Well, you made a whole thread to complain about it, including such hyperbole as comparing it to PS2 games or saying it looks "three generations" out of date, no offense but you certainly gave the impression of being quite worked up about it.

If that were true. The problem is that you're too disappointed to the point that it's making you think the game is not AAA grade because of graphics. That's feels off.

The game is AAA because it took them 6 years to make the gameplay versatile and mostly bug-free.

The Switch certainly is dated, but TotK is better than most games you probably consider AAA games that have the graphics you want TotK to have. You're missing the high value of the game because you can't calm that part of your mind that needs the graphics to be perfect.

At the end of the day, it is a very beautiful game due to its art direction and creative design. Computer systems are so advanced nowadays that in a device the size of your hands you have something looking like TotK and running incredibly well given the breath and ambition of what it's running. So even if the graphics are not perfect like on more powerful devices, it's still absolutely beautiful if you look at it from a normal point of view without such high expectations of everything. Paintings are limited, there are no animations. The level of realism is limited because it's made by a human. Yet people travel from all over the world to look at a Monet, a Van Gogh or a Picasso.

Without wanting to sound like a fan, really you should be happy it was actually made and released given how ambitious it is, many people are saying it brings them joys they haven't felt in years, due to gameplay surprises Nintendo is known for.

Still feel free to tell your opinion, but at least don't be surprised if people don't understand it.

Not sure how you got that impression. My post says that I like the game. In fact, I woke up an hour early this morning to get a couple hours in the game before work. So I am enjoying the game.  That doesn't mean that I think the game is perfect, or that I don't recognize the limitations of the Switch hardware.

Is this site for discussion, or is it for nothing more than cheerleading on our favorite mega corporations? 

Whether it was your intention or not, your opening post gives the distinct impression you're posting in bad faith. Comparing a modern game to the PS2 graphically is a commonly used troll trope since the PS3 days.

Comparing modern games to the PS2 *since the PS3 days* is often trolling.... Like, what?  This site exists literally because people like to compare aspects of games and the gaming industry.  We can only compare to things that came before. No other comparisons are possible.  

My post mentions that I like the game, but also talks about some graphical shortcomings. That is in line with the general purpose of gaming forums.  They exist for us to talk about things.  If using a forum as intended, and comparing to things that came before is bad faith in your eyes...... I guess you must see a lot of bad in the world.  

In any case, if it still isn't clear, my post (that I believe clearly states that I am enjoying the game, as the first thought I express is a positive one) is intended to facilitate discussion of the shortcomings of the Switch hardware and/or how those limitations impacted TotK.  It mostly seems to have succeeded in making that discussion happen.  But, being that this is the internet, no discussion is ever perfect.  

Maybe next time I'll do a few paragraphs of cheerleading and declaring my love for the mega corp before I say anything critical. 

There's no need to be disingenuous. 

It's the extreme nature of the comparisons that come off as bad faith. If you'd just said you wished it was on more powerful hardware that'd be one thing, but when you start saying it looks reminiscent of PS2/OG Xbox stuff, that it's three generations out of date, or that it looks like an indie game from 10-15 years ago, that kind of ridiculous hyperbole, people are naturally gonna think you're not being reasonable.

Saying you like the game doesn't excuse the ridiculous over exaggerated claims of it looking like a ps2 game. No one has a problem with you discussing shortcomings just do it in a way that isn't ridiculous. Yes it is a very common troll tactic to say a modern game looks like a ps2 game, kind of unbelievable you don't know that. 

Your comparisons in the op come across as purposefully made to stirr shit up and are so obviously nonsensical that there is no way you actually believe that yourself. They serve no purpose.

Criticize the game all you like, I don't care. But don't tell me the foliage moves like in a PS2 game. What PS2 game even had moving foliage instead of static low detail tectures?

But we only had 1080p tvs when the remaster came out, matching the current state of TVs again. It was the sharpest possible at the time. But yeah, playing it now on a 4K screen obviously makes it look softer again due to upscaling, still sharper than upscaling from 900p...

There are more things where Nintendo is behind the times. No calibration options in game, no brightness/contrast, no text size options. I find it hard to read the instructions from the couch, also not helped by the low contrast and upscaling. And apparently it doesn't save what you build? I made a super long bridge to reach more places on sky island, went back in the first shrine to trigger a save, popped back out and everything was reset :/

The remaster launched in 2016.

4k displays existed as far back as 2001.

Sony recognized 4k displays as gaining relevance and released the Playstation 4 Pro in 2016.

4k was definitely a thing when the remaster came out. And it definitely looked soft on those panels.

But here is the thing, even large 1080P displays... 1080P content still looks soft regardless.

The WiiU was limited by it's HDMI port and technology, hence why it could never push past 1080P, even the more modern Switch is limited by the same issue.