It depends on why the review exists -- most reviews emphasize fun, a fairly nebulous term that basically translates to "I didn't regret playing it", but there's not much value in fun as a target (and why such reviews are rarely described as well-written; there's little to write about). For the reader, it's a mildly indirect answer to the question "buy or skip?"

This review tries to answer the question "is it interesting", particularly in the context of other similar board game designs. That is, the reviewer was interested in whether the fundamental mechanics worked well, and achieved the goals of the creator, and the player (spoiler: it worked for well, but did not achieve player goals)

In this mental model, the question of whether it's "fun" is irrelevant. Is it worth remembering, as a player or as a designer, is a much more valuable, and harder target to achieve.