I think people are a little too hasty to compare this to Man of Steel's fights in a feverish attempt to point out the 'hypocrisy' of the film's critics, we have two drastically situations at play here. There were a few points in the former where Superman had deliberate choice of where to angle the fight so as to reduce collateral damage in the city, but for weird reasons decided not to. Case in point, when he tackled the fuck out of Zod, barreled him straight through the field and past several neighbourhoods for about half a minute, then whips straight through a gas station, causing it to explode and collapse on itself.
Another scene has Zod launching an enormous truck towards Clark with a simple nudge of his foot, and the latter hops over it like a minor nuisance becfore the truck...impacts the parking garage directly behind him, detonates, and, again, causes the structure to collapse inwardly on itself. Both of those instances depict extreme carelessness on Clark's part because civilian deaths that he could have easily prevented may have most likely transpired.
Here? I'm not sure you could apply those same criticisms to Stark here, he's not in control of the fight at all, as Clark was when he first assaulted Zod through said gas station. He tried subduing Hulk by burrowing him through the ground, but was kicked off rather easily. Every other exchange had Tony fighting to get some distance between them, because when it came down to it, Hulk was simply stronger physically, by a considerable amount. Sure, he could have displayed a little more care when he blasted Hulk with a repulsor into the adjacent building, but to do that would have significantly risked his chance of surviving the fight.
