the sequelitis is 20% valid complaints
50% "i wasn't part of OoT's target audience"
30% opinions
And his opinions aren't even good. He said Trinexx from ALTTP was a good boss. Making a boss that has a mandatory weakness to a 100% optional and out of the way item is hardly good game design, it's just plain annoying to get that far and get roadblocked because you didn't find that optional item.
However, I think this quote best sums up the video.
His praise for LoZ seemed odder to me than his criticisms of 3D or object permanence ("The spikes I saw when I entered the room hit me even though I wasn't looking at them?! Horse shit! Not fun!"). LoZ had 0 combat depth, no dungeon variety, no puzzles, minimal dialogue and no story. It's a series of 16 square bullet hell rooms, times 8 dungeons. The enemies and bosses all have the same strategy of "Attack it head on". In half an hour of silly rationales not once does he speak ill of LoZ for any number of perfectly legit reasons. I'm still not even sure if he liked LttP or not; he seems to hate it when he's talking about LoZ but love it when he's talking about OoT.
His disdain for story or dialogue and misconceptions about what a puzzle should be also baffled me. Kill all enemies or bombing a cracked wall is apparently the apex of what we can hope to achieve, and having the player do so dozens of times is totally NOT repetitive and is completely fun. While using the 3D perspective mechanic to navigate and explore a room is stupid and silly. "If only they would make this particular puzzle that I'm describing, despite having just complained about exactly that room in the Shadow Temple earlier.
I don't agree with him because I think his goals for a game are wildly different that what we might expect and his argumentative toolset is flawed.
Honestly though, I wouldn't care too much about the video since as I said earlier, he's not even remotely close to the OoT target audience. I'd rather listen to the opinions and complaints to someone who is actually a fan of those types of games, rather than someone who isn't.