Yes agreed it is usually the most hardcore fans that most hate the thing they claim to love because they are the ones that have very specific opinions of how the thing should be.

But yeah agree with what LegitHyperbole said. The no fighting is the major turnoff (and I guess when you get into the game the UI for selecting echoes is also a turnoff based on what people here are saying). The game looked awesome, right up until I realized after watching the trailer that they entirely switched out fighting with Echoes. As soon as I realized Zelda doesn't actually fight that was an instant huge turnoff for me and the game went from a must-buy to a probably won't buy all in that instant, to eventually a definitely won't buy.

A very large part of the Zelda formula and the fun of the series is combat with weapons. They unfortunately decided to make a unique Zelda-spinoff as the first Zelda-focused game rather than throw Zelda into a typical LoZ game, that alone drastically hurt the quality and sales of this game. Any other complaints (bad echoes UI, too easy, dungeons that don't stand out) are secondary to the fact that you don't even fight in the game. After years of waiting for a new 2D Zelda on Switch Nintendo was like here's what you've been waiting for: Zelda without fighting lol. Heck look at BotW, one of the best games ever and a massive revolution for LoZ, and yet there were certainly disappointing things about it like lack of standard dungeons, but that just meant it was a 10/10 game rather than like the most perfect game ever. Just imagine if you couldn't even fight in BotW...it would have been a massive fail even if all the other amazing and revolutionary stuff about the game stayed the same.

At some point Nintendo needs to realize adding a new mechanic (sometimes called a gimmick) is not worth it if you actually take away a main mechanic that people play the game for!

I have bought it by now, but haven’t played it yet. I don’t know when I get around to.

There is no "Nintendo bump". Their games score well because they are generally well made and appeal to a wide audience.

There is a Nintendo bump. Or at least there was, it seems to have faded in the last few years. 

There never was, it was always a myth invented by those who don't like to see the "enemy brand" get high ratings, in order to downplay the quality of Nintendo's software.

Okay. 

Lol. Also, idk abt your remark here, @curl-6. I feel like there was a Nintendo bump to a certain extent: Skyward Sword, for instance, did receive the same level of critical acclaim as TLoU, The Witcher 3, etc. Same with Mario 3D World, which — in all honesty — I would not even think of placing anywhere near TLoU nor GoW. The bump is def gone, I can’t think of even one game from NSW which received unusually positive critical reception, though it certainly was there for a period.

The reception of any game is a product of its time and context; a big part of why Skyward Sword mostly reviewed very well as it realized the concept of motion-controlled swordplay in Zelda that had been teased since before the release of the Wii, so it was seen as the fulfilment of a generation-long promise.

Game quality is also inherently subjective and depends on individual taste; I thought Skyward Sword was a great game for instance, but I was never impressed by the likes of GoW, GTA, or many other highly rated titles. No two people's experiences will ever be exactly the same, so at the end of the day a review is simply an opinion.

eh…I feel like the reason SS reviewed as well as God of War 2018 is b/c 3D Zelda up until that point was always 95+ on MC, so reviewers were a little cautious/confused when the new mainline 3D Zelda didn’t quite match prior entries in quality. By certain observable metrics, such as sluggish pacing throughout the opening sequence, relentless hand-holding, and potentially distracting motion controls, it should be reasonable to expected SS to have scored in the mid-80s had it not been labeled with such an acclaim franchise. Of course, the experience is subjective, though weak game design increases the likelihood of one getting a bad experience out of a game…but then the question becomes whether game design choices can objectively be labeled as “weak”….hm.

In any case, to backtrack on my previous comment, I really don’t feel like Nintendo has been treated unfairly well by critics: They are genuinely just a powerhouse of the industry. That’s not to say I don’t think 3D Mario and 3D Zelda sometimes get inflated reviews b/c the quality assurance tied to their respective mainline installment, though I don’t believe it’s a Nintendo-wide issue.

stupid thing to even be talking about. “Nintendo bump” just sounds like somebody is having a temper tantrum when a Nintendo game reviews well lol.

The thing with Metacritic is that it's ultimately an average of the opinions of like 50-200 people out of the entire human race, in a certain moment in time, so it really shouldn't be taken too seriously or treated as any kind of objective gospel.

We're agreed on the Nintendo bump; the fact is, Nintendo games simply appeal to a broad range of people, which makes it more likely that the people who do the reviews will be among that range.