I believe that our critical sense evolve with time, same thing for the context around the publishing of the original review. The initial impact a game, a movie or anything of the genre, has on the reviewer or the user is unique. Each new play through can add or remove from the point of view we had on the game.
I always found the one year later revisits reviews interesting, specially once the dust had the time to settle on the hype or the negativity. I’ve seen youtubers being salty on the Last Jedi after it’s theatre release, being less critical today after multiple viewings. There’s games like SotC able to maintain their status which is I believe a statement on how well the original was made. And I’m also pretty sure that RDR2 could get lower scores now since the Wonder of it’s technical performances won’t be as new today than what it was a year ago.
So I think the whole debate about inconsistency in the reviews with time as more to do with the ability of the product to stand the test of time. DQ seems to get better reviews for now on Switch and it’s clearly because the game is still as good as it was one year or two year ago and the improvements they made showed that the developers cared about their product.
