Forza Horizon 3 review: Playground Games drifts off at the wheel of Xbox's latest racer | IBT UK

Microsoft's annualised racing series returns for another festival of speed.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
YinYangGaming642d ago ShowReplies(5)
Lsbb642d ago

The forza horizon series is the only racing series that I buy. Found that the second one got a bit boring towards the end of the campaign mode. But loving the new demo. No way this game deserves a 2/5.

G20WLY642d ago

Well I saw another review give it 10/10, so goes to show you can’t please everyone all of the time. This game can’t seriously be a 4/10.

Lsbb642d ago (Edited 642d ago )

Not a chance. The graphics are excellent and I used to live just outside surfers so it'll be interesting to see.
@septic you just had to put in that childish comment didn't you.

G20WLY642d ago

Yeah the graphics seem an improvement over last year’s version.

zeuanimals642d ago (Edited 642d ago )

2/5 doesn't really mean 4/10. Sure, mathematically it does, but these are arbitrary numbers applied to rating games. There's no real metric and not much, actual logic put into it. It's just a feeling you get. Like for instance, it'd be impossible to seriously rate a game as a 8.192048/10. Really? You've got a whole algorithm to figuring out how you feel about a game?

The 5 star rating system has a lot more "nuance" to it. The part that sucks about it is that Metacritic treats a 2/5 rating like it would a 4/10. A 1/5 could be anywhere from 1 to 4/10. It's pretty much a game to avoid. A 2/5 could be anywhere from a 5 to a 6.5/10, 3/5 is a 7 to 8, 4 is an 8.5 9 to 9.5, and 5 is a 10. That's how I look at it anyway, based on how reviewers actually feel about a game based on what they say and you can kind of see the similarities to how other things, rated with a 5 star rating, should feel like as products or services. I've eaten at restaurants with 2/5 stars that weren't terrible, like a 4/10 would be, it just wasn't too good. So I guess another way to look at it is, 1 is anywhere from terrible to bad, 2 is meh to alright, 3 is good, 4 is great, and 5 is amazing.

It would just be better if reviewers stopped using 5 star systems so Metacritic will stop counting things wrong, though, since the people or systems at Metacritic don't take nuance into the mix. But I don't think reviewers are gonna do that, 5 star rating systems fit their thought processes more, I presume.

642d ago
Septic642d ago

At least there are no petitions here 😂

dumahim642d ago

As noted below, 2/5 is not equal to 4/10. It's more realistically a 6/10. I tend to look at them similar to grades.
5/5 10/10 = A
4/5 9/10 = B
3/5 8/10 = C
2/5 7/10 = D
1/5 6/10 and lower = F

There's really not much point of grading games between 0 and 5 or 6 out of 10.

blawren4642d ago

I prefer the old "at the movies" scoring system, thumbs up or thumbs down. Sadly, metacritic would give a lot of zeros for below average games and 100s to games above average games that don't deserve either. Metacritic has such pull right now that if you are not conforming to their scoring structure, you are not necessarily being represented accurately. Either that or, you know, actually read reviews from reviewers you respect. Its the meat of the review, not the score, that matters, but many don't go beyond the metascore.

blawren4642d ago


2/5 is 4/10. 3/5 is 6/10, 2.5/5 is 5/10. no way to make 2/5 sound any better. The flaw in your scoring is that you equate 7/10 as being a D. I know that the value of the score has no standard whatsoever and means something different to each person, but I'm still holding on to that being a C. There are ton's of gems in the 7/10 range. This is one reviewer that gave it a poor score that it clearly doesn't deserve. it will be vastly overshadowed by other reviews which are clearly stronger. It's OK.

I have a real problem with reviewers that compare a game to its predecessors. Nostalgia should not come into play as you are biased from the start one way or another. Review as if this is a brand new IP and or first game you've played in the series and sites will be much more respected for it in the long run.

nix642d ago

I don't understand how it got 4. Almost every site is giving 9 or above. 8 or 7, i understand but 4 is like really looking for attention.

