Gran Turismo 5 reviewers failed Yamauchi’s damage test – incomplete reviews?

Gamer.Blorge writes: "It seems like Gran Turismo 5 is choke full of hidden surprises. However, it may not really be a hidden surprise for those that have actually played the game enough. In Kazunori Yamauchi genius fashion, he has left out a few important pieces of information waiting for reviewers to discover them."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Sunny_D2646d ago

IGN failed most definitely. If I recall correctly, the reviewer playing it was only on level 5 or somewhere around there. Whatever it was, it wasn't even atleast at level 10.

deadreckoning6662646d ago (Edited 2646d ago )

"Yamauchi probably feels that players must first get their skills to a level where they can drive well before introducing race losing effects as crippling full on damage."

That actually makes a lot of sense. Beginners are likely to crash a lot in the beggining, so if the full damage was available from the start..beginners would hardly win any races. Hmmm...the game is more accessible than I imagined.

irepbtown2646d ago (Edited 2646d ago )

Totally agree,
Although i would love damage, GT5 seems very realistic with Traction control, different tires etc.

I dont think it was the best idea to 'Unlock' damage, but it will definitely help the beginnners.

Trading in Black Ops for this game, bye.

EDIT: Was just told its Progressive, Basically the damage becomes more realistic as you play and Ai gets more difficult.

GlowingPotato2646d ago

ITS TIME to reviwers change... they must play the entire game before write some random sh** on the web.

and this will not change if we still support them.

Ducky2646d ago (Edited 2646d ago )

... but why hide the actual visual damage?

Unless... Unless... wait... did Yamauchi just troll the entire gaming-related internet?

EDIT: I just realized. Since the damage is controlled by your progression, Yamauchi basically created a "Damage Control" system.
The plot thickens... o.o

GlowingPotato2646d ago

Yamauchi want to expose the evil! actuals reviwers r failing!

longcat2646d ago (Edited 2646d ago )

Has he just trolled the entire gaming media??

sdtarm2646d ago Show
karl2646d ago

oh god..
thats some serious trolling kaz...
the sites that talk shit should be ashamed now..

i even read how the AI was totally lacking in some reviews

this guys didnt even reach lvl 10 ...

and yeah IGN is first on that list



That's because GT5 don't "visual damage" for premium cars (I don't know about standard if they are visual only or not).

The "visual damage" on a premium car is actually "physical damage" too. If you mess your hoof or bumper you have to actually fix it. And although this body kit fixing may be free, most of the damage fixing isn't.

So having damage early on the game would rain in all new racer's parade. You can actually spend more on fixing a high end car in GT5 than buying one, and all we long time fans of the franchise know that good cars come with time and money invested in the game. Having to constantly fix cars you get early on just because you can't get anything better would jeopardize on the real objective.

Shadow Flare2646d ago

I've been playing since Wednesday and I'm already at level 16. If only reviewers did the same. There are still some things like the online, rallying and track editor I've yet to try out. Nearly all reviews I've seen, the reviewer has been at a around level 10 or under. You could get to that level in maybe a day or two. It's ridiculous that they could write a fulfilling review in that space of time. I thought you're supposed to play the majority of the game to be able to review the game. I mean otherwise you might end up writing stupid things like "there's no damage"

-Alpha2646d ago (Edited 2646d ago )

For the sake of skepticism keep in mind that we don't know for SURE if that video is real or not. For all we know he could have spent hours trying to get to that level of damage.

From what I've seen that kind of damage was expected in the game, but it's the way damage happens that people do not like. You can go at high speeds and bump off barriers while making just a small dent from what I hear.

And while it makes sense gameplay wise to have damage progress, it doesn't make sense to limit the damage model graphically.

We still don't know for sure how damage happens at level 40, and since there is a damage patch that was addressed there clearly was an issue that needs addressing.

That's what I'm reading from GTPlanet anyway:

For those interested there is damage for standard cars displayed on that link.

longcat2646d ago

Kaz - All your credibility are belong to me

Guwapo772645d ago

@Canna -

There was a time when reviewers would beat the game before a review was written. Some even went as far to give a progression review until it was beat. Those days are gone sadly... If you aren't out the gate with your reviews first, you miss out on your site hits (which equals pay day). We can thank the internet for that.

Wish we could go back to the day when Game Mags were the source for all reviews. Let me hush, I'm starting to show my age.

