Good. If you're gonna complain about something, it better be legit or gameplay related.
Kind of a serious question - how does one define a "legit" criticism?
I mean, there's no shortage of material I can draw from, so I'll go into the most basic one - Mario. I'm not fond of Mario. I've never been that enamored, in part to fighting for Sega in the console wars, but as an adult, I've pretty much lost all interest. Part of that is due to Mario having no real personality, and, gah, Peach. Peach, who after 30-plus years, is still nothing more than a damsel in distress, who exists solely to be kidnapped and rescued. Yes, I'm sure you can point to exceptions, but generally, that's been the status quo. Mario Bros. had you rescue Peach from Bowser, Odyssey had you rescuing Peach from Bowser, and in all that time, she's done nothing to try and improve her condition.
Now, you can point out that the Mario games have never been about character or story, and "save the princess" works as a basic plot point, and yes, both of those statements are true. But even by the standards of platformers, the Mario characters feel bland. For Sonic, Amy Rose started off as a damsel in distress, but became something more competent, even if some of her character development seems to have been reversed. Crash Bandicoot started off with Crash rescuing Tawna, but after that, we got Coco, and at least as far as I'm concerned, Coco is a much, MUCH better character by virtue of actually being a character. The original Spyro platformers gave us Ember, the Legend of Spyro gave us Cynder, and the latter has a character that goes beyond "I'm hot for you, little purple dragon." Even in Nintendo's own catalogue, Zelda went from a damsel in distress to a character in her own right, beginning that transition in Ocarina of Time. But Peach remains Peach.
Now, if I was assigned to review a Mario game, I wouldn't harp on this for too long, but the question is, is this legitimate criticism? It's nothing to do with the gameplay after all. But it is stuff that's hampered my interest in the games, and we've probably all got examples of games where the criticism comes from story/character elements, or other considerations. Like, the RE3 remake is a good game, but a poor remake, for instance - how much does that paradigm lend itself to "legitimate" crticism?