Top
610°
7.5

Polygon updates their Driveclub Review

Driveclub's greatest contribution to the racing genre is how it manages to seamlessly blend the act of racing solo with asynchronous competition against your friends. That one major boon is aided by a solid (if unremarkable) core and some of the best visuals of this generation so far.

The story is too old to be commented.
Yi-Long909d ago

I bought it 1-2 months ago for 22,50€ when it was on sale on PSN, and I've been having ALOT of fun with it. Great great racer. It'sa ll about that gameplay and amazing trackdesign. All of them very fun to race on, again and again. I don't think there's a boring/poor track in the game.

It's not a perfect game, as the diversity in cars is a bit limited (no Japanese cars, no American cars (although DLC have added some I believe), no classic cars, etc), and perhaps it could have used a few more locations... but I'd rate it a 8.5 or even 9.

It's probably the best racer I've played since last gen's PGR series, and the first GRID.

Aery909d ago

One of the best racer I've played.
This updated score is still a joke, but it's polygon, I can't expect anything better from them.

Aery909d ago

Btw, from 7.5 to 5 to 7.5.

That's why I think they show how unprofessional they are.

The game, since its original release has improved a lot.
So the first time they scored it 7.5 because they liked it, then they updated it to 5 because it was broken, then after tons of updates that have improved the game from its initial release a TON they go back to just 7.5, as if the game is as good as it was at the beginning, but not broke.
It is ridiculous.

subtenko909d ago

No one cares what you think Polygon you POS BS review writers. Changing your scores to a lower back to the original when they added more content too.

GTFO with that shet!

Saw Drive Club, was informed they were adding things, played it, 9/10 for sure!

TheTimeDoctor909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

I think 7.5-8 is fair. A fun game

medman909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

I think 8.5 would be a fair score for Driveclub. What it does, it does exceptionally well, and it's the most addictive racing game (and the most beautiful) I've ever played....but it is missing alot of customization features and the cars do tend to perform a bit too similarly, particularly the braking performance. How I wouldn't kill for a brake bias setting or an opportunity to feel like the carbon ceramics that certain cars have in reality were actually reflected in improved braking performance in the game. I'm not asking for all out customization options, it's not that type of game...but the braking performance is not up to par with the rest of the game, in my opinion. For example, in Driveclub, it's absolutely essential to use the parking brake to help steer through a corner, as the understeer of every car is pretty bad. That may be a design decision due to the heavy drift focus on the game, but I would prefer not to pull the ebrake through corners...I don't in reality. Those sort of shortcomings are why Driveclub shouldn't get a 9 or above, but again, it's an excellent racer and the most fun I've had in a racing game in a very long time.

jc12909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

I agree. I'd give it a B-. Its a solid game that's a grown a lot since launch. It's certainly fun to play.

That being said, it does lack a true single player campaign. It also lacks car variety, car customization, real-time damage, and has mostly bumper-car tracks...These shortfalls by no means ruin the game, but they prevent it, at least in my opinion, from being a truly great racer.

fr0sty909d ago

Had they not originally scored it a 7.5, I'd agree. Though I personally would rate it 8-8.5.

u4one909d ago

I'd say it could have used tuning and customizing options as well as race configuration options etc. It's missing so much stuff compared to other solid racers. Not to compare it to forza, but the customizing of cars and how it rolls into social multiplayer aspects is part of what makes it so cool, in addition to the great racing etc. The car meetups let you check out other people's cars, race them buy them, view them etc. Super cool.

DC has certainly gotten better since launch. Id say a 7.5 is fair. I went from thinking it was a joke to at least picking it up from time to time for some quick races online.

Yi-Long909d ago

The balance is pretty good in Driveclub, and allowing modding and tuning etc etc might take away that balance, or at least THE IDEA of balance.

While I can enjoy those aspects in the SP career mode of a game like Forza, basically crafting and creating a car from different upgrades and tweaking it all to handle as good as possible, Driveclub seems to really just focus on the core-aspect of RACING, and does that very well (IMHO).