HolyOrangeCows2645d ago (Edited 2645d ago )

These reviewers are so used to playing short, uncomplex linear games (or boring open world games that serve as filler traveling) that when they get a good one in, they play it for ten minutes and write their review.

The best reviews haven't even released yet.

TheDeadMetalhead2645d ago (Edited 2645d ago )

Meanwhile, at Polyphony...

Lawliet2645d ago

These days I don't read a review to buy my games. I play my games to judge a reviewer... How things have change..

Karum2645d ago

As I read the article those were exactly my thoughts, because I crash a lot too at these lower levels and need to improve so the damage and thus mechanical breakdown would just hinder me from progressing as well as I maybe could. The same will be true for others.

Personally I think this kind of system makes the game a bit more accessible. I wouldn't mind the damage being maxed out from the beginning tbh but this move from PD also makes sense.

I also like how it has shown up the reviewers of the game and justifies my stance of putting very little faith in reviews this generation and that isn't just for PS3 games but for all games.

hay2645d ago

I'm glad to see more and more people actually playing GT5 instead of their weird imagination of the game.

Congratulations guys. We've created a moving force. Most reviewers will be careful now with reviewing games 'cause now, they're just a laughing stock.

jony_dols2645d ago

Every review I read was incomplete.

Features such as proper damage, Custom tracks, range of steering wheel support, and (most importantly for me) 3D support, was left out of 95% of the reviews I read.

It's a disgrace.
I didn't read one review that actually tested out the 3D, some sites mentioned the feature. None actually used it.

twoface2645d ago

It is only logical that the visual damage fits the physical damage. If your car looks badly damaged, it should drive badly damaged.

Could be this reason why visual damage was also omitted from the early stages.

Ravage272645d ago

Yamauchi vastly overestimated the intelligence and integrity of modern-day reviewers.

+ Show (18) more repliesLast reply 2645d ago
-Alpha2646d ago (Edited 2646d ago )

IGN's reviews complained about more than just damage. I'm not sure how much the review scores would change if they got to level 40, but yes, they failed to address that component. People are talking about this to invalidate lower review scores but keep in mind that there were also sites that gave it 9+ that also didn't get to the level 40 most likely.

It's a case of picking and choosing reviews as fans see fit and happens with nearly every game.

This is not uncommon with many reviews for games though. MW2's MP was barely touched-- in fact, MP in general is barely touched in numerous games before reviews make judgments on them.

You can blame review sites, but they technically don't have to take blame if embargos are lifted by Sony. I don't know how far a majority got before reviewing games but it's obvious that many games should get a week or so for reviewers to:

a) Observe as much as they can
b) Let the hype sink away for a more logical score

This is why I like Gamespot reviews. While IGN tends to have reviews ready to go the minute an embargo is up, sites like Gamespot usually give their reviews last and I find that they take more time with their reviews

PirateThom2646d ago

Sony lifted the embargo, doesn't mean they need to have the review up as soon as that embargo lifts.

If Sony is at fault anywhere, it's not getting the review copies out earlier.

-Alpha2646d ago (Edited 2646d ago )

I'm not blaming Sony, but if an embargo is lifted sites will flock to get it out ASAP for immediate hits. I'm just saying that sites like IGN wont take blame because of embargos.

People can't expect sites to wait when there is competition from all kinds of sites.

We even had websites release reviews before the rush to get some attention.

@raz below

Of course-- but they wont do it because IGN reviews tend to be very general. They don't have to be coerced, they just have to have permission from Sony.

People can't say their reviews cant count or that they need to take it back because then you can say that to just about any game whose review you don't agree with.

Like I said, I don't know how far they got or if their score would have changed-- their main issues seemed to stem from their negative attitude towards the A-Spec mode and the game not being, I suppose "game-like" since they called the simulation aspects a 10/10

raztad2646d ago (Edited 2646d ago )

Nothing forced them to publish their review just when the embargo got lifted tho. Other major sites are taking longer to review the game. I'm not saying that better damage or AI would change the final score, but they would have been a little more accurate on their comments.

Rage_S902646d ago

"There will be more to come as rumblings on more aggressive AI is starting to bubble"

so what about this

Nitrowolf22646d ago (Edited 2646d ago )

The thing is, it isn't MP, it's SP part of GT. And from IGN review, it leads me to believe that they didn't play it as much as one would think. For starter they complain about the AI's being Zombie. The first 10lV they are, but once you get above that they actually try to pass and block you. Same with the damage, it's weak to begin with but later on it is improved as the higher Level you get. I notice a change in damage from LV1 to LV16, it's much better but still not the best, but it is improving.

