you could explain what you think should be done to alleviate these issues? It kind of just sounds like you want Link to be maxed out as soon as the game starts. Even then, you still have to learn things.

It's in every description of monster items you pick up after killing a monster... This is purely your own fault. 

You can directly fight them... I killed them all and didn't bother with stealth.