What a lot of people seem to be overlooking with these comparisons is that games like The Last of Us and God of War 3 arrived later in the PS3's lifespan, and were built with gargantuan budgets and a strong focus on achieving the highest possible graphical fidelity. Switch hasn't even been out of a year yet, and really doesn't have any big-budget games built with graphics as the top priority.

platinums games have never been mind blowing graphically.  metroid prime 4 that has a chance with a skilled developer.

GTAV on 360>> zelda, it's doing way more technically, and looks better. GTA5 has lots of simulated people and lots of cars and lots of other simulated systems running concurrently, which incredibly taxing, on top of all that it shaders, IQ, and textures are all better. Ii Don't think wiiu can handle GATV. pics are from Digital foundry for both games. please look at the pics full screen, yea zelda does grass better, because the game is based around a forest, gtav does everything else better.

Yeah, people forgetting that we still talking only about Switch 1st year games, later games will be more advanced and more impressive, and tend to forget those PS3 games are only 720p/30fps games.

And yet Bayonetta 2 looks quite impressive on Wii U, Bayonetta 3 will look much better on Switch off course.

Totally wrong, you don't have idea how much technically BotW is advanced and how many effects game has.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/zelda-breath-of-the-wild-the-technical-analysis.8197/

You'll need to substantiate a few of these statements with some details.  

GTAV (like all city-based sandboxes with many people walking about) cuts quite a few corners when it comes to "simulations". The AI, like in every other game, is just varying complexities of conditional statements prescribing a small subset of pseudo-random scripted paths, much of the heavy computational work doesn't occur until you interact with them. So sure, there are many dozens of people on the screen, but the five to ten you're interacting with are taking up more of the computational work than all of the others walking about their scripts in the background. Breath of the Wild's analog to this is its wildlife (foxes, fish, birds, etc.) So really the bulk of computations for both games (GTA and BoTW) are being produced by the immediate enemies and persons with whom you interact. The question then is, how taxing are the individual interactions themselves?

Where the heavy computational work comes about is in things like dynamic weather, car collisions, fire, explosions, particle effects, magnetism, kinematic approximations, dynamic approximations, etc.  There is nothing quite spectactular about GTA V's implementation of these things, and it's not as if BoTW doesn't have a dynamic physics or weather system of its own. In fact, in many ways there are more things happening in BoTW at once in certain circumstances (such a dynamic system of wind, combined with simulated fire, and its effects on nearby enemies during combat while calculating the kinematics and dynamics of the physical interactions between enemies.) 

One of the more taxing intersection of simulations in the Wii U version of Breath of the Wild is using the fire rod to burn grass while the dynamic wind system blows (see: below.) 

compare it to GTA V's implementation 

Shading and lighting-wise Breath of the Wild is definitely a level above GTA V (on 360) in most circumstances.

Image-quality wise they are the same, both 720p titles with post-processing anti-aliasing, both have crappy texture filtering. 

In terms of texture-quality the games are comparable too. 

The Wii U probably would have no problems handling GTAV, in some situations better and in others worse depending on whether or not the specific technical feature is CPU-bottlenecked or memory-bottlenecked. On the other-hand, due to memory limitations I don't think the PS360 can run Breath of the Wild without large concessions. That was the major bottleneck for even the Wii U version of the game. 

you do the same for almost any technically impressive looking if you wanna list every effect it does, that doesn't impress me. i'm not saying zelda is not impressive, but its obvious that a living breathing city with traffic, and NPC every where is gonna way more demanding then empty looking forest areas, and on top of that it has better graphics.

i disagree here big time, shading and lighting look better in GTAV, textures as well, IQ easily goes to GTAV, just look at the pics, the IQ in zelda is horrible on wiiu. look at zelda  on wiiu as soon as it goes in densely populated  are like karoki forest which doesn't even compare to GTAV city, frame rate starts to hit 20 fps for long periods.

If GTA V had the traffic system of say, Cities: Skylines, you'd have a point. Otherwise, there is nothing speculator about the way traffic is handled in Grand Theft Auto games. There is not much "simulating" going on there. Follow pre-determined path -> if a jam is created (or there is a red light): stop, is pretty much the scope of it. 

The illusion of it complexity is created by the diversity in assets, locales, and the large scale of it all. 

Yeah, no. The 360 version of GTAV does not have a full volumetric lighting system, for starters, while Breath of the Wild (for Wii U) does. Please start citing some examples of features that GTA V has which the BoTW doesn't have, rather than saying "look at it." 

As for image quality: 

1. Both GTA V (360) and BoTW (Wii U) run at 720p. 

2. Both incorporate post-processing Anti-Aliasing (which says very little about performance.)

3. Both have substandard texture filtering. 

Tell me, in which area is the image quality of GTA V (360) superior to BoTW (Wii U) besides aesthetic preference (you prefer the particular implementation of post-prossessing AA in GTA vs. BoTW.) 

This is a clear example of how saying, "look at it" means very little about what is demanding and what is not in a game. "Look at it" is subjective, actually citing the technical features of a title is not. 

heh you are the first person i heard say this, even a developer who is a huge nintendo fan BTW, say's other wise. I mean just look at zelda on wiiu when it goes in karoki forest it doesn't have nearly as much as going as GTAV, yet its start running at 20fps, here is whattaht developer said in regards to GTAV port on switch, and switch has a much better cpu then WII u.

"GTA5 has lots of simulated people and lots of cars and lots of other simulated systems running concurrently. The city feels alive. PS2 would never been able to achieve that. Last gen console versions had much less cars and people on the streets. You can't really simulate rush hour traffic without being able to simulate enough cars. Highways simply don't have enough cars in the last gen version to cause traffic jams. The city feels less alive. 

Haven't got experience from Switch, but 3x ARM cores are likely a significant downgrade compared to 7x x64 cores for this kind of highly parallel city simulation workload."