Now why would a journo feel the need to publish what's effectively a damage control article in a business specialized site? Specially after the widespread backlash the game got from the Poison Ivy and Brainiac leaks?

Multiple people who worked on the project say their growing concerns were often met with promises from management that Suicide Squad would eventually coalesce at the last minute, just as the Arkham games had. Several employees adopted the term “toxic positivity” to describe the culture of the company, which discouraged criticism. Leadership didn’t seem worried, they say, even as other traditionally single-player game studios that chased the live-service trend were delivering abysmal results with games such as Anthem (which earned a lowly score of 59 out of 100 on Metacritic), Marvel’s Avengers (67 out of 100) and Redfall (56 out of 100).

This is the actual problem. The devs deflected any criticism from the playerbase, they shut down any negative discussion around the game.

They'd rather blame the business model than the content. Imagine being an investor and be told 'live service games' are meant to underperform...

This is the same argument as 'the superhero fatigue' they pulled. When Concord fails they'll claim Hero Shooters were a bad investment but 'diversity' is still a safe bet