All reviews on a new game out get an automatic no on review because there is no way they have played through it and explored everything it has to offer or all the bugs it may contain. Wait about a week before posting a review.

You miss out on all the traffic if you don't.

There are some sites that wait a good deal of time before reviewing True PC Gaming

Nobody's forcing you to read them...

If you are referring to GOG game reviews, many have played them before GOG has released them. Those people are reviewing the actual game (story, gameplay etc.), not the GOG version in particular.

If you are talking about magazine/web site reviews, I think they usually get early copies to make their reviews in time. One Finnish gaming magazine which I used to read a lot quite often put some screenshots about the end game or such, just to show the readers that they have even finished the game when they reviewed it. (But quite often screenshots also come from the publisher directly, and the article writers don't necessarily take them themselves.)

Adding to this, and not to give any credence to the quality of Gamespot reviews, but they only publish reviews whence the reviewer has completed the game, even if it's not an advanced copy. I had a laugh once with their updates (I can't remember the game, might have been a Blizzard title) where they kept posting 'Halfway done, have the review up pretty soon' Followed later by, 'Getting close to the final boss, another hour and we'll have the review ready.' Finally topped off with, 'FINISHED! Haven't slept in 19 hours. Here is the review....'

I particularly like that the Australian show "Good Game" makes mention whenever they are running a pre-release games that may be different to the final version. They also often review games after they have been out for a little while if they cannot get a pre-release copy.

I suppose if the indie game (I presume this is for GOG review, yes?) has just been released on GOG at the same time as other sellers - first day reviews might indeed be lacking in substance. Otherwise, as others have said, given that GOG often puts up oldies or even indies that have been out for awhile already, people may have played these games before in depth.

The only issue is, should the reviews be about how the release stands on its own in 2013?. Or how the game plays compared to modern games in same genre (if its an old game) ?.

I suppose that's a fair point ... though for oldies I don't think the timing of the review with respect to the game's release on GOG changes that dilemma

I don't think that there should be a rule about that. Every reviews writes what he or she cares about. It's up to the reader to find reviews that match their taste.