I love just starting it up, pickinga car and track, and just go. The gameplay itself is FUN, even after repeated playing on the same tracks.

It's as close to a rally-game as I've seen from a non-Rally game, in that in Driveclub you're also just constantly 'fighting' against the track itself, cause there's always a little bump in the road, a little dip, a little slippery spot, a corner that's challenging, etc etc. I love that.

It truly makes me wish these developers would produce a rally-game, or at least rally-expansion for Driveclub.

Utalkin2me909d ago

Don't you get tired of being in every DC article saying the exact same stuff? Broken record would get tired of hearing you.

jc12909d ago

u4one- I somewhat see your point. I dont think its unreasonable to give this game a 7.5. I think that's a slightly - and I mean SLIGHTLY - low score, but not by much. I'd give it an 8.

iceman06909d ago

I think that you are judging this game based on something that it was never meant to be. It wasn't supposed to be a "tuner/customization" ; styled game. It was meant to be a more arcade racer with handling that attempts a balance between arcade and sim. It's NOT meant to be GT or Forza or Project Cars. As for the score, I think that a solid 8 would be fair (7.5 being not too far off, I'm not upset).

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 909d ago
Aceman18909d ago

For me this game was a solid 9+ from the beginning even with the server issues. The racing is just exciting and fast. For me it's just pure racing without the nonsense.

ravens52908d ago

Great racing game, a 9 to me. It's much better now due to spotify I can race and listen to tunes. It's very challenging and fun. 9/10

3-4-5909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

* Polygon.

You have no soul.

Grow a spine, and stick with your decision.

* If you've been fooled I'll let you in on a little secret.

* They are just doing this for publicity.

No instead of getting your clicks ONCE per game score review........

They can now get your clicks 3-5 times per game score if they keep changing it.

* All this leads to is more rehashed articles and them basically getting payed for reviewing their own reviews.

You are helping them get paid for reviewing their own reviews.

Think about how stupid that is people.

Wake Up please.

Trying to help you.

fanboysmackdown909d ago

And to me, that's why we play the games we do. You enjoyed playing it and that's all that matters. Reviewers or other people's opinions mean squat and I don't let them ruin my enjoyment from any game. Gonna pick this title up soon too, it's almost at the price I was waiting for.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 908d ago
GarrusVakarian909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

"It's debatable whether DriveClub is actually a better game than it was with the addition of new tracks and cars and the weather system, but it's certainly more of what was already good."

Haha, what the hell am I reading? How on earth is that debatable? The inclusion of those things 100% objectively makes the game better.

Never change, Polygon. Never change.

OB1Biker909d ago

Yea that bit doesn't make sense and I'm not bothered to know what else they got to say anyway

ikkokucrisis909d ago

Omg they "made you look" didn't they!

Nekroo91909d ago

So much saltiness in the disagrees... The game is probably an 8.5/9.0

Transistor909d ago

You can go into a Polygon article knowing it's going to be terrible and still be shocked by how terrible it is.

Volkama909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

Say you don't like someone cos their breath smells of poo. That person could buy a really cool new hat. Objectively speaking, they just became better! But their breath still smells of poo so you still don't like them any more than you did.

Driveclub is has a cool hat (Weather, replays, photomode, Japan etc). But if you didn't like the handling or AI or whatever else then the game hasn't really improved.

MrDead909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

Whats wrong with the handling and AI, those are the two areas that Driveclub excels at.

Edit: @Septic
Driveclub was always a good solid racer but unfortunately suffered from severe network issues.

"a sprinkling of extra cars on an already lacking list"

I can tell you don't play this game, it's quite hard to keep up with all the added content this game has received. I've never known a game to be supported like this one.

Septic909d ago

Weather made the game look better for sure but look at the rest :

* replays -a basic feature you expect in racers

* photo mode - not really something that makes the gameplay better

* a sprinkling of extra cars on an already lacking list.

