Game media are just media that talk about games. I enjoy plenty of them. Reading through bias is a skill one pretty much needs in life, and not just to read about games. I used to receive "Nintendo Magazine" when I was a kid. during those good old days when everything was fair and balanced. Let's just say "advertisement distributor" barely covers what it was. Rose-tinted nostalgia glasses are well and good but imho we're far better off these days considering the amount and variety of gaming media available.
As for the anti-consumer moniker, sure, let's grab the pitchforks, it's such a convenient simplification. But there's a bit of an inconvenient truth not too far, which is that constantly listening to the gamers is not a good thing because it inevitably leads to lowest common denominator design. You may, like a large portion of the gaming crowd, enjoy Blizzard stuff, FIFA20XX, Battlefield of Dutiful Honor 4e5323. I don't. Not that I lament that they exist: they're games that please a crowd and make money for the people working on them, it benefits plenty of people, so fair enough. But that's what happens when you're just after pleasing the largest crowd. Same old tired formula, over and over, because chances are, anything else will result in an uproar and considering the money involved, big studios are understandably risk-averse.
At the end of the day, it takes some bravery to take the risk to offend a large part of the crowd to try something different. Because gamers mostly want what they already have. Yet, games are also a form of art, and should be allowed a certain amount of artistic integrity to grow and offer something new we never knew we wanted. If that means ing off some loud voices, then so be it. The result might be worth it and I, as a gamer playing a wide range of games, will benefit from it. Right now, that kind of risk-taking is mostly the realm of indie devs and more often than not results in niche, not terribly successful games, with a few here and there getting minor cult status. But it'd be nice if big studios tried their hand at it a bit more often. And that pretty much requires to not always listen to the consumer. Hear the feedback, weight upon it, but have the fortitude to ignore it and face the pitchforks. For an example, see From Software and the yet unreleased Sekiro. Should they listen to gamers and retrofit it into Dark Souls: Japan with multiple weapons and levelable stats? I have no idea whether the game will work for me but good on them to have a vision and stick to it. I feel we're living through a golden age of gaming at the moment, long may it continue.
And for the record, I feel that in this particular case it's a good thing Ubi did what they did. Not because the gamers called for it, but because in this case, it's their original design that was the lowest common denominator: have a single version, toned down enough to not offend anyone. Accepting to take the financial hit (duplication of effort that will be replicated for every single update for the rest of the game's life) to keep the original vision available should be applauded. Because it's the right thing for games as art.
Finally, I'll add that if one feels that strongly about big game medias, well, turns out we live in the age of social media. Everyone and his dog has a blog, a youtube channel or a Steam/GoG account where they post reviews which are free from the evil media empire. I should know: in addition to reading the big sites, I also like reading Steam player reviews to make up my mind before a purchase. Of course, I should know better, having heard many times that Steam reviews are useless and awful. Sometimes, hilariously, by some of the same people that complain about "game journalists". Power to the people, just not other people. [noob]
