Grade Gran Turismo 5

  • Thread starter Thread starter a6m5
  • 263 comments
  • 22,930 views

How would you rate Gran Turismo 5

  • Total voters
    889
80 - Very happy with the game. It could have been better
Click to expand...
80, lack of some things I really expected
[only 17 RM cars,
lack of events,
tracks could've been used better (we get 2 enduros on Tsukuba and no enduros on, let's say, Autumn Ring),
rally was nothing I was hoping for (I hoped it was going to be like in GT2),
overal racing aspect is poor,
stupid AI,
PD's funny sense of humour (we get 2 Suzuki Swifts as premium cars and Bugatti Veyron, Pagani Zonda and many more are standards, SL55 AMG is premium and SL65 AMG is standard),
some cars I expected to be in the game aren't there (BMW M6, Ferrari F50, Lamborghini Diablo, Audi RS5, Pagani Zonda F and many more, just can't think of any more now),
no Test Track and Machine Tests,
standard cars (which isn't a big problem for me since I use bumper camera)].

So 80, I'm happy with GT5, it's the best game on PS3 but it could've been so much better.
 
Last edited:
a6m5
It took long enough for me to get a feel for this game, but I think I have finally made up my mind. An "80".

It's actually more like 75, but I have to give them extra considerations for the game's heritage, and unbelievable amount of work that they have put in. But when it comes down to it, I had to subtract points for things like:

1) Fun Factor - I think they lacked more than little bit in this department. And as a real driving simulator, it might've been a no-win situation. Many will like the simulator game, sure. At the same time, the challenge factor does become too high for many gamers who might not want to spend the time & effort polishing their skills, leveling up, earning the cash, etc.

2) Execution - The game is all over the place. IMO, both in good sense & bad. Lots of stuff to do, great. At the same time, premium car/stand car things is not acceptable to me. Operation in many of modes of the single to multiplayer are just awkward.

3) Multiplayer - This is huge part of console games these days. Unlike first person shooters, you can't just go ahead with Team Deathmatch, I understand that. Tracks change everything, cars also change everything. Maybe it is impossible to make a simulator-type racing game as accessible as games like Call of Duty multiplayers. In my personal opinion, this is going to be the beginning of the end of Gran Turismo as one of the top leading games. More complicated the multiplayer game play becomes, fewer players will be online playing it. I do have to admit that I do live in the U.S., and my American market bias is very strong regarding multiplay playability. Mario Kart sounds pretty good to me right about now, and that says it all, I think. :crazy:

Again, I'd give it a "75" rounded up to an "80".
Click to expand...

Agree with you on everything you said there. It's fun but you have to make it fun. It doesn't entertain unless you entertain it. It's like playing monopoly. Its just a board and paper money until YOU do something with it.

My main gripe with it though is unlike games like F1 2010, Dirt 2 and 3, Shift series and even like Forza; you don't ever feel like the driver. You feel like a robot not a real person. It seems too clinical, cold.
Full damage modeling again is something that is expected from a racing simulator. Sure the objective is not to crash but knowing that if you go for full risk and top speed you may end up totalling your car affects driving style when racing.
Oh and AI needs to be fixed as well so it's faster.
But that's nothing compared to the way this game sounds. Polyphony please just fix the engine noise so it's got more grunt, base and sounds real not computerized, do that and I'll forgive you for the crap damage modeling and standard vs premiums. Also make environmental sounds louder and collision sounds just generally better.

Anyway thats too many negatives. Polyphony I love your high end graphics that stop me buying any other game because no other game does graphics like GT.
Physics: I have to say GT makes the line between car handling in real life and in game about the size of the line that marks the equator.
Cars: premium or standard GT s cars are so special to drive just because they are all different to drive.
Tracks: Real tracks or fictional I don't really care they're all a blast to drive on (cape ring maybe not so much), pick any good track car (pretty much any 430 Scuderia or Jag XJ13) and drive.
Special Events: wish there were more but overall they're so much fun to drive on. Definitely more challenging than all of A Spec combined. Heaps of fun.
Endurance races: again heaps of fun because they're such a challenge. Tests for how long you can drive with concentration on maximum
B Spec: yes I love BSpec because it's a way to get money and cars while eating lunch.