The game's shortfalls remain and yet people want to pretend all the above transformed the game into something amazing.

OB1Biker909d ago

That comparison sounds silly tbh but I think the AI has been improved actually

@sceptic
'people want to pretend'
a lots of people have opinions and preferences different than yours you know

Crimzon909d ago

Well the handling and physics are just awful. They lack the sheer fun and thrills of an arcade racer and the challenge and reward of a simulation racer. Instead, the physics just sit in an uncomfortable middle ground of the two which results in one of the most dull driving experiences in the genre.

The AI is also abysmal and seems to lack any awareness of the player. This isn't from reckless driving either, but simply sticking cleanly to the racing line and braking where appropriate etc. will still see you rammed into oblivion.

Now take the above two points into consideration with track design that is incredibly tight and narrow and the core gameplay experience is just terrible, and this is without doubt one of the worst racing games I have ever played. The list of faults and problems with this game is long, and the only redeeming feature I can possibly point to is the graphics. Unfortunately however, I play games for the gameplay, and not for the graphics.

What's worse is that this game was supposed to have revolutionary online play and team-based racing. What was it in reality? A cheap, inferior copy of the Autolog system that Criterion pioneered with Need For Speed: Hot Pursuit. Well, except for the fact that this game's cheap copy of said Autolog system doesn't even work correctly and is broken.

This game is terrible, and even giving it 7/5/10 is being far too generous. If this was a multiplatform game it would receive the criticism it rightfully deserves, but because it's exclusive then all of a sudden it becomes immune to criticism and people laughably claim it as the best racing game around? What a joke.

I got this game free with my PS4 and I still feel ripped-off, I wish I'd had a better game filling that slot in the bundle I bought instead. I'm just glad I was able to get a decent price for this game on eBay before it's value nosedived after word got out about how terrible it is. This is hands-down one of the worst racing games of the past ten years.

rainslacker909d ago

True, you can't polish a turd and all that. But they found the game OK overall...unremarkable, but good. So if it's good, how is having more of it a bad thing, and how is it possible to say that having more of something good(in a game) doesn't just make it better?

Hate to bring it up, but the Order was a good game, so if it had more content(for length)...that being tracks in this case, and more varied game design mechanics...weather component in this case, would it not have been a better game?

Volkama908d ago

@rainslacker the quote says driveclub has added more of what it was already good at. If the things it isn't good at had been addressed (like your length of The Order) it would have a higher score. But so long as the flaws remain they still have just as much weight on the score.

It isn't the same as saying "the improvements don't improve it", but you can't just keep adding up positives or you'll end up giving games 78 out of 10.

rainslacker908d ago

That's a fair point. On the other hand, weather is also a new mechanic which adds to the existing experience. To say it doesn't add anything, or give more variety of the already good game play, kind of makes it seem that they just don't want to add anything past their original review.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 908d ago
Mikefizzled909d ago

They mean just because there's more content it doesn't make it a better game. For example Master Chief Collection, going on what you just said, would be a solid 10/10. 100+ maps, 4 campaigns, 2 seasons of spartan ops and plenty of other stuff. But it wasn't cause of the actual game was buggy and the online was dead at launch.

rainslacker909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

OK, say it had more maps, extra stuff added to the campaign, and an extra season of spartan ops...would it not be better?

More of a good thing is good in gaming isn't it?

All that being said, does less of a good thing make it a worse game? There are games that severely lack content, and more would be desired, yet many games get away with very little content by reviewers...Evolve being a recent example.

Rookie_Monster909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

More contents does not make it a better game. And to make the PS4 fans happy, this 7.5 for driveclub is actually above the 7.0 that they gave Forza Horizon 2. I think they are the only site that I know off that gave DC more than FH2. And people claimed they are MS bias. Lol

The truth of the matter is, Polygon, like many sites, have different reviewers giving different opinion and not all of them think alike or feel the same as you or another person. That is the real fact.

kraenk12909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

The truth is Polygon is some hipste wannabe gamer site which shouldn't be taken seriously in the first place.

iceman06909d ago

You are right!!! More content doesn't make it a better game. However, the edition of more content alongside actually FIXING what was broken at launch makes it a much, much better game.