I can understand why reviewers are scoring it down, One thing i think PD should have done was actually indicate that damage improves over time, with an in game Notification. In a sense it is PD fault here for not saying anything before launch, but then again it can be considered both unproffetional by both reviewers and PD.

But still most reviews i have read, seem as if they don't take enough time to review it. If most sites got their game a few days before the embargo lifted, that should still be no excuse to have to release the review that same day. And yes it can be tempting for them, considering that they want hits.

Thing is us gamers, we expect reviewers play the game to the fullest, but that isn't the case. Many times reviewers play a small portion of the game and make their verdict just so they can be the first to the punch.

I don't expect any reviwers to take back their score, all i know is that i am happy with the game.

Waiting for theirs too
Even though i already have the game and am loving it.

Mostly earlier reviews are indications of what to see
If good score is seen, 9-10, then the game is expected to get that score across the board.

Usually games that fall into Racing, RPG, JRPG, games that take 40+ hours, i usually wait for later reviews. I hate early reviews period. I wonder why reviewers can't get their games the same day as everyone else, tbh i think it's just so publisher can put that "10/10" on the cover of their game. idk their are reasons like influence sales and other stuff.

-Alpha2646d ago (Edited 2646d ago )


It's common with all games. Some reviews will also rush to the end and miss the smaller details of games.

The reason why people are more acute here is that guys like IGN gave a lower score than expected and people want GT to score higher on sites like IGN.

If it was scored 9.5-10/10, and even if they spent just about the same time on the game people wouldn't notice or care.

Of course this doesn't justify a site like IGN only scratching the surface, but it goes to show that the issue is much broader than just GT5.

Again, IGN and a lot of early reviews are like that which is why I prefer Gamespot. I don't think much of IGN and hold their opinion lightly as they tend to be more general (though their scores still fall in line with much later reviews).

Personally I don't look at media reviews as much as I do user reviews. GameFaqs, etc. tend to have well written and deep reviews

thesummerofgeorge2646d ago (Edited 2646d ago )

Alpha, their job is to play video games, and if they can't even do that because their desire for the most hits is preventing them from doing their job, then they are no longer relevant. Instead of just looking to be first out with a review, they could easily look to be the first out with a fair, accurate and informed review, otherwise you're just a fanboy blog. And I think amongst all the bullshit, an informed review from someone who actually played the game WOULD attract hits in and of itself, because it would stand out amongst the trolling.

They make their money off of our traffic, we need to demand better, otherwise what's the point of reviews. Some of these sites make big money off of this stuff, they have a responsibility that joe blow and his blog don't have... Their reviews affect other peoples business, so either do it right, or get out of the biz, but don't write phony reviews for a game you haven't played, and act like it's accurate.

The Wood2645d ago (Edited 2645d ago )

hmm. Ive always though reviewers should state how much time they put into the titles they're reviewing. They should at least complete it unless its a broken mess or if its a game that cant really be completed (mmo type or online only game etc).

As a minimum requirement a reviewer of 'infamous' for example should have completed BOTH good and evil arcs to post a review. A game with the depth of GT5 obviously needs a little more time than a hack n slash or shooter in the hands of the reviewer... How many reviewers have got to this so called level 40.....How many have mentioned it???? You could blame PD or whoever for not informing reviewers but they are paid to review our games....they aren't doing it for free.

What book reviewer writes a review without finishing the book, or what film critique writes a review of a film they haven't fully watched .....doesn't/shouldnt happen.

I understand that reviewers dont have infinite time to go to the ends of the earth to analyse every nock and cranny of a game but when you make claims that are subsequently proved false you kinda look dumb or unprofessional at best.

Its sad that many people are put off by incomplete reviews and im no way saying GT5 is without fault or issue, im just saying that people are spouting a lot of fud because of some of these same semi fud filled and incomplete reviews.

callahan092645d ago

Well most of the other complaints IGN had were just about graphics and interface.

Well, the graphics are great, and I don't even particularly care if they aren't perfect. That's just a nit-pick, really. The racing is excellent, and the graphics service that end.

As far as the interface, I think it's absolutely wonderful. I like the menus a lot, and I think the presentation is great.

