Digitalbattle:Gran Turismo 5 is finally here. It has taken 5 years and tens of millions of dollars to bring Gran Turismo 5 to the stores, so the game has earned huge hype as millions of eager racing fans have waited for it.
Just read all of the 7/10 and 8/10 reviews They all have a few things in common. 1- they all say damage is very little or non existent 2- they say the A.I. is weak BOTH of which are false as you learn when your level goes up. This is the problem when so called "big name" sites like IGN lie. All the little ones follow suit for the sake of popularity
They have no idea what progressive difficulty is or what it means.
They're just reading IGN's review and simply summarizing it. Did they even play the game? o.o lol @ "racing simulators aren’t exactly what racing fans are looking for these days ".
In regards to the video of the damage, that video could have been fake and it has been largely dismissed by people on GTPlanet. Basically, the person could have spent a lot of time damaging the car to get to the level of damage he showed in that brief clip. I think we should wait for a better video showing Level 40 damage and to see how it acts in a natural race. As for AI, I've noticed AI act in weird ways in a few clips and I don't think that AI should behave the way it does (bumping right into you instead of swerving around) regardless of difficulty. You can have difficulty cater to casuals/newbies without compensating AI behavior. Even if AI is simpler in beginning modes they should still be able to offer a level of challenge instead of having to grind to really high levels. These are the complaints I'm reading and I think that they are totally valid. I'm sure difficulty gets harder but that doesn't exactly mean AI behaves better for it to do that. Those are two possibilities as to why reviewers may be still saying what they do. Note that there were many positive reviews that didn't get to level 40 either so it's unfair to just dismiss low review scores as being inaccurate While I agree a game like GT requires a lot of time to play through it isn't fair to just dismiss low scores as sites that gave it high scores usually fall in the same line of error.
That's just it Alpha, I don't need to wait on those things. I HAVE the game so I can be my own proof. And I've already seen/ done the stuff first hand. Ok since my disagree friends seem to think I DONT have the game, how about some of you just leave me your psn name in a private message so I can prove my point
Alpha instead of putting in insite on a game I know you don't own, why don't you play it for yourself and make an educated Opinion. I mean trying to justify poor reviews? Calling videos fake? I don't know how you have 8 bubbles cause your comment history recently is almost the same as T9X69's or worse. Come on man, WTF? @below, put time into it and you'll realize the game lets go of your hand and gives you realism that blow your freakin mind as you level up.
I'm not calling the video fake, I'm saying that it COULD be fake. Every GT fan here immediately accepted that video as true. You did NOT see the whole video. You do NOT know for a fact how long that driver was driving, how that damage was simulated, etc. And what's funny is that I have not played the game but people who aren't at level 40 seem to accept that video as true. We are all aware that that level of damage is possible-- we've seen it in trailers, etc. But Correct me if I'm wrong but when you drive really fast do you not just walk away with a small bump when colliding into something? Isn't that the issue? That damage doesn't render realistically? Notice I'm asking, not trying to make claims. Why can't that damage exist in lower levels? Without punishing newbies? You can have the cosmetic damage without affecting gameplay. Seems much more smarter than having progressive damage. I don't have to play the game to show people here that there are legitimate complaints regarding AI and damage. People post experiences here and I'm sure you'd have no problem if I accepted positive experiences. But I can just as well read and accept negative experiences from people who HAVE played the game. I'm not making any definitive claims, just offering this community proof that there are people, who are actually fans, that are demonstrating the issues. Most issues here are shrugged off as coming from haters or people who haven't played the game, and I don't think that is fair. I think there is an issue when experienced players have to grind to level 40 to experience the game at its best. It makes more sense to me to have a difficulty option so that experienced gamers can have that difficulty/challenge from the get-go with that cosmetic damage shown. The issue seems to be that it takes a long time for damage deformation when factoring speed, collision, etc. That level of damage in the video has been emulated by players lower than level 40 who just kept damaging their vehicle purposely for a good amount of time. This is what GTPlanet forums are saying. They largely REJECT the video. And as for AI, I stand by what I said. There is a difference between bad AI and good AI and it makes no sense to justify bad AI for difficulty. If this isn't what is happening then fine, tell me I'm wrong but explain to me why. I'm open about not playing the game and I'm not trying to bash the game-- I'm just telling people what I read. On N4G everything negative is portrayed as biased or wrong. On GTPlanet there is some contradiction and more open debate.
I HAVE the game and I can tell you that the damange ramps up AS WELL AS the A.I as you gain higher levels. Why do I know this? BECAUSE I'm already at such a point in the game. I don't NEED any "video" to tell me what is and isn't in the game If anyone wants to meet me on psn to PROVE this, please just PM me your psn name and we can even go a few games And Alpha if you read I've already explained about the A.I. in my first post. And I've even done so again just now. It's a LEVELING process. And to be blatantly honest, until YOU play the game yourself, YOU don't know what's true and what isn't. And it doesn't matter WHERE you get your information from on that much Edit- may as well do this now lol, for my disagree friends (because I know they're coming) Meet me on psn for the proof you need and do a few races with me
@lodo I don't doubt you-- but there are just as many people expressing disappointment with the system/nature of difficulty. That's my point. People only have a problem with others accepting negative opinions and they expect their positive opinions to be more representative of the game. Once again: AI can behave in a challenging manner instead of feeling like a grind-fest. It's tedious I assume for experienced players to play like this. The video showing damage doesn't accurately reveal the numerous factors that are in question including damage deformation in relation to vehicle, speed, collision rate, etc.