NecotheSergal909d ago

That and they updated a flawed review score TWICE? XD They have 3 different scores, 7.5, to 5, to 7.5 again? Who the hell does that? lmfao.

Polygon, being an embarrassment since who knows when.

rainslacker909d ago

Actually, I don't mind that they changed it. Their original review was based on playing it when it wasn't having problems. Their updated one was based on the problems that showed up after launch. The newest one is based on what they feel the game should be now since the issues have been fixed.

I'm with Lucas on this one though...how does the added content and new mechanics not make it into a better game? But overall, I won't worry about what they think of it, and just happy they at least did update their scores to reflect changes made. I don't think that should be done for every game of course since many games get patches and more content over time, but in cases like this or Halo:MCC it does seem reasonable.

NecotheSergal909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

@rainslacker - Yeah, but why rewrite a review because it's having temporary server problems due to being overloaded? Do you know how many games I bought at launch that had server problems at the get go? Almost every single online-focused game has had launch server issues that lasted weeks or months. Diablo 3 for one example, SO many people couldn't log on and the onslaught of hate by fans were everywhere. I don't remember seeing any other game reviewer that would concentrate the temporary downfalls of a game as if it's a Core Problem to the game fundamentally, that shows zero foresight into the content that the game does provide. A few setbacks that will be fixed is a bad thing, not saying it isn't or that it's not worth demerits/penalties - but it's obvious that server problems at launch - as bad as they are to the consumers, to get such a hefty pounding over it where a reviewer is all like "I take my review back, I'm lowering my score until the servers get better - Oh hey, 6 months later the servers are better, here, have a 7.5 again"

That does not sound professional no matter how you want to put it (Not like anyone goes to Polygon for anything professional anyways) :/ Short-comings or downfalls that are temporary should be given Shame I'd say, a definite negative feedback in some variety which comes all but naturally with the players whether a reviewer points it out or not, customer reviewers do that and I think should be used for these kind of problems. A player review focuses on their personal opinion and what they had to tackle, but a professional reviewer should think of the contemporary issues and not let it completely impact their forethought process. A professional reviewer I'd believe that its their job to see what is given 'Now' and if there's a drawback to be had, then it's how the game can be viewed 'After' the setbacks are fixed (Unless the setbacks/bugs/problems are so drastic that it really does make the game unplayable), Driveclub was in a grey area of sorta 'Bad servers, a bit unplayable, but still possible to my recollection?). I don't remember seeing Low-scored reviews on Bloodborne though solely because of the long loading times which could be viewed as a drawback to a great game, or as if the scores were negatively impacted by any of Bethesdas AAA games, Fallout 3, Vegas, Oblivion and Skyrim all launched with terrible bugs that are infamous amongst any Bethesda game - did those crippling bugs help ruin the review scores? Nah - and if mentioned? It'd have been a minor setback of what, 0.1-0.5 reduction?

and yes, I also agree with Lucas.

rainslacker909d ago

I don't disagree. There is no reason to rewrite a review once it's done. But at the same time it doesn't upset me that a review is changed to reflect changes that make the original review score irrelevant. This is particularly true for games that are still selling, and may hold some interest for a large number of people.

They should have left their original review in place IMO, because it was pretty obvious that the problems would be resolved. And they were resolved quicker than many online games problems get resolved.

Lamboomington909d ago

The problems the author had with the game were different things. What was added was part of what was already good - ie the things for which points weren't cut in the first place.

