The book's not out yet and people have already rated it. Personally, it all depends on the book, series or stand-alone. If the first book wasn't done properly then I would have less faith in the next book, wishing that it was a stand-alone so I wouldn't feel compelled to read the others. If it was a stand-alone and the book was great, but it had a ton of unanswered questions, I would find myself begging for more. But, in general, I prefer series. Mostly for the fact that I hate when things end abruptly for me. One book seems too final. Also, I like that usually, in each book, there is always a new problem and maybe a couple of new characters that may be added. Sorry, this reply is so long.
Stand-alones, definitely. Reason being I don't like when things are drawn out, just so anther book gets published. I like when books end. Simple as that.
I prefer series because you get to learn the personalities of the characters and it leaves you in suspense for the next book to come out, if it isn't out already. Good series are Janet Evanovich's Stephanie Plum series (first books is One for the Money) and is good for mystery/comedy/romance lovers; Charlaine Harris' Sookie Stackhouse series (Dead Until Dark is good for the mystery/romance/suspense/vampire/ET lover. Great reads!
I perfer series since I simply like longer stories, but it really depends on how well the book is written. My real favorites, though, are stand alones that are self-sufficient but related to other books by the same author. I do it all the time.
