First of all, that implies that every game starts out as a 10/10 and then gets reduced points from there.  A game has to work to get a certain score. A 7/10 isn't 3 points from the base score, it's 7. You don't start a  game assuming it's a 10/10. Don't look at it like it got deducted 3 points, look at it as if it earned 7. I guess it's whether you're a glass half full or glass half empty kind of guy. 

There is actually quite a lot of complaints in the review, a few of which have nothing to do with innovation. So again, you're wrong. A summary is supposed to give you the most basic idea of what to expect from a game quality-wise. That summary is pretty good because the main gripe the writer had was not just the lack of innovation, but the consequential repetition as a result. If you do not want to go and read the review, at the very least do not assume every negative detailed is tied in to some pretentious notion of innovation. Because the points made are actually good. I and many other people might not agree with them, but it is far from an unconvincing review. 

No, your defense of the score falls on its own weight when the person says it's the best spiderman or how much love it is in the game... they already portrayed the game as great and then go and deduct points.

And hardly any game would start from 0 on score since unless the game is utter garbage it won't average below 50.

So Spiderman will sell just because its a more known IP? Not only that but 2-3 times more than any superhero game has ever sold on a single platform?

That's what happens when you have reviewers that have never worked in the industry or even learned the process of creating games. Imagine if other things were reviewed with that mindset. 

"This car has excellent gas mileage, but since it doesn't allow me to fly I give it a 7/10."

"This CPU is competitively priced, has a eight cores, hyperthreading, and a  4.3 ghz clockspeed equal to the competition. But since it doesn't go any faster than competitors I give it 7/10."

"This weightlifter just benched 1075 lbs, but since that isn't anything more than the current world record I give him a 7/10."

Basically what this reviewer is saying is that Spider-Man can't just be a top-quality game. No, no, no! It has to move the definition of quality even further along! I don't have a problem with a score of 7/10. That's fine. But the idea that games have to perpetually improve or else they won't get top marks is ridiculous. If someone told me that there was a new JRPG as good as Chrono Trigger I'd be jumping for joy. If that same person said, "Oh, but it's only as good as Chrono Trigger, and that's a 20 year old game, so I'll pass", I'd smack them across the top of their head. 

This idea that games must not only match the best in their genres, but somehow continually improve on them, is what I'm coining "The Edge review mentality". Why? Because Edge Magazine has had this mentality for years. And they are one of the worst review publications I have ever read. Their scores make zero sense whatsoever, even when they hand out good scores. 

Edit: Ok, the reviewer in question actually had more real complaints. But his final line, blurb, or whatever you call it is horribly written,and gives the impression that he has the Edge review mentality. But my above comments still apply to Edge wholeheartedly. 

How'd you manage to get an early copy? The game isn't out until tomorrow. 

How'd you manage to get an early copy? The game isn't out until tomorrow. 

The preload unlocked at 12am here in Ireland, GMT time. :D