There's basically two reasons to make games: to make money, or to make art. You can try to do both at once, of course; and focusing on one doesn't necessarily detract from the other.
Consider FromSoftware, for instance; often pilloried by the gaming press for their lack of difficulty scaling or tutorials, but adored by their fans and able to turn a tidy profit with each release. Similar, but less well-known, would be Spiderweb Software; which has steamrolled along for decades without breaking their artistic style.
Not everyone wants to be the next Candy Crush or Clash of Clans; many just want to create an experience that they would enjoy.
I don't think the presence of tutorials automatically count against artistic merit, unless they are done badly.
From Software games are more hands-off because their goal is to make the player discover the mechanics and systems on their own. Not every game wants to do that, and as such I don't think games like Halo: Combat Evolved or The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time are automatically worse for this. In the latter case, I think the unskippable tutorial section pulls double duty in setting up Link's backstory; You're with him as he first learns how to fight, use his shield, etc. before going off on a grand adventure.
From Soft games are also not immune to the unskippable tutorial mission. Both Elden Ring and Sekiro start you off in a relatively safe linear level with pop ups teaching you their basic mechanics.
I want to circle around back to the comment that started this though, because that user said they immediately uninstall and refund any game with an unskippable tutorial. Maybe they meant this as hyperbole and I'm just sitting here wooshed, but it seems like an extreme stance to take.
Indeed, tutorials do come in a great many varieties, and when it's done well the user may not even be aware that what they're experiencing is a tutorial. That has a strong tradition in game development; where a new ability or a new tool is provided to the user and the level is designed thereafter to allow the user to explore that new thing. That's closer to your Zelda or Halo.
Even FromSoftware games take this approach. Elden Ring has a whole opening stage that's clearly designed to expose users to core gameplay mechanics.
But then there's those unskippable dialogues, or the tedious "now press this input to perform this action" prompt found within a purpose-built tutorial area. Those, specifically those, are what I find cause for immediate product return.
There was some Need For Speed games on the PSP that were particularly awful for this. You'd be _racing_ and it would pause the gameplay to show you a dialog about how to drift or draft or somesuch; completely breaking the flow of the experience. That's what I would demand a refund for.
That said, art is subjective, and the experience is ultimately defined by the beholder. Maybe some people actually enjoy being brow beaten with unskippable prompts and hand-held through tediously constrained environments, with their experience jarringly interrupted at unexpected times by dialogs that break the suspension of disbelief.
There's basically two reasons to make games: to make money, or to make art. You can try to do both at once, of course; and focusing on one doesn't necessarily detract from the other.
Consider FromSoftware, for instance; often pilloried by the gaming press for their lack of difficulty scaling or tutorials, but adored by their fans and able to turn a tidy profit with each release. Similar, but less well-known, would be Spiderweb Software; which has steamrolled along for decades without breaking their artistic style.
Not everyone wants to be the next Candy Crush or Clash of Clans; many just want to create an experience that they would enjoy.