The bigger sites like ign and GameSpot are the only ones who don't have to give a super low or super high score on purpose just to draw clicks from people checking metacritic or game rankings. I take their review with a little bit more weight than some site nobody has heard of.
IGN and Gamestop seem to rate competitive shooters, and cinematic action games unreasonably high. Even if the game has rampant, blatantly obvious issues, it can score a 9/10 easily. I consider their opinion on those sorts of games nearly meaningless as a result, since they've shown time and time again that they can't be trusted with those game types.
Meanwhile, if it's a game in a genre the reviewer doesn't understand, or a game that dared to try something new.... it could get rated down several points, due to the reviewer not understanding how to control the game properly. Or misunderstanding a key gameplay concept, that's fairly obvious.
It's frustrating. But, that's why it's good to look for patterns in what's being said about a game, rather than rely on a single review site. But I especially don't trust IGN or Gamestop's opinions, compared to all other review sites.
Anyway, with Infamous Second Son, it sounds like reviewers have a consensus that it plays like a prettier Infamous game, with some fun new powers. But didn't try to change the formula too much from previous Infamous games.