The only presentational issue I've got is that with some races there are requirements for what kind of car you can drive, and the game doesn't help you to pick out a car for the task. It's nice that you can look at your garage and it only shows you the cars you already own that work for the race at hand, but if you don't already own a car for that race, they don't help you to find one at all. For a lot of races, this is not a big deal, like when a car must be older than 1980, or something. That information is easily visible in the car dealerships screens. But when it's something like the Lightweight K-Cup challenge, it can be more difficult to remember all of the small Japanese vehicles that qualify, and you have to write down the cars that it says qualify and look for them in the dealerships. Or even something simple like making sure they put in the country the car is from, I'm surprised they don't have that info on the car screen. I mean, I know most countries for most car makes, but not all of them, and I feel the car info screen is a little less complete without that simple item listing.

But that's about it. The game isn't perfect, but it's as close as any other racing game I've ever played, and it has so much content and so much to do I feel like I have no shot at ever completing it all! The course maker alone will keep me invested in this game until Gran Turismo 6 comes out, even if that is years and years from now.

I played my first race in Toscana today, with day/night changes, and was blown away by the amazing beauty of that course. The environment, the lighting and effects as day turns to sunset turns to night, the firework explosions, everything, just simply stunning.

callahan092645d ago

... (Continued) ...

About the difference between standard and premium cars, well, I don't even know what to say. I haven't really noticed much difference, honestly. I think it's cool that premium cars are available to use in Photo Travel to take ultra hi-res pictures that look gorgeous, and they have full interior modeling, but I couldn't care less about the other differences. There's just as much reason to drive some of the standards as the premiums. They control and drive just like you'd expect regardless of whether it's standard or premium. The cockpit view lacking in standard mode doesn't mean a thing to me because I personally find the cockpit view incredibly hard to use. I use the bumper camera view, it's just the best field of view for me, with the most visibility and the best sense of speed, so I don't even use the cockpit view.

And as far as the graphics on the standard car exteriors, I honestly feel that they're still incredibly beautiful and I've never once felt like I was playing with an "up-scaled PS2 model."

And as for damage, well, I personally loathe it. Haha. It increases the challenge so much. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad it's there, it adds to the immersion and realis, but it's definitely something where I'm glad they introduce it as a learning curve, slowly, so that you can increase your skills and not be thrown to the wolves out of the gate with this game. I use the bumper camera view, so you can't see the car in the race, and I find watching replays to be boring, even if it was a tight race (I had an awesome race on Laguna Seca that I won by .009 seconds to get the One Hundredth of a second trophy! ... and even that replay was boring to me), so for me, I never even physically see or look at the cars when they're damaged. I haven't even noticed a difference in damage between standards and premiums because I do my best not to wreck and I don't really use an out-of-car camera.

Anyway, the point is, there are things you could complain about just for the sake of complaining, but the fact is the game is a lot of fun and offers so much to do and see and learn about cars that you'd never experience it all. The racing controls to perfection, there are tons of courses, a ton of cars, a course maker, Gran Turismo TV, etc. etc. etc. It's a masterpiece. If any game this generation has deserved a maximum score so far, it's this one.

evrfighter2645d ago

they should have gotten some review copies out earlier. simple as that.

thesummerofgeorge2645d ago (Edited 2645d ago )

evrfighter, so when reviewers don't do their job, it's PDs fault for not getting it too them earlier? Since when are game reviewers such primadonna's that we must make sure they get everything they want or they won't do their job properly. If they got the game earlier, we probably would still have seen half ass reviews only earlier.

Put the blame where blame is deserved, PD did their job, they shouldn't have to pander to reviewers and cater to their every want, that's not who the game is for. They get the game when they get it, and they should do their fucking jobs. How is not getting the game earlier an excuse to make an unfair review? Cause they want to be first? Tough shit. If anything, it's just an excuse for a late review, not an unfair one.

I think the well has been poisoned, these fuckers have gotten so much payola and "gift baskets" that when they aren't pampered, it's not worth their precious time, and they don't give good or fair reviews. Maybe I'm just cynical, but c'mon people, under no circumstances is it PDs fault the reviewers didn't play the game. If it takes a week after release date to pump out a fair informed review, than that's what the reviewers JOB entails.

Imagine having a reviewers attitude at a REAL job... I would have loved to tell my employers I didn't do my work properly because it was late in the day when they asked me to do it... "Meh... Maybe if you guys had asked me earlier, I'd have done it right.... But not to worry, I did part of it, and pretended to do the rest"

insomnium22645d ago


OMG you are so correct! I could not agree more!!!

PostApocalyptic2645d ago

I agree that cockpit mode is harder to drive. But I implore you to give it a try again later on in your progression. Especially once you start fine tuning your super cars.

