I'm not saying that Zelda: Breath of the Wild isn't a great game that doesn't deserve great scores, but it's extremely difficult to take most of the reviews for this title seriously. It'd be different if the reviewer base wasn't made up of so many Nintendo apologists who are franchise fanboys that are jacked full of bias. Reviewers and fans alike have a very real tendency to look the other way and forgive a lot of things that they normally wouldn't when it comes to beloved franchises like Zelda. People can argue all they want but no amount of surface climbing, tall grass cutting, or tree chopping is going to change the fact that BotW's massive open world is both empty and lifeless. It's no less baron than the open world titles that constantly get called out for the same exact thing. But it's Zelda, so it's ok, right? Now let's talk about the infamous "Ubisoft Towers". This is without a doubt one of the most complained about mechanics in open world games, but guess what, Zelda has them. You wouldn't know that though because a lot of reviewers neglected to discuss that fact in their reviews and the ones who did briefly speak about it did so in a manner that basically gave the game a free pass because somehow they used the mechanic differently. Which they didn't. But it's Zelda, so it's ok, right? The two things that I've listed above would no doubt bring the score of almost any other open world game down, but because it's Zelda that just isn't the case. With that sort of integrity backing up reviews for this title how could anyone take it's perfect scores seriously? It's one thing for opinions to differ but reviewers/fans have been blatantly glossing over and ignoring issues that they'd have no quarrels bringing up with non Nintendo/Zelda games. Edit: Alice Bell wrote an article illustrating my point regarding "Ubisoft Towers" perfectly. Here's the [b]Link[/b]... [url=https://www.videogamer.com/features/why-dont-you-hate-the-towers-in-zelda-breath-of-the-wild]link[/url]