In that case, the addition of more of what already worked doesn't mitigate the problems the author has with the game. So he/she can't increase the score from the original then, because his/her issues with the game weren't resolved. You know, the stuff that marks were cut for. That's totally reasonable and logical

It's just an opinion, but it's reasonable. Yes, it might be annoying to see, because Evo have done amazing post launch support. pCars and other games should follow their example !
In my eyes, the game should indeed be scored higher than before, but if not, I can see why that might be the case, and its fine.

rainslacker909d ago

You nailed it.

More content is apparently bad. Not enough content is apparently bad. Guess they need the game that gives just the right amount of content.

What this says to me is that Polygon is Goldilocks of the gaming press, and gaming is just their three bears to come to terms with.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 908d ago
carlingtat909d ago

Bought it a week ago for £10. Great racing game, have had zero problems.

Gardenia909d ago

At launch the game had problems yes, but they have done a great job making this game better after a few months. I still enjoy this game with all the new content

GearSkiN909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

Re review? That's dumb, so all the broken games should get re scored.

Including MCC

Ultr909d ago

Yeah I believe they should. If they are still relevant

Professor_K909d ago

>implying dc is relevant LOOOl

OB1Biker909d ago

That is if they actually dropped points for being broken

PraxxtorCruel909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

They did. That game deserved a score around 95 if it weren't for the problems!

Halo 2 Metacritic: 95
Halo: Combat Evolved Metacritic: 97
Halo 3 Metacritic: 94
Halo 4 Metacritic: 87

= 93.25 So around 95, it lost several points as it sits at 85 for its network troubles which are now resolved yet no one is updating their review! :p

MasterCornholio909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

@Praxxtor

Have you ever taken into account that since the first Halo game standards have risen?

The Last of Us is a fantastic game but ten years later there could be much better games than it so it wouldn't compare as favorably to those titles.

Anyways the MCC has a meta of 85 which is still a very good score. I don't see why people are complaining about it.

johndoe11211909d ago

MCC was virtually unplayable and STILL got scores of 8.5's and 9's. Are you saying that the game only lost 1-1.5 points because of it being broken? If so then why was Driveclub scored so lowly originally because of it suffering the same issues. Now, using that logic one can only come to two conclusions, either driveclub was unfairly judged and scrutinized by the gaming media or there was severe bias in giving HMCC a pass even though it was released just as broken as driveclub. You tell me which one.

Volkama909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

MCC had 4 very good campaigns, so even with no online mode it did a lot right.

Driveclub actually had some pretty awful reviews that didn't take any points off for online issues, because those issues didn't manifest during the review period (such as GiantBomb's 4/10 that was very specific about it).

Logic bomb :(

johndoe11211909d ago

The fact that giant bomb gave that game a 4/10 without taking into consideration the online issues proves my point that that game was deliberately bashed by said media. There is no way in hell that that game should have gotten such a low score for its single player. It may not have been "groundbreaking" like the media insists every sony ip should be but it was a good racer. giving it 4/10 was downright spiteful and vindictive.

Volkama909d ago

OR it proves that reviewer really didn't like it.

I mean, the media seem to enjoy Bloodborne. They seemed to enjoy TLOU as well. I'm not seeing a pattern that suggests they hate Sony IP.

Septic909d ago

@VOLK

There is no pattern. Its just a childish cop out by people who just can't handle the truth. I'm sorry but it's just downright pitiful.

Lamboomington909d ago

@johndoe11211

"The fact that giant bomb gave that game a 4/10 without taking into consideration the online issues proves my point that that game was deliberately bashed by said media. There is no way in hell that that game should have gotten such a low score for its single player. It may not have been "groundbreaking" like the media insists every sony ip should be but it was a good racer. giving it 4/10 was downright spiteful and vindictive."

Or they just didn't like it, you know. It's entirely possible, btw. Maybe they don't like simcade kind of racing. Maybe they wanted more variety. At the end of the day, maybe they just got really really bored. Like others said, several PS exclusives come out and are critically acclaimed and reviewed as some of the best games ever made.
This whole "they are biased against Sony" and "they are just bashing the game" thing doesn't work. It's hypocritical too.

