There are far better examples of games that illustrate the system's limitations.

This, combined with the fact the OP has failed to convincingly support his PS2 comparison makes it seem more like an attempt at raining on TotK's parade than anything else. 

Day 1 patches are not uncommon these days and are pretty much considered 'shipped'. No reviewer will be judging the game on the non-patched version. This is consistent across platforms unfortunately.

Why Nintendo couldn't have had that patch included in the game's release code is a bit of a headscratcher as you'd think 6 years would have been sufficient time to sort it out...

With the day 1 patch however, the game has been applauded for it's stability & performance. It's running a tad better than BotW and at the same time is doing a good deal more.

I'd suggest checking out Digital Foundry's review for their take. 

According to Aonuma's Washington Post interview the game was largely completed a year ago, but they held off on releasing it for a year in order to spend that year ensuring it was as stable as possible. That was a very good move, as Nintendo absolutely could not afford a repeat of the recent Pokemon situation.

And they still couldn't have included these 2 patches on the Cartridge? Day one patch came out week before release...

 the ps2 part is hyperbole. if he said ps3 it would be fair.

If DLSS functions well on the unit, it will be a good deal more powerful than a PS4. Plus the Switch 2 will have a considerably better CPU than the PS4/XB1 and much more modern architecture (Nvidia Ampere is way, way better).  

It doesn't read like hyperbole... And if it is, then it's being used to deliberately ruffle feathers. 

Almost everyone wants the performance gains that a new switch will introduce . This thread is just repeating a well worn, widely shared opinion, but for some reason linking it to one of, if not THE most technically accomplished games on the platform.

It's just silly. 

I don't know man. The graphics and perfomance hardly being improved from a game that was made for wii u 6 years ago is kinda of sad. it's not Nintendo like to be honest. doesn't really matter a year from now we will get switch 2 and  will no longer have worry about games looking like crap anymore for nintendo. imagine a zelda with red dead 2 type graphics, heck even in this style at 1440p/60fps would make a massive difference.

Maybe they just tapped most of the available power first time around...

My understanding is that there's a lot more going on in TotK, so asking the devs not only to deliver & render a more demanding/complex world, but also to do it at higher fidelity is prob asking too much. 

Digital Foundry (who I'd wager knows a great deal more than either of us) are impressed at what's been accomplished with TotK. You can only optimise so far...

Not only did he say PS2, but when referencing the PS3/360 generation he specifically went out of his way to say "indie". Which, anyone who played games that generation knows that indie games (with the definition we use for indie today) looked nothing like this back then.

Both of those facts together shows that the OP was being purposefully hyperbolic. I'm not sure the reason for this (to bring more responses, to be more negative towards the game, bias, etc).  But it's glaringly obvious and I really think that everyone should stop feeding that part of the discussion at this point.

To everyone: OP knows what he did, he was called out dozens of comments ago. At this point I think we should all just shift to the real conversation which is does playing TotK on Switch feel dated?