I definitely love this game.
Score : 80%
 
I've never seen this kind of phenomenon. The game has a ton of flaws. More so than just about ANY other game I've ever played. Yet, it's good enough to be a very good game to play and keep you playing for months on end. Some of the flaws detract form the enjoyment. Having to grind, is a grind! I gave it an 80.
 
Lets hope Gt6 is just a completed GT5.

All the groundwork is done, just needs tarting up round the edges.

10/10 for physics
8/10 for game

hence a 9/10 overall.
 
I gave it an 80.

Would be more impressive if it doesn't have the bugs that GTP members keep crying about.
 
Personally, the lack of Premium cars and courses from the past series killed it for me. Oh I miss all the city courses from gt4!
 
It's fun but you have to make it fun. It doesn't entertain unless you entertain it. It's like playing monopoly. Its just a board and paper money until YOU do something with it
Click to expand...
Perfectly said.
It's like money, it's just paper before you buy something with it.
 
FishHunters
Lets not! I wouldn't want to go through this experience again even if they fixed the flaws. Lets hope for something very different!...and not such a grind!
Click to expand...

It's a sim game. How different can they get? They introduced B-spec as something different and now look at it.

I'd be perfectly happy if the series went on striving for the best possible physics engine, a better car choice and a better track choice. That should be the main focus of the game.

That's also why I like GT5. I give it an 80/100 because the physics are very good and the car choice is huge. Could have a bit better track choice, but that's why it doesn't get 100 or even 90.
 
I just wanted to add that i rated it as 60, because it is so sterile. Technically very good I'm sure, but the fact that I have not wanted to play it since shift 2 came out says it all really.

There is no sparkle, drama, or fun in the game. It sounds dull and the tracks are bland. Cote D'Azure really surprised me at the lack of quality in the presentation. Again, Shift 2 has GT completely beaten on the track list.

Online might be different, but the connection isn't good enough round my way so isn't reliable enough.

As petty as it might sound, it grates at me that the game has so many sub standard cars. Always better to include them than not, but still not good enough. I don't expect 1000 'premiums' but at least cockpits on more than what we have and no drawn on shutlines. It bugs me that the cars I want to drive look and sound dull.

Physics are good. Maybe the best in the business, I don't know. Doesn't feel alive enough to me if thy makes sense.

Maybe I just want more fun. The new tracks rumoured will really boost the games appeal. I want to love it, but just can't right now. Probably sounds silly but there you go.
 
6/10. Sterile environment, non competitive AI, official car count is a lie.

I don't even play this game anymore. DiRT 3 has all but taken every minute of my racing attention away from GT5. Seasonals? I have already raced all of your "new seasonal events" in A spec.

However, I will be holding out for future dlc.

Forza 4 cannot come soon enough...
 
II-zOoLoGy-II
6/10. Sterile environment, non competitive AI, official car count is a lie.

I don't even play this game anymore. DiRT 3 has all but taken every minute of my racing attention away from GT5. Seasonals? I have already raced all of your "new seasonal events" in A spec.

However, I will be holding out for future dlc.

Forza 4 cannot come soon enough...
Click to expand...

I feel your pain...but not too worry...

image_forza_motorsport_4-15756-2069_0001.jpg

image_forza_motorsport_4-15755-2069_0003.jpg

image_forza_motorsport_4-15755-2069_0004.jpg

image_forza_motorsport_4-15755-2069_0001.jpg
 
Based on these ratings, I'd give it a 70 for a couple of reasons.

-It just seems incomplete. Some cool things that were to be in the game were left out, and they took some good stuff from previous games out of this one.
-The AI lacks intelligence, and speed. They don't even put up a fight. You get near them and they just casually slow down to let you by.
-Some new cars brought to the game are left as standard models, which is pretty lame. Along with these, there are plenty of cars that deserve to be premium from the get go, and yet they are standards only.

I know that some of these things can be fixed with updates or even DLC, but if they were in the game from the start, I'd give it a better rating.
 
