Great way of starting a discussion. Unfortunalety looks like I know a little more than you what a review is.
First of all you mix cinema with games, making a naive mistake that a remake in a game is the same object as a rescreening from a movie.
No, I didn't make that mistake at all because I in no way asserted that.
If you're going to engage with my analogy at all, you need to only focus on how
reviews of remade games are different from
reviews of re-released movies.
For second looks like, by your comparison, that you leave outside of your understanding of a review of a remake all the technicality which is usually the biggest reason for a game to be remaked. So in the end what we are getting is the original game, which shouldnt be getting new reviews.....like jaws.
Can you put bold sentence in English? Because this is borderline incomprehensible.
Jaws
did get new reviews, and they too were good in the aggregate. Just like TLOU1 remake. Because no matter what the differences between them and the original releases, they are
both new products for multiple medium-specific reasons when it comes to the current, modern landscape of products, aka "things people can/might spend their money/time on".
That's the point of reviews, to assess and recontextualize the value and merits of any individual product/piece of art/whatever within the current choices given to consumers.
Your statement about "what a next gen game is" begs the question; no reviewer cares what you think is incumbent upon a dev to deliver as a "next-gen game", they only care about assessing this current offering in a way that maps to their philosophy on what is a good/bad game. That's why it has great scores, because it meets that threshold for the vast majority of pro critics. Which is the same reason why your question is idiotic in the first place, because you are trying to tie some other baggage to what a review is or should be, and most critics -- quite rightly -- are not.
Unless you are more naive than it looks and cannot understand that an artistic object belongs to its time and any new observation over it is a revisitation, which doesnt have the same proprieties as a review and shouldnt have or has any necessity for
Care to finish this sentence? Because again, it's just a mess.