Cueil642d ago

check his metacritic history lots of 2/5s

Kingthrash360642d ago (Edited 642d ago )

Smh. 2/5....trash click bait site. This is why I can't stand gaming journalists anymore. The lies for clicks.

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 642d ago
CaptainObvious878642d ago

I'm a sony fan, but even I can see that score is divorced from reality.

yeahokwhatever642d ago

Did you read the review? He said the graphics and amount of things is better than the other ones, but they spent too much time adding random features and making the game too easy and full of rewards, they didn't improve on the fundamentals with driving. He used DiRT as an example. The latest DiRT game is amazing. Not because they added ultimately meaningless features, but because they made the driving better than its ever been. The challenge is real. He praised a lot about the game, but it let him down because they didn't make the game more about driving. I understand where he's coming from entirely.

Rimfro642d ago


Are you the reviewer? You seem to be going out of your way to justify the score. Don't know why you keep comparing this to Dirt. The games are two entirely different takes on racing. Dirt went for more realism with its handling in the recent version. Where Horizon has always been the arcade version of Forza. I'm going to score COD lower because it's not Halo. Get out of here!


But hey there is no bias right? LOL

TheCommentator642d ago

Yeah, 2/5 is ridiculous, and I was confused by his condescension towards just about every feature that goes beyond just racing. Then, to top it all off, he says he's not a fan of having to drive precisely through checkpoints all the time.

So he doesn't like ancilliary stuff to micro-manage and wants more racing and sim, but doesn't want to be bothered with "strict rules" regarding checkpoints? IMO, it sounds like this guy just hates on one brand of consoles and wants to drop metacritic reviews while trying to sound professional. Either that or he's brain dead, and here's why.

Contrary to his opinion, everybody I know who's played the demo is in love with it. What about drone mode, wide body kits, FH auction house debut, many new activities, more geographic diversity, new vehicle types, double the size of FH2, amazing visuals... I don't recall the author mentioning any of these things at all. Matter of fact, he said it seemed like Playground was bored with making FH and didn't seem to care anymore.

FH1, FH2, and now FH3 are about an experience, not just being a racing sim. It can be toned down to arcade for beginners or made as hard as many sims depending on preference (also not really mentioned by the author). This guy is a serious douche, period. I'd give his review a 2/5 and the game at least a 4/5.

Snookies12642d ago

Agreed, having played the demo... There's no way this game deserves a score this low. The graphics are freaking stunning (aside from some shadowing, but that's to be expected of any open game while moving at faster speeds.) I can't quite speak on the content of the game, as I only played the demo. However, if it's just more of what I played, I'm all for it.

NohansenBoy642d ago

Don't AAA demos hardly resemble the "finished" product these days?

lxeasy642d ago

They clearly gave this game a low score to for click bait.

642d ago
+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 642d ago
LordMaim642d ago (Edited 642d ago )

Well that's a trolling score. There's a reason I don't go to this site.

EDIT: Of course I meant, not N4G. The experience on N4G is largely subjective.

EazyC642d ago

You mean N4G? You're right! I just don't know anywhere else that collates gaming articles, so I have to use this.

JackBNimble642d ago

Yet you made a user name and bother to comment because you don't know where else to go.

game4funz641d ago

It's a shame really. Would go to any other site that did what N4g (not for gamers) does.

LackTrue4K641d ago (Edited 641d ago )

Go to EGM, there site is always up to date on the newest gameing news.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 641d ago
Yama642d ago

N4G, where every other article is someone "worried" about a video game instead of anything meaningful, a "here's why" telling you how you should think or my personal favorite, a list where "you won't believe number 5". Gaming "journalism" at it's finest, lol.

JackBNimble642d ago

And you will continue to come here every day and bitch about how much of a troll/ ps4 site is.

Got news for you, you don't have to subject yourself to these forums

Yama641d ago (Edited 641d ago )

Come here every day and bitch? My last post was like 200+ days ago, lol. PS4 site? But I have a PS4 and love it, I also have a One. I just play games here and there, I don't concern myself with console wars, I can afford them both I'm not a basement dwelling creature.

