That's not an example of "the wrong" mindset, if that person tries to enjoy the Souls style, but can't. I mentioned that "It's not a mindset that can always or easily change from game to game. Some times a bit of leyway is required to not get bothered by something."
Someone who prefers Dynasty Warriors button mashing could warm up to Souls styles games. But not everyone can.

They can't enjoy it because of their preferences, not their mindset in the situations I'm talking about. Trying to like it is the correct mindset.
And Joe tried to like it, and he even thought about (and gave example of) what would make him enjoy this system more, such as weapons not breaking as easily. Or having specific weapons (like the Master Sword) that never break.
The person who initially said that the only problem with weapon deteriation in Zelda is people playing with the wrong mindset should know that Joe wanted to enjoy it, since he mentioned other very specific details of the review.

if you buy a Zelda game and don't even get more than half way through its sort of tough to consider you a serious 'Zelda fan'. just saying. Arguably Breath of the Wild's buildup of gaining allies and (eventually) beating Ganon is a big part of the experience.

its fair if you didn't like the game, but generally we should try to be objective when reviewing games. OBJECTIVELY speaking Breath of the Wild does a lot well. Its just plenty of people may not like an open world game that focuses more on having fun with its physics engine AND exploring, rather than the traditional slightly more linear 'dungeon to dungeon' aspect of Zelda.

I  do stand by the concept that its hard to take someone's opinion of a game who only played half of it anywhere near as seriously as someone who does a complete playthrough of a game. Especially with a game as expansive as Breath of the Wild.

Although also, arguably, because Breath of the Wild is so open ended and you CAN do a lot of things in any order- if you didn't finish the game or accomplish a lot of things- how would you even KNOW that you were halfway through?

at any rate its just sad people bitching and whining when someone like Angry Joe likes the new Zelda game. He has no incentive to lie about it, in fact if anything one would expect him to be a bit biased AGAINST Nintendo games considering the war he's had with them online regarding 'fair use'.]

You're allowed to not like something but to claim that reviews are biased or unreasonable because of your subjective opinion is just silly. As an example: I don't really like The Witcher 3 all that much  PERSONALLY but objectively I will admit that its a great looking game with a lot of unique solid gameplay. I wouldn't say its great reviews weren't deserved just because I personally don't enjoy it that much. Same should apply to you haters and Zelda. Its a game that does a lot well. if its not your cup of tea that's sort of irrelevant in terms whether its a good game or not.

When the people giving favorable reviews have fully detailed reasons for why they like the game in their comments compared to the single sentence:

I acknowledge that preferences are a part of your midndset in the examples I gave in my first post. But it's specifically Joe's preference that made him not like the durability system. His overall mindset, which was trying to like it, understanding it, and even analyzing what would make him like it more, is a good mindset to have going into a game. That's the best you can do, as not everyone will like everything. Saying that "the durability system sucks because it's not like *insert specific game*" as your only critique of it is an example of a bad mindset to have, as they are different games.

Assuming that the only problem people can have with this system is them having the "wrong mindset" is arogant.
That would be unfair people who try to enjoy it, and give it a fair chance, but simply can't. There's nothing wrong about that.

You make it sound like he hated the weapon system when actually he said he will be happy if they just lasted a bit more and he aknowleges why the system works as it is, if he hated it he wouldn't be praised the game so much, since combat is pretty important, instead of being as closeminded as Jim, Joe started with the wrong mindset and little by little he started to understand how the system worked and how he was suppose to play it, when he adjusted he loved the game.

You guys really can't get over that 7 can you?  Boy.  And no, Joe liking the game more, despite not exactly liking the weapon durability, doesn't make him more open-minded than Jim.  By the way, Jim still liked the game, just not as much.  No, that means they have different opinions.  Technically, they share similar opinions on the weapons, only it didn't bother Joe as much.  Nor did he start out with "the wrong mindset."

In the end, there is only one conclusion.  It's just time to get over the 7.

He said "I wish it wasn't there" at 21:43 in the review. That means he has a problem with it.

I specifically pointed out the examples he gave of what would have made him be ok with the system, which is an indication that he has an understanding of it. There's no indication of him having the wrong mindset anywhere in the review. Not understanding how a system fully works in the beginning is perfectly normal. As long as you continue on, so that you can get a clear understanding of how it fully works in context of the game, you have the right mindset. And that's what he seemingly did.

However, after he has beaten the game, he still has a problem with it. He wishes it wasn't in the game, unless they change some things.

So how does this go together with your comment that the only problem with it is having the wrong mindset?