I do think a little bit of time refreshing the player on the events of the previous game is important, but there are better ways to go about it. TotK's method seems to be just ignoring almost everything about the previous game and hoping that the player has also dumped all their knowledge of the previous game.I think the main difference is that there are bits of tears that I think wouldn't have made sense if you didn't play botw and I would love for someone who knows nothing about botw to play tears and share their experience to help
Usually a sequel, especially one in a YA series, takes the time to rehash old points from the previous book that become relevant again, like where we met this character or the last time our hero was in this town. I can think of a bunch of Holmes stories that casually reference older cases, implying a loose timeline, but otherwise they stand alone. If the reader needs to know something from a previous book, they're told it again
Tears doesn't do that all the time it felt like so I'm surprised because I want to say video games tend to go even farther in the opposite direction and have the only through line between a series be characters
At least something like Mass Effect 2 will make references to Reapers and Geth destroying the Citadel. Imagine how awkward it'd be if you walked up to Admiral Anderson to talk about the Reapers and he said, "Who are you?"