I think publishers and reviewers can be quite useful in such a case by making it clear that the later, better volume (in this hypothetical) is different and how.

Although I believe first volumes to be nothing like the quality of later volumes, so I shouldn’t be deterred by one bad egg in a series that could potentially be enjoyable (The yaoi Kizuna is a prime example). Is it still the fault of the creator for not finding their voice so early in a series?

[...] 2006: Mail Order Ninja released in two parts, damaging the storytelling; creator complains about reviews that don’t [...]

[...] And this is a bit meta: Johanna Draper Carlson panned Mail Order Ninja earlier this week. The creator read the review and took it to The Engine. Interesting discussion follows. And later Johanna defends her review. [...]

[...] Meanwhile, Johanna, writes about judging a series based only on the first issue: …if I’m still not excited to read the next volume, then I say that’s the fault of the creators who haven’t created that anticipation in me. The decision to break the story where it did and package it this way was damaging to its presentation. I can’t evaluate a book based on what might happen next month or in the future; if I did, I’d rightly be criticized for trying to write the book myself. [...]