The ride inside the cockpit is like no other sim I've ever driven. For the first time the physics model reacts to the tiny bumps and irregularities of the straight-aways. You wont notice it under 140MPH. But the faster your car, the better the handeling it will have. But, once you get above, say 175MPH, you'll start noticing tiny little bumps on the straights that you didn't notice at 140MPH. It's amazing trying to keep your car centered at that speed! It's fun as hell! :D So, far my arcade run, I used a Zonda 09 at 200+ and the ride inside the cockpit is pure adrenaline!

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 2645d ago
zeddy2646d ago

ign need to retract their review and do a proper proffesional review, heck even wait a week and play the game and then do the review.

sashimi2645d ago

I don't see IGN doing a proper professional review since that would require a education higher then high school..Which their other reviews clearly reflect.


I think the problem is that PD didn't announce to the public how the Damage system works.

Everyone thought the Damage is unlocked starting at lvl 0.

A lot of reviewers didn't know that.

-Alpha2646d ago (Edited 2646d ago )

This too-- but they would have found out if they got far enough. That's the problem-- of course, with a game like GT and a site like IGN, if your review isn't first you'll get buried with the audiences running to all other sites.

I'm sure they got a bunch of traffic for their review

UltimateIdiot9112646d ago

Which is the problem with reviewers these day. They don't take the time to actually play the game and review it. Instead they take out a sheet of info and play for a fraction of the game then submit a review.

I remember back in the days, playing games was about discovering secrets and neat features as well as taking the time to learn. These days, too many ask to be spoon fed.

Graey2646d ago (Edited 2646d ago )

@ Alpha-Male

I like your posts they are very informative. On another note however I want to add a caveat to your statement.

"This too-- but they would have found out if they got far enough. That's the problem-- of course, with a game like GT and a site like IGN, if your review isn't first you'll get buried with the audiences running to all other sites.

I'm sure they got a bunch of traffic for their review"

I would agree but I'd like to add, sites like IGN, Gamespot, 1UP and Playstationlifestyle, are the types of sites that are really well known. They should set the standard. They should be the example by which the lesser or up and coming sites strive to adhere to.

I'm not going to comment on their review, but I do think that if your job is to review and your a big company then you should be the one with the most integrity. Granted I don't know what agenda's play behind the scenes, but still a lot of people come to the main sites for their information. I agree that negative news does generate more hits but I would think after awhile people would eventually catch on to the scheme (hip hop gamer comes to mind).

That being said I think that all reviewers should set the standard by which all credible reviews are judged by. This standard should be clear and concise(although it can be tweaked or modified) so that we can have a standard template by which to see things.

Hopefully that would alleviate some of the negative aggression.

Tapewurm2645d ago

If they would have played it thoroughly enough to review it they would have known......Plain and simple.....they should have never reviewed it if they didn't even scratch the surface of the game....they should be made to retract it and eat crow.....maybe they could consult with Gabe Newell...he seems to know how to eat PS3 Humble Pie.

dredgewalker2645d ago (Edited 2645d ago )

Anyone who's played GT in the past knows that it's a game where you spend time with it to further appreciate how deep it is. I'm very certain a lot of reviewers are GT noobs and didn't know what they were getting into.


If they spent time playing the game then would have known about the damage system. In the end it's still their fault for rushing out a half-assed review.

Death24942645d ago

@Alpha Male,

Gametrailers, G4tv have yet to release their reviews. I completely understand what you're saying. Some of these reviewers recieved their copies on the 22nd and had to get a review up by the 25th. But had they taken the time to actually review this then they could have exposed this feature just like this guy did. Therefore gaining more respect from the gaming community as a whole. The first one out of the gate isn't always t he first to cross the finish line. You make a valid point and you're right with showing the major flaw in reviewing games today. Gran Turismo isn't like Halo, Killzone, or Call of duty where you can beat these games in 8hrs.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2645d ago
nycredude2646d ago

Hey didn't anyone know about the GT TV section of the game on the main menu. THere are some cool videos of Kaz attending car shows and all kinds of stuff. I haven;t seen anyone talk about it yet. THis game is more of a lifestyle. I've been playing nonstop for three or four days now!

Perkel2645d ago

gt-tv is very good VOD for car maniacs.

