Most sequels add things to make it look new while still retaining the look of the game, if you can name me exactly two sequels that didn't do this and were highly acclaimed then I'll admit I'm wrong. Take the Halo trilogy for example, each game added an array of new animations, functional and aesthetic menu changes, new gun sounds etc. If Halo 2 still looked like Halo CE, with the same melee and reload animations, people would have likely made jokes about it being an expansion instead of calling it a new game.

FEAR series did this, DOOM did it, Quake did it, Titanfall did it, Gears of War did it, Rainbow Six did it, Lost Planet 2, Crysis, Wolfenstein, Borderlands, Left 4 Dead, Battlefield and as much as people love to shit on it, Call of Duty does it too. It's what helps make a new game look new, and if it doesn't look new and improved, then people are going to call it DLC because that's essentially what it is.

So far, it doesn't look like they've added much of that at all. It would be nice to have an opinion without people jumping at your throat with over-exaggerated rage over a disagreement. Plenty of people say it looks more like an expansion rather than a sequel, obviously there is a reason for that.