I'm changing from a 8 to 9.

I recently wiped my save and began all over again.

It's the best thing I ever did. It's feels fresh and new again, trying to do all he events with cheap cars.

I shal be doing it again when it starts to become stale :)
 
BarronGeddon
lol 3 people gave it a 0/100 :confused:
Click to expand...

But almost as ridiculous, 45 gave it 100%. Fairly questionable is that 189 rated the game 90%.

Often on message boards I see people ranting about how reviews from websites and magazines are worthless, but they're a billion times more valuable than the opinions of Joe Gamer, and these outlandish ratings illustrate that fairly well. Professional reviewers have some sort of understanding how to realistically rate games, while Joe Gamer has no friggin' clue.

From the perspective of Joe Gamer, "I liked the game, so it's a 10 out of 10. 100%." Then the next guy chimes in, "I didn't care for it at all. It sucks. 0 out of 10."

Obviously, the game can't reasonably be anywhere near 0% because that means it did absolutely everything completely horribly. Heck, even Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing managed to do something, earning it at least a couple points. PD would basically need to ship blank discs to get a 0.

However, almost equally daft are the folks that gave the game perfect scores, which suggests that it did absolutely everything equal to or better than any other racing game available (at least on consoles), but the truth was far from it. If GT5 is a 100%, then FM3 must have been 140%. Sure, GT5's driving feels better than perhaps any other console racer, but that alone doesn't earn a perfect rating. It has to do everything else amazingly well to get perfect marks. It didn't.

EDIT:
Just as I was typing that, one more questionable vote went to the 90% rating, taking the total to 190.
 
TheFlyingKiwi
Agree with you on everything you said there. It's fun but you have to make it fun. It doesn't entertain unless you entertain it. It's like playing monopoly. Its just a board and paper money until YOU do something with it.
Click to expand...

I also wanted to say that Monopoly example is a very good one. Motivated player can get a lot out of this game. Great point. 👍
 
Bump. Saw this thread when it was first posted last November, but thought I'd hold off posting my grade until after a couple of months. Forgot all about it though, until now :sly:

So after eight months, numerous patches, updates and everything else, I'm going with 70.

Customisation is a mess. Personalisation is non-existent. Tuning is limited. The paint chip system hasn't been fixed. Online is still suspect at best, and while the Seasonal Events are welcome, there's no structure to them; they're just placed online and left there. The game design is so horribly out of date and is now more than showing its age. It's suffocating.

It doesn't really need repeating, but Ring + Night + Rain is the reason to buy GT5. That is a great experience, but not one that can carry the whole game.

Will be looking for better customisation, personalisation, tuning and online in GT6. As well as a fresh approach to game and feature design. I just with I had faith in Polyphony to deliver on that...
 
I gave 100, although it's not perfect, but it deserves it.

GT5 is far away from the perfect game, but I haven't seen something better, so far:)
 
I'd say 65/100. I like the racing part very much, but some things are just 🤬 annoying. Like buying cars, GTAuto, and all the RX-7, MX-5, S2000, and Skylines.
 
ive given it a 70/100...i think the game is a huge improvement over the other versions ie the graphics and extra cars etc but they have left some things out which should of been in it,the b-spec live timing should have been like gt4 with the 3x speed up,thats been a huge loss to gt5,hopefully polyphony will add more updates to make it a much better game and i can increase my score to 100/100....:)
 
80 . Like GT1 and GT3 this newest game is brilliant at times but lacking in places . I can see a possible sequel being much more solid and well rounded . Overall I'm very happy to have this game .
 
I gave it an 80. It's a good game, but it could be better.
The main issues Polyphony have to fix are:

  1. Cars-All premium (even if it means removing standard cars altogether)
  2. Tracks-Bring back the favourites (see https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=201774)
  3. AI-Make it more unpredictable and more challenging
  4. Damage-Make it much more realistic (sometimes the damage makes the cars look melted-particularly the standards)
  5. Bugs/Glitches-Fix them!
  6. Races-add much more to GT5
 

Latest Posts

Back