Formulaic Books
In a book set in Missouri, with switching POVs and interlocking timelines, a crime concerned with false allegations and people with unhealthy love to each other is solved after a big plot twist. Which book did I just describe - "Dark Places" or "Gone Girl"?
Right.
I noticed this because I read both Gillian Flynn novels in the space of two months (although it is pretty obvious). The same happened with Jodi Picoult's "House Rules" and "Nineteen Minutes", though to a somewhat lesser extent.
These novels are in no way predictable, they are just, well ... formulaic. They seem to follow patterns and use the same building blocks to tell their story. And that discourages me from buying more books from these authors, because even though the plot seems interesting, I have a constant feeling of deja vu when reading.
Kathy Reichs does this, too, but her novels lean into the direction of crime novel cliches (heavy enough that I am unsure what happened in each book), whereas the two mentioned above go beyond just that.
And then there are people like James Michener, who also always write "the same" book - an epic saga spanning millennia - but manage to make it unique every time. Or Markus Zusak, who - with "The Bookthief" and "The Messenger" - wrote two books that could not be less alike.
Maybe it is a commercial thing of wanting to put out a new book as fast as possible, and not coming up with something completely new is quicker. Maybe they don't actually have other ideas, I am not sure. Fact is: formulaic books are boring, even if they are one step before being predictable.