I've got more of a problem with people who just... don't... like... RPG's... reviewing a game. It's only ever justified when the game is either a potential blockbuster with crossover potential, or if it intentionally goes out to court fans of other genres (such as FPS).
Even worse, people who don't like a certain game mechanic because they think it's outdated.
See, I have to disagree with both of these points. It is incredibly important for a reviewer to have a similar demographic or point of view to that of the majority of its readers. I would expect a reviewer here to like RPGs - it's our modus operandi that we play RPGs, and our audience follows suit. However, if you take a major publication like Game Informer or IGN or any other big-name website owned by a conglomerate, that's not the case. The average demographic of their reader is significantly different, and is probably more likely than not to have a big portion of their readership uninterested in RPGs unless they are genre-hybrid. As such, the reviewer, as both a respect for their readers whom are consuming the content and their advertisers, who are supporting the content, to have something that their target demographic will read and commiserate with.
As for the second point, outdated mechanics are a big deal. In RPGs, games with a massive encounter rate and required grinding don't fly - that form of lengthening a game because of combat is outmoded. Developers have proven that a game can be engaging, entertaining, and challenging without forcing the player to grind. Same goes for SCUMM-esque verb selection in adventure games. I know that if I had to go and select a from a block of verbs in every adventure game, I wouldn't be too happy. Game design is about evolution, be that adapting to the control schemes, to the market, or to the consumer. Now, that's not to say that evolution is always a good thing. There have been plenty of games that have attempted to evolve and have failed; there are reasons that certain parts of genres stay as mainstays, because there aren't better ways for them to be implemented (or it hasn't been discovered how, yet). Still, when a re-release, etc. returns to something that's generally accepted as outmoded, it's a frustration, not as a reviewer, but as a gamer. I'd say that the logic isn't "I hate this because I think it's outdated," but rather, "I don't like this, I've seen it done better, therefore I surmise that it's outdated."
On point for the previous conversation: that video is not entirely out of character for this industry: "look at me, look at me, I'm better than you!"
