I'd like to agree with what you're saying, but reviewers are all in dev pockets, tiptoeing around truths.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/batman-arkham-knight/critic-reviews
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/assassins-creed-unity/critic-reviews
Out of all those professional reviews, those "Broken games" you mentioned still got an average of 70 out of 100. Those reviews are nothing more that lining the pockets of the developers with lies. When you look at the user review counts for those games they are mostly accurate.
Batman Arkham Knight : 2.5 out of 10
Assassins Creed Unity : 3.0 out of 10
If reviewers were honest and did as journalists do, reporting fact from a non- objective point of view I would agree with you 100% Sadly they are no better then the shit game makes. One scratches the others back. At least now that the reviewers feel like they have been wronged, perhaps the reviews will be a bit more honest.
Bethesda is now a cash grab company, reviewers are developer ass kissers so that they can get paid. Now they are all streamlined. And honestly, if someone didn't know BAK was unplayable at this point, they should loose money for living under a rock.