Things slip through the cracks, it's a submission based site. It's not a big deal, we're just poking fun at some of the nonsense that does seem to get published a lot. It's great for getting an abundance of headlines and news quickly, that's why I support the site overall. I don't have all day to weed through articles, N4G does it for us.

Lighten up.

EpicSandwich642d ago ShowReplies(9)
TheHorseTamer642d ago (Edited 642d ago )

There is always one or two of these troll reviews.

Still, with this score added to metacritic, it is currently still at 90. Just amazing and congrats to Playground games and Turn-10.

yeahokwhatever642d ago

It's actually a well-formed opinion. Read the article before jumping to conclusions.

zb1ftw777642d ago

I read it.

Its a troll review.

NeoGamer232642d ago

Well informed?

To begin with it is only a 10 paragraph review.

The review seems to focus on the fact that the FH3 is not a full-on 2,000 hour knock'em out grind'em out racer devoid of entertainment like some other racers such as DiRT Rally. It also slags FH3 for being too difficult as an arcade racer and too nice as a racing simulator, which is something that is the Forza Horizon series is known for and applauded for. It goes on to knock FH3 on having collectibles that give you cool stuff.

This is simply a poor review. It does not talk about the vast selection of cars, it only makes small mention of graphics, it makes no mention of the racing environment in Australlia, it makes no mention of weather, no mention of night racing, and no assessment of Multiplayer and social features. Simply put the review chose to mock the game on a few of its core design principles.

yeahokwhatever642d ago

good lord, NeoGamer. I said well-formed, not well informed. At any rate, just because you don't reach the same conclusion as someone else it doesn't necessarily mean their conclusion isn't properly thought out. Personally, having only played the first FH game, and having played DiRT Rally, I can see already where he's coming from. And while I don't doubt FH3 has a plethora of improvements over its predecessors, if his assessment is correct that they put the improvements in the wrong place, I would reach the same conclusion as him. Having seen gameplay videos of FH3 in motion, other reviews(more positive), I would agree with his review. Racing games for me are about the challenge of pushing yourself and your car further to stay competitive. When you're over-rewarded early on, it removes the competitiveness from the game entirely. That's not my cup of tea.

EmperorDalek642d ago

Yeah you're definitely the reviewer. Or at least one of his fans... AKA 50% of his fanbase. Or hell maybe you even like pretending to be your own fan

yeahokwhatever641d ago

1. I've never even visited the site before this review.
2. I didn't bother looking up the reviewer's name, but as far as I know, I'm not a fan of any reviewers.
3. You'd make a shitty detective.

If you're capable, now this might be hard, as it might require you to re-take the 3rd grade, but what we're looking for here, is reading comprehension. You know, where you read words in a language, and then based on the meaning of the words, can comprehend what the idea was in the set of ideas expressed by said words. If you look carefully(maybe with the help of mom or dad), you'll see qualifiers in my assessment of the review, such as "if". Which means I my opinion is valid as long as what the author and other reviewers said is true. I have not played FH3 for myself, though might at some point if there's nothing better to play and the bargain bin is calling my name.

The things you listed are features that would be described on the back of the box. I don't need a reviewer to tell me that night time is dark. I would expect a reviewer to point out MINOR features only in the event that they were spectacularly terrible, or spectacularly awful. If they are as described on the box art, it really isn't worth my time to read in a review. This is 2016. The fact that you think Forza as a series needs to brag about basic features (like weather) that have been in dozens of racing games since the 90's doesn't really speak well for Forza. In a review, I'm looking for reasons why a game wouldn't live up to my expectations, or reasons it would possibly surpass them. Everything I've read about Horizon 3 (mostly from really positive reviews) makes me believe I would not enjoy the game for more than a couple of days.

Razzer641d ago

No it is not a well-formed opinion. When you are reviewing an arcade racer as a racing simulation game then you are totally approaching the game from the WRONG point of view.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 641d ago