Sometimes I think the problem Zelda and its fanbase suffers from, is an inflated sense of gravitas with what The Legend of Zelda even is.
I am not too young; I'm 38. I was already past the "early childhood christmas" phase when I played games like Zelda II, and A Link to the Past. Back in the day, I never had the sense that The Legend of Zelda was as big of a deal as people make it out to be. To be sure, Zelda is a storied series. Zelda has a lot of iconic elements that have become tropes and cultural references in gaming. That's the biggest contribution it's made.
But in its original context, Zelda was just "another good Nintendo game". It wasn't above or below Super Mario, Metroid, Mario Kart, or anything else. It was seen as a gold star example of how to make a solid adventure game, and nobody made them quite like Nintendo, so yes, Zelda was special. And despite all the cynicism aimed at Nintendo today, nobody still makes them like Nintendo. Wind Waker, Twilight Princess, Skyward Sword, and yes, the DS duology - set aside bitch fests over hating X element from a game, be objective about it, and nothing has quite the polish and attention to detail of an in-house Nintendo production. Even if it's not a title you, personally, love.
What I think did the real damage to Zelda was Ocarina of Time. That game is put on a pedestal as few video games ever have been. I believe one of the main reasons is shock value. It arrived at the time of the great transition to 3D games. It was the first large scope 3D action adventure game. Nobody had ever seen anything like it - it was like a Battle Arena Toshinden, if Battle Arena Toshinden had ha ha, been a good game after the shock and awe of a three dimensional world wore off. Add to that the "Nintendo childhood effect", where so many people have Nintendo games burned into their brain on christmas morning, creating a aura of chemically entrenched nostalgia that will never be recreated.
As a result, suddenly Zelda went from being just another quality game in Nintendo's portfolio with beloved bits of lore, to supposedly being a game the industry hinged on. I really do get the impression that a lot of people possess a virtually subconscious expectation that every Zelda game is supposed to be a gamechanger. Like a centerpiece release for the entire gaming landscape. And in truth, objectively, after only one game (OOT), it's been nothing but criticism and scorn that every subsequent Zelda game hasn't had the same impact as Ocarina of Time. Nintendo, meanwhile, has mainly focused on just making good Zelda games. The truth is they've succeeded. Regardless of how each game compares to another Zelda, the games are still on a high level of quality. It's one of those situations where I can't help but think if you removed the name from the cover and called it something else, people would generally applaud it as brilliant. Sometimes I think we seriously need a Folger's Taste Test in video gaming. Too much of people's reaction to a game always seem wrapped up in their expectations. And for die hard fans of a series, the hope that a new entry will be a religious experience.