Some people loved the game, other's hated it. Deal with it.

rainslacker909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

Yeah the reviewer may not have liked it.

I know when reading a review, I really care whether or not the reviewer liked it. Things like objectively looking at what the game does well and poorly, whether it provides what it promises in the marketing as per the pub/dev, and whether or not the game actually works or not, if it provides enough content, or if the story is good and well presented where applicable are simply side notes to the authors opinion.

That's how I base all my game purchases...if Reviewer Joe #45324BR7 whose looking for his 15 minutes of fame, likes the game.

I think a reviewer's opinion is obviously a part of whether they like a game or not, but they have to be able to objectively qualify why they think the way they do and then weigh that against some sort of criteria that should be set down by the editors(where applicable) to come to a final conclusion on the game's score. To do otherwise is a disservice to the reader, and could be potentially harmful to the developer or publisher and ultimately the industry.

Can't speak to the 4/10 review, just speaking in general...using everyone's favorite method...sarcasm.

It's really a bad thing that reviewers are not trusted overall anymore. All this defense of certain review scores needs to stop if people want some sort of system where reviews actually mean something more than a way to fan the flames of the console war.

Professor_K909d ago

Virtualy unplayable? wtf the game didnt require an internet connection to play campaigns. Do you even know what your talking about chap?

also, has your fanboy mind ever considered that the reason DC got low reviews was because it was an overall lackluster launch game? Comparing that half baked garbage to MCC does it no justice. You guys wouldnt know a good game from a bad one unless it was any other console besides ps platforms. SHAKING MY HEAD

Crimzon909d ago

Hahaha. The possibility that the game is bad just doesn't even enter consideration here, obviously the reviewers have to be biased.

Some fanboys really are laughably pathetic. Everyone I know who's played the game thinks it's utter garbage, it's only on N4G you'll see the truly delusional screaming about how it's really 10/10 and apparently the best racing game in years.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 909d ago
secretcode909d ago

I'm a Forza/Need For Speed kind of person, and at first I didn't care for DriveClub but I gave the game another shot a week ago. There's so much about the game that I love, but there's a few things missing from the title that still make me completely confused: Specifically, steering/braking options, aand more in-depth customization system (decals, paint work, tuning etc.) There's something fantastic about DriveClub, and I hope the developers continue to fine tune it.

one2thr909d ago

I recommend switching the acceleration and braking controls to either analog stick (up-faster, down-slower) makes a huge difference in throttle control compared to using L2-R2.

But as with everything, it'll probably take sometime to get use to and the pay off is well worth it.

GameSpawn909d ago

I did this for a while with the Gran Turismo games, but the downside to this is that you can't throttle and brake at the same time (overlapping the two). I ended up going back to the triggers in all racing and driving games.

To each his own. I still recommend to anyone to try it at least once though and see if it is for you.

one2thr909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

I do it this way, seeing that I dont use both feet to drive (Left foot on brake, right on accelerator), I found out that there actually are people that drive with both feet, but I over came the problem with trying to brake and accel. with a controller at the same time, by making the "R2", the E-Brake, again this is based on how it would be driving with an actual wheel and pedal.

GameSpawn909d ago

In the real world, people who tend to drive with both feet (gas and brake) tend to drive manual transmission cars and use the left foot to clutch and brake and the right for the accelerator. It's referred to as heel toe double clutching or just heel toe:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

One of my friends actually does this in his actual car and also with his driving wheel setup in Gran Turismo. It's difficult to do until most of the process becomes second nature between braking, clutching, and shifting.

one2thr909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

I thought with manual driving the left foot is used to engage the clutch?

I just learned something new (I only drive automatic)

Yeah after reading that article I'll just stick to automatics, but if I ever choose to want to know how to drive manual, I'll do what my friend did, and buy a "bucket" and have fun in a empty lot.