Grumble, I hate these sort of comments claiming people score certain games higher because of nostalgia because it seems to take away from the actually good merits of the game. Perhaps this game would have scored lower if it wasn't Zelda, or perhaps it would have scored around the same. It matters not what the game is called, but how the game is. It should be reviewed on the game alone and not on its name.

To me, it broke a lot of their 3D Zelda conventions that were established with OoT.

Probably, but only to a minor extent.. there are a few Zelda games that got okay reviews and you would have to apply this logic to all big franchises then :/

This might be off topic but I still have to agree with you on this. I never had any issues. That's because I swang the wiimote like I would swing a sword, not like I'd try to shake off some flies. My gf on the other hand had these mentioned issues, and guess what, it's because she always got hectic during battles and swirled it around like crazy.

The same thing when I stopped by my brother's house, you'd think he was in a table tennis match with the Flash the way he was swinging and he was having issues all the time as a result.

I think a more interesting question would be how Zelda would review under XOne/PS4 standards. I don't think brand name is that much of a factor, maybe 1 - 2 points at most.

If xbox one had botw, it'd finally make my Xbox be used for more than third party games and streaming 

I agree. It'd go down to, at most, 96.

What standards? What is different on XOne/PS4?

While I sort of agree with you, you kinda executed your sentence it poorly. The problem with Zelda games and the people that review Zelda is that they hold it to a different standard. I remembered back in 2015 when the Witcher 3 came out, loads of reviewers said that the Witcher 3 was the new benchmark for action RPGs. It was the new gold standard for gaming of that genre, and while I didn't read or watch the majority of Zelda reviews yet, they don't compare it to the Witcher 3. While people might say it would be stupid to compare Zelda to Witcher, Witcher 3 is still a good and solid benchmark for action RPGs. They simply compare Zelda to older Zelda games, or maybe just say something like "Other action RPGs do it like this, but Zelda does it like that" they don't compare it to other titles outside of older Zelda games. Which paints Zelda into a much higher light. It also doesn't help that pretty much every reviewer is also a fan of Zelda before, so there is going to be a bit bias from nostalgia there.