Sequal Game Review question

Not sure if this is the right place to ask this question, but it is review related.

Do you guys think its fair when a reviewer compares a game sequel to the previous game and gives or subtract points away from the game cause of the previous game?

I'm talking about games like Tony Hawk, NFL 200X, Mario Party or any games that have multiple sequels with in the same generation.

Do you think its right for a reviewer to take away points from a game if all the game is is a clone of the previous game with next to nothing changed.

Heres an Example, first off please don't think I'm attacking EA, I've actually have never played any of the NFL series, I'm just using Football as an example.
If a company released a Football game every year but Only updated the roster and changed nothing else would it be fair to start taking points off the score of the game?

I ask this because I've gotten a couple people arguing on another form that its unfair for me to take points off of a game since I feel that the little new content added to the game was not worth a sequel and that it was a very small upgrade from the previous version.

Sure, when reviewing games, you have to be able to compare it to previous games and games of similar types to see if the games improves on what went right and wrong for those other games. Adding new features, improving existing features, droppng things that didn't work so well, advancing and improving the story, and graphical tightening and improvement are some of the things that are looked for in sequels. If a game seems to up good things that the prequel had, that would deserve some docking of points, though how much is up to the review for how it affects the overall.

If a football game, or any sports game for that matter, came out as just a roster update and nothing more, I'd think it'd get around a 5 or possibly less since there'd be nothing actually added that improves it over the previous game with nothing about it that couldn't be had from the previous game.

There's a certain amount of grace that one can give to improvements in a series before it starts seeming like a waste of a sequel and a missed opportunity. It's all subjective, every person has differing opinions on what's good and what's not.

Do you guys think its fair when a reviewer compares a game sequel to the previous game and gives or subtract points away from the game cause of the previous game?

Click to expand...

Absolutely.