Agreed. The difference is that lazy positive feedback is positive: it reinforces having fun playing the game (or developing the game). Which is inherently valuable. Lazy negative criticism spreads negativity without providing value.
Neither provide any value.
"Game is good" doesn't provide any actual feedback. Maybe it makes the developers feel warm and fuzzy inside. But it provides absolutely nothing in regards to how to make their next game also good (Unless you go the Ubisoft/CoD route and just copy/paste the same game again and hope people still like the same game next year...)
Just because it's positive, doesn't mean it's constructive.
Actual constructed feedback is the stuff that details the exact parts and how they are experienced. Whether this feedback is positive or negative it matters not, both are equally valuable when presented in a constructive way.
"Lazy" feedback is entirely useless, with exception of maybe adding to an overall review score (Like say having the Steam review score become "Overwhelmingly Positive" due to many "Reviews" of "Game is good") which can be useful for the average consumer to get an overall impression of user experience (Keep in mind, this goes both ways. Positive and negative feedback both affect the overall score in the same manner).