BTW there is already full 2009 and 2008 season of Supper GT

the_1080p_guy2645d ago

@nycredude, shhhhh dude.Dont tell the reviewers.They havent discovered the feature yet.

monkey nuts2645d ago (Edited 2645d ago )

Yep GT TV is quality, I bought a HD jap drift tourny when I had prologue and apart from the crazy drifting skills on show like tandom drift races around the track. It had two of the most crazyest commentators I've ever heard. The enthusiastic japanese commentator will scream and shout till they're blue in the face. By far one of the most entertaining/funny vids I'd seen evar. This game is like meeting an old friend you haven't seen for a whiles and having a catch up on whats gone down.

Clarence2646d ago

I said this before. I don't think many reviewers played the game enough to really give it a proper review. Who knows what other hidden suprises this game has. I honestly feel that Ign and many others gave unfair reviews.

Tapewurm2645d ago

So glad people are figuring all this stuff out.... there are so many things in the game that take time to master and understand...and it is clearly evident that a lot of the reviewers didn't spend enough time with this game. This game has exceded my expectations and I feel it is the best Gran Turismo yet. The folks with all the negativity need to shut their collective cakeholes and actually play the game enough to get a grip on it before making uninformed, IGNorant reviews and comments. This game is a beast and will be in my PS3 for a long, long time.

Knushwood Butt2645d ago

This is great.

Just goes to highlight what a joke the vast majority of reviews are.

So many reviewers made to look like fools.

Angels37852645d ago

Just sent an Email to IGN about there review.
Maybe they'll actually do something........

Kon_Artist 2645d ago

ya, it costs alot to repair cars, so i see why. im not complaining people.. im just saying that. im almost lvl 17 :)))))

MNicholas2645d ago

It's common practice, nowadays, for reviewers to have barely played a game or, sometimes, to never have played it.

DigitalAnalog2645d ago

Is that they have all these "previews" and articles about said damage to premium cars. It's like they've ignored that they even existed. I can't wait for what happens to the "AI" argument now.

-End of line

rob200902645d ago

Seriously level 5? I didn't read any reviews but I got to level 5 in under an hour.

Sam Fisher2645d ago

atleast, now we know why they kept delaying GT5

visualb2645d ago (Edited 2645d ago )

Yamauchi's (possibly indirectly) just owned all reviewers by putting SO MUCH content into one game, that all "rushed" reviews stuck out like a sore thumb

now I know reviewers don't have a lot of time to review each game, BUT, that is no excuse to rate a game with x content the same way as a game with 10x content.

you must really sink your teeth into a big game if you are to have a fair judgement of it.

sad but true

@ sam fisher - yes we do, in japan, because it was too ambitious-a date, and the world wide delay ( you say "kept delaying...yet they really only delayed it once, unless you are from japan) was due to a dead line miss of 3 days.

so yeah, the "kept delaying" GT5 ONCE because of 3 days...I wonder how much 3 days worth of work on GT5 would be, considering 1 person would take 6 months to do a car =P

maybe was a troubleshooting/ GUI finish up...

ico922645d ago

exactly allot of people that reviewd the game on its initial release like IGn, they didn't even finish the game, or at least covered everything the game had to offer, GT5 isn;t a game you can review in 3 days, hence why GT, G4 and Gamespot are yet to review it

JasonPC360PS3Wii2645d ago ShowReplies(2)
+ Show (16) more repliesLast reply 2645d ago
imaballa2646d ago (Edited 2646d ago )

FYI - this story talks about the three levels (calculations) of damage modeling in GT5, goes over GTPlanet's analysis of at what levels each damage level unlocks. Also, includes Yamauchi's response to progressive damage unlock.

Prcko2646d ago (Edited 2646d ago )

yep,reviews failed very bad!!!
Scratch review-7,5/10
Deep,full review-9,5/10

why we have reviews anyway???

Nitrowolf22646d ago

why do we have scores?

Honestly most people don't even read reviews these days, as long as they see the score they are fine. I see reports on articles here like "where the score??" and they didn't even have a score listed. Reading the actual review without a score for me is a bit better, knowing that you can see what they liked and what they hated, but with a score you get both of those and sometimes it doesn't even make sense why they would take points off for those reasons.

Claudinho692646d ago

haters fails again LOL.....PS3:It only exposes fake journalists

Motorola2646d ago

to you sir i say: Nice one

Snakefist302645d ago (Edited 2645d ago )


NICE!! Proves that journalists doesnt play much.They play 1 or 2hrs without completing the game then they start writing wats bad or gud things abut the game.PD hav made them stupid and proved that they havnt played the game much All credit goes to PD to revealed their shitty reviews!!