Scores by reviewers have changed what meant 10 years ago, is no longer in the same ballpark, these days you got just an average ok games scoring 7/8's what would have been 5/6, so now if a game doesn't get a 9 or 10, it isn't considered high quality. Reviewers have scewed this over by giving mediocre games higher scores than they deserve. 7 is considered low in this day and age if the game is meant to be a top notch quality which Zelda botw is, has few flaws which aren't enough to put it down.
Is there a standardised review score system out there then? Personal to the reviewer would pretty much have to be the only way to do it from where I sit. To be compelled to join some kind of irrational (though I suppose you argue it is a kind of a reverse exponential number scale) hive mind would not be cool.
That's mindless rant. If weapons breaking were really a problem then how can a guy beat the game in less than 2 hours, forcing himself to beat the last boss at full hp and its 4 incarnations in a row and without "that" weapon?
It never is a problem, there are many many weapons throughout the game, this mechanic is just incentive for you to try dozens of different weapons instead of sticking to one. Where other games would lock you out or just put an invisible wall to prevent you from fighting an enemy you're not supposed yet, BotW just makes it hard but it's technically possible even beating a guardian without using weapons proper and relying on Sheikah Slate powers instead. It was an excellent design choice on Nintendo's part and it's pros easily outweigh any cons imaginable.
There is a phrase that runs just because you can do something does not mean you have to, while not terribly relevant here the sentiment is. Just because you can do a game without something if a mechanic is in a game it stands to reason that it should enhance the gameplay in some way.
There are a variety of mario hacks out there that crank the timing and some measure difficulty along with that up to levels some might dub perverse, still very much able to be completed though. Would Mario have been as good a game if such things were there, it is still technically completable? You could debate it but it would not be a clear cut victory.
The guy stated what he likes in games in the review "I can’t say I find it particularly edifying.", so a sense of edification, possibly via combat and references a few systems he previously enjoyed. Not unreasonable in which you are cast as the hero of the land and are to beat the bad guy and his minions, and I am sure I could probably go find a dev of the game saying they want you to be that too. There are games that aim for other things, many horror games aim to beat you down, things like dwarf fortress are designed to have you fail, sim city is deliberately ambiguous...
Forcing you to move outside your comfort zone is fine too -- how many games feature a "hero is captured and has to fight their way out" level?
Or if you prefer there is an old creed, it informs a certain approach to weapons which many may expect. The Japanese take this up a notch as well if you ever consider their approach to swords.
"This is my rifle. There are many like it, but this one is mine. My rifle is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I master my life. My rifle, without me, is useless. Without my rifle, I am useless."
Again though most are not arguing against the idea of a durability system, though some certainly have, but the specific implementation of this one. Others have covered basic things that might have been done to improve it within the framework of the game (damage on failed hits, blocking, progressively less damage until you get it fixed...), in other games certain enemies might be more vulnerable to certain arms and techniques, or damage might mean you want a bit more range, a bit more speed....
"other games would lock you out or just put an invisible wall"
Don't act like it is a remotely new or under explored concept. There are countless examples of that going back to Diablo and probably the roguelikes that spawned it, as well as from a whole bunch of open world games going back to the 2d GTAs. Various enemies might be way harder than just mashing attack and chugging health potions will allow you to beat, however they are there and if you are good enough you might well beat them below the "suggested" level.
