But by that logic you completely ignore one of the most important factors in reviewing a game, it's originality. That's the core of the issue with Zelda games. Are they too unique, or not unique enough? You can't score a game on originality if you don't compare it to other games that play similarly.
Also, the other flaw with the notion of not comparing one game to any others that exist, is that you're left with pure bias. If you don't have any standard of any kind than any opinion is as valid as the next as they will all be based off of inherent bias. To back up any notion of "good" or "bad" or "fitting" you need something to compare it to. The words by themselves have no intrinsic value of any kind, they are completely meaningless until they are put into some kind of context. Otherwise a reviewer who doesn't like FPS games will review each one as "bad" simply because it is an FPS, while a reviewer who may not like the genre but is aware of other titles in the genre can concede that while they themselves did not care for the game because it's an FPS, it is definitely the best FPS they've played as compared to other games like it.
It's a hard concept to get across, but if you think a game doesn't do something "well" then you've either played a game that has done it well or you've simply conceived of a game that could possibly do it better. If you can compare the game that doesn't do something well to a game that you feel does it well then your statement becomes tangible and has substance. If you simply say the game does not do something "well" because you can imagine it being done much better, that has no value for anyone you tell, because we have no idea of what it is you would consider doing it well. And as soon as you start explaining it to us, you are comparing it to a standard, perhaps not one that exists in the real world, but one that exists in your mind.
I may think it's hot out when it's 20C. A person from Africa may only think it's hot out when it gets to 35C. Without the centigrade scale to compare the two statements the term "hot" could mean anywhere between 20C and 35C, so the term by itself doesn't have any value. Similarly, anyone who is only familiar with farenheit will not understand that we mean different temperatures because they are not familiar with the scale with which we are comparing it to. Saying something is "good" without comparing to something that is either better or worse is about as useful as telling someone it's 25 degrees out when you don't specify whether or not you're using C or F. We don't know if we should grab a parka or put on some shorts. Until you compare it to the freezing point the number has no substance.
With the Zelda games, the freezing point is the games that have come before it, and other games in the same genre.
