A couple of days ago a thread was made questioning reviews that complained about Horizon: Zero Dawn's towers being Ubisofty. Sony fans were complaining in the thread " it's because it's a Zelda game and it automatically gets a free pass on these types of things", "People are too distracted by it being a Zelda/Nintendo game", "Because reviewers don't hold Nintendo to the same standard that they hold most other games too", "Well, most nintendo gamers probably never got to play those games since they were too big for wii. Maybe that's why it got a free pass", and many more like that. 

See below. 

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=226471&page=1

Honestly, it's just his opinion. I mean, I never really agreed with this man's reviews considering how much his own bias factors into the score. However it's really fine for someone who trusts his tastes. Not everyone is going to enjoy the game the same way for the same reasons.

Honestly anything under 8/10 is clickbait for a game so widely praised, even by non Zelda fans. Reviews should be based on quality of the gameplay alone, not if you like or dislike Zelda.

And aside from a few minor framerate issues, the quality of Breath of the Wild is matched by very few games. I van see nit picking it down to an 8, but a 7 is reaching.

Lol, that's not ranting.  That's actually a legit criticism if they say they don't like it in one game, but excuse it in another.  Especially if it happens to be the same reviewer.  Now, the real question is did they then go and take those sites down?  Start hacking the reviewers accounts?  Bitching about the Meatcritic going down by 1 point?  I'm going to guess, no.  In fact, most are pretty happy about the 89 Horizon got.  I can only imagine the pandemonium if Zelda had gotten that score.

"That's actually a legit criticism if they say they don't like it in one game,"

How convenient. Kind of like how Jim Sterling never mentioned an issue with the stamina meter in his 10/10 Skyrim review, but thinks it is one of the worst things  in Breath of the Wild? 

"Bitching about the Meatcritic going down by 1 point? "

Um, that is implict behind complaing about the 75% review. It brought the Metacritic down, otherwise they wouldn't care. 

" Especially if it happens to be the same reviewer.  Now, the real question is did they then go and take those sites down?  Start hacking the reviewers accounts?"

Not for this game, but it has happened with others. See below. And for a game that really doesn't even deserve being defended, even. 

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.941561-The-Jimquisition-website-got-DDOSed-just-after-reviewing-No-Mans-Sky

Maybe he felt they did it better in Skyrim?  Or maybe because he doesn't like the new changes to Zelda?  It's not law to like them. 

They shouldn't care that it dropped one point.  That's the freaking point.  It's still FUCKING 97!!  Jesus Christ.  I wish it was an 89, just to see heads explode over a great rating.  Even some of the more sane Nintendo fans are trying to defend all this BS.  Why not just move on.

The example you gave me was No Man's Sky, which he gave a 5.  I was asking for the even more insane thing of going apeshit over a 7.  Can you give it to me?  Has a fanbase done so before?  Granted, going nuts over a 5 is fucking stupid, too, as he finds the game just average, which is fine. Still, I really want to see what other fanbase went nuts over a GOOD.

As a reviewer myself - you have a responsibility to maintain integrity and not crumble to the pressure of others. Your opinion is your opinion, and it's a shame that people can't respect that (as long as it's based off sufficient playtime w/ the game and is genuine - not simply trying to get cheap hits/attention).

And while I strongly disagree with Zelda being anywhere near a 7, that's what he thinks, and who are these people to say he's wrong? I do also feel the game is probably not worthy of a 10, though I'd personally place it at somewhere in between a 9 - 9.5

Maybe the reviewers felt they did towers better in Zelda than Horizon? All of the arguments you can use to justify inconsistency in his reviews can be used with respect to Horizon and Zelda. Ask yourself why it is the case that you didn't see that. 

I am sure you do wish it were an 89. 

You mentioned a 5 for a game that otherwise got 9's or 10's. No Man's Sky has a 71% Metacritic. A 5 is about as far from 71% as a 7 is from 98% (or now 97%.) 

Also a 7 is not good on Metacritic. They label that as "mixed", which is obviously not "positive". 

Almost all of the problems, at least those of us in the thread, have with his review revolve around how he supports his conclusions, in other words the facts about the game he uses to justify his opinion, not the subjective parts of his review. Furthermore, there is a question of consistency. Does he treat certain mechanics the same in BOTW as he did for other games? 

If critics can criticise, it's also ok to criticize the critics