Expressing being upset over it is NOT the same thing as saying it doesn't even exist. Which is what many have been doing. Whether that's by design or lack of patience is beyond me. I can care less about anyone's personal opinion since I never use it for my own. As I stated from the first post. It's not about the score, it's about the reasoning BEHIND the score in most of them at raises issue And for the record, your disagrees aren't coming from me
I don't care about the disagrees, I can understand people getting upset with a negative comment from a guy who hasn't played the game, especially with all the trolls and, like you said, poorly reasoned reviews. I don't deny that they don't exist, and I am not justifying them. But I think that there are fair arguments for AI and damage and that it is a little unreasonable for Sony to remove the embargo so early if it takes so long for the true game to be experienced so late. It's been a good while and there are still gamers who haven't reached level 40. There is still a lot of confusion regarding the damage and AI and I'm hearing it from both sides. Even if the AI/damage is non-existent/limited at lower levels a well designed game would offer challenge and damage in relativity to the gamer. From what I hear gamers are grinding and that genuinely upsets people Like I said, I don't doubt what you say, I accept it as much as I accept anything else I hear about the game. Obviously my opinion is crippled by not playing the game but I can still listen and form understandings of how the game works. Anyways, thanks for the comment, appreciate the discussion
Why are you defending horrible reviews anyway Alpha? It seems you're content to accept these reviews insight based solely on their word when there is evidence that contradicts their conclusions, real or not. Just doesn't seem right for someone with so many bubbles. You seem like you're trying to keep a balanced view on the topic but can you really say after reading all the reviews that GT5 was held to the same reviewing standards as other games in the same genre? I've read quite a few and I don't think that's the case here. I've said it before, most reviews who are scoring GT5 8 and below seem to have wanted/expected GT5 to be something other than a racing sim.
And only being released 4 days ago, not everyone out there can reach those levels to test out "damage" claim. I've been playing the game for over 6 hours and I'm only Level 5. It's scary to think people actually reach lvl 20 in this short period LET ALONE 40! The number of people to test that are basically the amount no bigger than my digits. Because of this you're calling this video "possibly" fake because a bunch of GTPlanet (possibly 360 trolls) said so? That is NOT photoshop, what kind of special effects do you have to do to "replicate" fake damage on video? There are websites ATTESTING to this lvl of damage even as far as last September. Take a gander: http://granturismoevolved.c... It's surprising how you can let slide this intense bashing of GT5 even as far as calling "fake" videos dismissed by random posters on a forum who more or less did not even reach lvl 10 at this point in their lives. -End of Line
"GT5 is one of the best racing simulators ever made. However, “racing simulators” aren’t exactly what racing fans are looking for these days." So, its the best racing sim, but we'll just rate it low because its not an arcade racer... "The Bad: Single player is tedious at times -eh, more challenging than tedious. Some of the times for gold trophies are a b!tch to get. And leveling up is never going to make some challenges easier, as it is all skill that determines how well you do in them. AI provides unrealistic challenge - At what? Beginner difficulty? Damage is cosmetic only - Not if you actually leveled up enough to even right a review in the first place Most cars are not high-def"
These reviews are ridiculously false. Clearly poor journalism at it's finest.
So he actually marked down the game because he wasn't good enough at the game. Another trash review then.
"the car damage that’s been added is only cosmetic, even if you can call that, because even the worst head-on collisions leave only a few scratches" WRONG, the reviewer has not played long enough. The damage is far more than cosmetic. Honestly, what level are these ppl reviewing GT5! FFS "he AI doesn’t provide realistic challenge." Terrible. Reviewer should really consider playing the game some more before reviewing it. And next time, make the review worth reading, it's far too small for a game of this size.
trolling again i see
Talk all they want, cause the consumers don't seem to listen. Gran Turismo 5 sells 1.8 Million copies in just TWO days, and still going baby :) http://gamrfeed.vgchartz.co...
As much as we like the sales and are sure its selling good we can accept VGChartz as acceptable because it would benefit us, that would be playing the fanboy game. Lets wait for a better source.
Agreed, however your fanboy concept works both way. If you truly believe that IGN reviewed GT5 with all fairness in all its glory... Then why can't you do the same for VGcharts? Just sayin ;)
This review is full of shit just like the others
This game can be scored in two ways, as far as I have seen..... 7/10 ~ 8/10 according to people with overhyped expectations. 9/10 ~ 10/10 for people that kept both feets on the ground. That is what's truly happening.
Eh. 7 - 8 / 10 for those treating it as a game. 9 / 10 for those treating it as a simulator.
Another poorly written, brief 'pre level 40' review.
So do you think if they played to level 40 and got full damage the review would suddenly go to 10/10? Maybe 7.5? Maybe the issues of the scores that most sites are giving GT5 go beyond damage modeling. Maybe GT5 is just not a perfect game. A good ending will not save a mediocre game from mediocrity.
teething I guess you didn't read the review.
"However, “racing simulators” aren’t exactly what racing fans are looking for these days" Who said it's for racing fans, I don't like racing usually but love challenging games, that's why I like Gran Tursimo 5.
terrible article. The review score does not fit my pre-conceived view of what this game should score, so I say that it is a terrible article. Had the words of the article been the same, but it be given a 10/10, it would be a great article.
NO if they gave it a 10/10 and said what they said, it still would have been a shit review. Troll harder kiddo, oh and maybe pray that someday you actually become a gamer.
"IT'S TOOO HARD!!!! WAHHHH!!! :'(" It's a racing game, get over it people...
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.