Because it's not a central component of the game. TLOU for example doesn't lose points for not having challenging and clever problem solving/puzzles because this isn't a core component of that game.

If you put a story in the game it is relevant to the analysis, if it is very bad (not saying it is, but seems like what was said by some here) then there should be points reduced, may be 1 or 2, but it can't have a perfect score if some of the elements presented severely lacking. I don't remember TLOU ever trying to make puzzle even part of the game.

BOTW's story isn't bad though. It's simply a secondary or even tertiary aspect and as such fairly basic.

TLOU has light problem solving like finding a box to push against a wall to climb it, or finding a raft to push Ellie across a body of water so she can reach a wheel to turn. Like BOTW's story, it was really basic stuff, but that didn't matter so much as it was not a core focus of the game.

picking a raft to get over a river isn't a puzzle.

And no problem in the story being simple if it's competent.

I said problem solving.

But before you were saying TLOU doesn't lose points for not having strong puzzle (which it never proposed to have), is this made to be a type of goalpost shifting?

Sounds pretty generic to me. I hope you see the point in making here

No goalpost shifting at all. I said:  "TLOU for example doesn't lose points for not having challenging and clever problem solving/puzzles"

It has no puzzles per se at all, and what problem solving it has it basic to the point of basically just being filler. But it doesn't lose points for it cos that's not what it's all about. On the other hand, had BOTW had weak problem solving in its shrines, which are one of its core components, it would have lost points.

So there is no scoring bias in favour of BOTW. It's simply that games are assessed foremost on their primary components, not their tertiary ones.

I didn't say it was due to scoring bias, I said that it didn't lost points due to it. And shoehorning "problem solving" as one key element that should be evaluated but wasn't because it wasn't strong or core, when it wasn't even part of the game at all not even as filler. The type of "problem solving" you have in TLOU is how to stay alive and find the best route and strategy to cross an area. Getting Ellie from A to B in some of the non-combat sections isn't a problem solving as it comes very naturally, is just one travessing mechanic that was used very lightly.

The quality of the story in Zelda and problem solving/puzzle in TLOU aren't anywhere near similar points to consider as one not being good (per admission of some and you not really contesting it, just said isn't that bad) but present through the game is much more relevant than a game not doing what it doesn't try to do at all. Next will you say TLOU doesn't lose points for not having strong platforming elements even though you use latters?

They are similar points. Both are basic as a result of not being central components of the game and as such it makes no sense to grade the games based on these elements. It's as simple as that.