None of these reactions have any valid points. It's just the ramblings of people who got called out on something they know is true.

I know that a lot of game websites aren't in the financial state to afford a large editorial staff, but there's still a compromise to be had. Why can't there be a dedicated set of reviewers for RPGs, then another one for FPS games, then another for racing simulators, and so on; for a given site?
Others can review games they desire (within the same site, of course), given that they have enough time on their hands, but they will be co-reviewing with the dedicated reviewer for the genre.

That sounds like a plausible solution to me.

Dunkey is one of my few YouTube subscriptions. I don't always agree with him but he's entertaining and consistent.

As a fledgling game critic myself, I think this video hits pretty close to the mark. There are serious problems in the games journalism industry: nepotism and favoritism, rushed reviews, etc. The one criticism I think shakiest is that larger outlets like IGN and GameSpot employ dozens of reviewers, which leads to what appears to be inconsistent criteria. This is just kind of unavoidable. Not every staff member will speak with the same voice or appreciate the same things, so you're going to get wildly different scores for similar games.

I've been subbed to Dunkey for years now and I do love his content, but splicing "yeah, yeah, nope",never was a good sonic game, excellent game" doesn't really fit the viewpoint all that well. It would be like editing someone saying no to make it seem like they are saying yes to fit what you're trying to talk about.

Well, it was a rant. It was OK, but ... he hates turn-based combat? GTFO!

No, I watched the video. It was a bit inconsistent, but the main point seems to be, that the reviews are inconsistent. So say, if you follow a reviewer on youtube or in a blog, he may be not liking platformers, but he consistently does so. Review-sites on the other hand have different reviewers and verdicts can change.

I for that matter think that stuff like metacritic or opencritic irons out these problems.

If reviewers are commenting then he obvious hit a nerve. Haven't watched it, it appeared in my recommended the other day but don't subscribe. Each review has their own opinion but the rush to review things will happen, with games being longer it'll be harder mind.

If he hates turn based combat then he has immediately lost all credibility in my book. Guy can go fuck himself XD

I can't watch the video right now. What's the situation? I'm not in the know.

I agree mostly with Dunkey. Specially the parts where the review reads like a manual, and when reviewers start getting harsh on the game but still give it an amazing score (repetitive, unimaginative soundtrack, chaotic, too easy. 9/10).

The inconsistencies between staff's opinions is unavoidable, and not that big of a deal. I just want the critics to be harsher on games. I rarely read reviews this days, because I can tell what they're gonna say just from the public opinion. They're not adding a critical, different point as to why this game sucks or rocks. They just echo what everyone else, gamers or reviewers, have already said.