The
IGN Australia review is far more informative, better researched and, seemingly, better balanced.
It always annoys me that some IGN articles can be so ridden with uninformed, ego-driven nonsense (and I mean that literally!) that seems to have been cobbled together in less than 5 minutes.
Nonsense such as this: "pushing the tyres to their extremities."
You mean, their outer 'edges?' Or the outer surface itself; as in, the part the car rolls on anyway?
"drift mode rewards players for the length and angle of their sideways follies..." Perhaps the theatrical sense of "follies" was intended, as in drifting is some kind of jovial dance to music; however, I would wager most people would interpret this to mean drifting is some sort of foolish endeavour (please, no drift vs. grip debates!)
Really, I despair when I read these things sometimes, how can a 'journalist' have such a poor grasp of basic linguistic skills? Sure, some of the vocabulary is flowery enough, but it must make sense in the first place and remain neutral!
Other things are just plainly wrong, such as the reference to the Ferrari 360's V8 purr - I personally wasn't aware of the 360 even being in the game!
"Of the six tracks included in Gran Turismo 5 Prologue, four are debutants to the series." I counted three debutants, since Fuji, Suzuka and HSR are all GT veterans to varying extents. Indeed, this point is further strengthened later on: "Fuji Speedway, the track which last year ousted Suzuka as the host of the Japanese Grand Prix, is a new addition..."
Whoever wrote this review clearly has no idea about the history of GT games and, more annoyingly, couldn't be arsed to find out.
Where's the passion, IGN?
EDIT -> My rant is referring to the UK review, just to clarify!
