i dont really mind that sort of campaign but using it as an excuse for rolled stats is pretty stupid
Let me spell it out for you, then:
In a setting-centric campaign, PCs are likely to die and be replaced with new PCs. If I roll a crappy character (or just one that fails to match My Vision Of What I Want To Play), then it's not such a big deal because he'll die before too long and I can roll a new one. Also, random generation is usually (but not always) faster than character-building systems (point buy, etc.), meaning that, when my character dies, I can make a new one and get back into the game faster. And, of course, if you're playing several characters over the course of the campaign, then the fluctuations in power level introduced by randomness will average themselves out over time.
In a character-centric campaign, PCs tend not to die very often, if ever. Rolling a crappy character would really suck, because then I'm saddled with something utterly unlike My Vision Of What I Want To Play for the entire duration of the campaign. And, since character creation is a one-time activity, it's less of an issue if creating a character takes a long time.
Now do you see why I say setting-centric campaigns are more suited to random character generation than character-centric campaigns?