PixlBit

I thought FVII's system was limited compared to 6. Materia is essentially the same as Magicite, yet it's a crafting system instead of a character growth system. There were no classes and no critical differences between characters outside of Limit Breaks, meaning that there is no reason to choose one character to hold certain materia over the others. Since, along with that, Materia is swappable and not permanent, you don't have to make any hard decisions about who has what according to their strengths and weaknesses.  In general in FF6, unless you wanted to spend a lot of time grinding, you would attach Espers to appropriate characters, like giving high MP characters like Celes most of the elemental spells and/or summons, while in 7 everyone has similar MP pools by default. If you weren't careful, you could find that you wasted time leveling skills that were not the best fit for your class, or that that time could have been used getting those skills sooner for characters that could make better use of them. You could also decide to either boost the characters' key strengths further or shore up their weaknesses. The classes and Relics add even more layers to your party configuration.

IMO, 7's battle system was like going back to FF1, after the richness that 5 (job system) and 6. offered.  It felt very primitive and shallow. 

If you confront  these people, they have no cogent arguments to make. They speak in buzzwords about how "revolutionary" the game they haven't played is and is deserving of 10/10 on principle, or how the reviewer is a fanboy of some sort or another and shouldn't have a job. It's like talking to children.  You're better off ignoring comments sections competely, at least at mainstream sites. There is nothing of value to be gleaned from that miserable soup of degenerate grey matter...besides lowered expectations for the intelligence of the average human.

1. GTA is good escapism. Just because Rockstar or Escapistman take it seriously doesn't mean I have to. It's still hijinks in a digital landscape to me. Gamers need to get a grip.

 2. And even serious business can be escapism. I love terror, satire, violence, foibles, unpleasantness in my escapism. Well, that's if... 

 3 . I believed in the concept of escapism and didn't play games to merely entertain myself.

 4. If people in the game media racket are fighting for games to be art, they're doing a terrible job of it by pushing every mind numbing, over produced AAA game to the forefront, and making critical darlings out of simple, shallow indie games, while remaining ignorant that ART HAS ALREADY BEEN ACCOMPLISHED IN THE MEDIUM. GO PLAY PLANESCAPE TORMENT,  CIVILIZATION, I HAVE NO MOUTH AND I MUST SCREAM, OR SILENT HILL 2, YOU FOOLS! THESE GAMES EITHER CONSIDER OR REFLECT LIFE OR ALLUDE TO OTHER WORKS OF ART!  But it's not about art or art history, it's about playing cheerleader for Rockstar/Naughty Dog/Take-Two/Ubisoft/etc. 

Well, even some AAA developers are talking about adding or have added hardcore and purist modes in their games. That could be in reaction to fan criticism of current gen iterations of those particular franchises though. 

I think things will come to a head with Dark Souls 2, then we'll really see if there is any lasting impact from the series.

Can't argue with your examples much, though I find several of them have been detrimental and/or having no value at all. I like that you point out the positive and negative of each game's influence.

Personal bias for them aside, I think the Souls games have been quite important to re-establishing semi-mainstream appreciation of challenging and cryptic games. I like to think it did its part in creating a welcoming environment for other hard game, like some of the indies, and for the various hardcore or old-school game Kickstarters.

Metal Gear is James Bond with a technology/military/magic realism skin.  Voyeurism and erociticism are part of the package. Quiet's design would be out of place in a military story and setting striving for versimilitude, but Metal Gear is not that. Do people not remember Sniper Wolf, Meryl's swishing bottom, and bathroom pervery in MGS? How about Eva and Boss's inexplicable cleavage exhibitionism in MGS3? The Beauties' sexy sashaying after you beat their mecha form, and the optional photo shoot and accompanying cheeky poses? 

ME2 was lucky to be released by a western critical-darling developer . The rules do not apply equally to everyone in game "journalism".

The console exclusives argument is the most annoying. Let's face it, most modern console games are made for morons and people with crippled thumbs. PC gamers don't care about that, they want games that require some kind of thought to progress. And most of the PC gamers I come across seem to only care about Japanese console games like Demon's Souls, Dragon's Dogma, vanquish, Valkyria Chronicles, i.e. skill based games and RPGs.

Plus, I don't see Total War, Mount and Blade, STALKER, or Amnesia on console, so the point about exclusives cuts both ways.

Persona 4 beats PS2 Persona 3 just for the simple fact that the former lets you control each party member in battle. That 3 doesn't let you do this is a huge flaw. I'd go for the PSP version of 3, which does let you micro manage.

Hopefully they rise above the romance novel, which is the equivalent of a mindless frag fest in video game terms, or it's really just a different side of the same coin.