Gran Turismo Sport PlayStation 4 Review

Discussion in 'Gran Turismo Sport' started by GTPNewsWire, Oct 20, 2017.

  1. ferreira

    ferreira

    Messages:
    128
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Very fair review, and well written!

    It's probably just my perception, but I feel like 3.5/5 doesn't sound all that great. Like, if I was looking at another game that I had no knowledge or initial interest in, and I heard it got 3.5/5 I probably wouldn't go anywhere near it.

    For me, GTS is closer to a 4 or 4.5/5. Even for all it's flaws and short-comings, I feel like there's a really solid base to build on here. The attention to detail that goes into this game just blows me away and I love Kaz's vision of motorsport & Gran Turismo - the ethos, visuals, soundtrack - it's all great. Like that opening clip at the beginning - particularly the first one that isn't animated - I thought was beautiful. I know it's not to everyone's taste, but it put a big smile on my face and reaffirmed my decision to buy GTS. I thought, here's a guy that understands what it's all about and knows how to capture the spirit and soul of motorsport.

    If PD can continue to build on this, I think we'll have something truly special on our hands.
     
    potvinsuks and RaceFuchs like this.
  2. Scaff

    Scaff Staff Emeritus

    Messages:
    23,831
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    'If' being the key word.

    And 'if' they do it may be worth a higher score, but what can be reviewed today is what we have today and for that 3.5 is a more than fair score (even if I personally would argue that a few of the sub scores are too generous).
     
  3. Billybops

    Billybops

    Messages:
    39
    I'm loving gt sport, yes we need more cars and tracks and they will come. Not a fan of the ovals though in my opinion there is 3 to many.
     
  4. Tvensky

    Tvensky

    Messages:
    823
    Location:
    Latvia
    I disagree on so many things on this review.. this site has gone too far into arcade...

    and I love rally stages here, since road races are too easy for me, rally and drift gives me the challenge I need, especially those extra hard license tests or special evens in arena.. sadly most of them are easy to get gold..

    Vision GT cars are a total waste of time, they have fun aspects and couple of them could be enough.. more real race tracks and old ones like Deep Forest are very needed.. and old historic road cars makes a huge dark hole in GT sport, it could be a fun sport on any of those old cars.. old F1 or old BMW's, anything simple and fast is quite fun!
     
  5. Jawehawk

    Jawehawk Premium

    Messages:
    4,618
    Location:
    Denmark
    While well written, I think the review is somewhat apologetic on behalf of PD. Please bear in mind the context for this game. You have the most experienced racing sim developer out there, operating with a higher budget than most, if not all other racing sim devs, and with a longer dev time than anyone else. Despite all that, they've managed to produce far less content than anyone else manages in sometimes half the development time. Their cars and tracks aren't any better modelled than their competitors, and outside of the Scapes thing, the graphics of the game aren't very impressive. I certainly wouldn't expect it to look as good as Driveclub, given that the GT Sport is 60FPS and has much more going on under the hood, and thus it can't dedicate as many ressources to making the world pretty, but the graphical difference between the two is pretty jarring.

    But let's focus on the important things, starting with the online requirement. You mention that most of the features in the game simply aren't available without an internet connection. In other words, when the servers are inevitable shut down in the future, you are, for no good reason, left with essentially nothing. It just baffles me that you do bring up most of the problems with this system in detail, yet it doesn't appear to have a very large affect on the verdict of the game as a whole, despite it pretty much literally making GT Sport a game with an expiration date. The online requirement alone is enough reason to not go anywhere near this game.

    And let's look at that content. You say that the game has been divisive because of the new focus. I disagree. It's not the new focus that has divided the fanbase. It's the near 100% failure to follow through on the new focus. There were two obvious routes to take with their new focus on motorsport. A, they could focus on making fictional racing series featuring race modified cars, or B, they could focus on brining real world racing series into the game. They then settled on trying to do both, and mostly botched it. When going through the car list, the game features approximately 80 unique cars, with the rest being alterations, both slight and significant, of existing models. So in four plus year, they, in terms of unique cars, managed to model what other devs manage in just a single year, plys maybe a few months. It's especially weird when you look at stuff like the Corvette C7 Stingray. It has the normal road model, then it has a Group 3 car, which I assume is PD's attempt at a GT3 version of the car, and then they have a road car version of the Group 3 race car, which in itself was a race car version of a road car. Wait, what? How does that even make any sense? What is this madness?

    But did they at least focus on specific racing franchises, so that they could actually represent motorsport? Not even close. Their best attempt was GT3, but even that is a mess, featuring cars from 2011 to 2017, instead of just picking one year, like any sensible person would've done. I'll concede that the Group 3 line-up alleviates this problem, assuming that they are indeed meant to be PD's attempt at making GT3 cars out of models that don't have a real world GT3 counterpart, which then means you have a pretty good line-up of cars to choose from, but you'll still have to deal with the different model years, making for a rather awkward line-up. No other racing franchise has an even remotely acceptable line-up in the game. Given the FIA license, the WEC would've been an obvious choice, but you won't have any LMP2's or GTE cars racing with you. In other words, some 80% of constitutes a WEC car field is missing.

    Somehow, the game fares even worse in the track department, featuring the worst track selection seen in recent times. Once again, one has to look at it within the context of a motorsport focus, and once again, one can hardly contain ones bewilderment at the choices made. Want to take advantage of that FIA license? Well, you have all of one (two?) track that they race on. How a dry and boring as hell track like Willow Springs, a track that has little or no actual place within motorsport, has somehow gotten priority over the likes of Spa or Le Sarthe, is beyond even my wildest imagination.

    This isn't even mentioning the disappearance of the hundreds of "future proof" Premium cars in GT5 and 6. We have here, a developer that was perfectly fine with featuring hundreds of low quality PS2 cars in their PS3 games, but when they actually have good quality models that wouldn't have looked entirely out of place, if at all, on the PS4, they decided to toss them out the window.

    This product might've been acceptable from a start-up company who had 2/2,5 years to work on it, but from a triple A studio, who had at least four years to work on (more likely 5-6 years, as they would've been among the first to get their hands on PS4 dev kits) and plenty of experience within the genre, this is nothing short of embarrassing. When taking into account the time, money and experience PD has, I cannot comprehend how you, or anyone else, can justify giving this game what amounts to 7.5 out of 10. You mention most of the complains I talk about here, and in much better writing than I can ever hope to achieve, but I don't see those complaints properly reflected in the overall verdict of the game.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2017
    Kobooi, fatkid, HarVee and 8 others like this.
  6. Brend

    Brend Premium

    Messages:
    11,697
    The reason rally gives you 'challenge' is because it's the worst representation of the discipline available on PlayStation 4 and can barely be called driving at all.

    I should reiterate this is my stance with the Gr.B cars.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2017
    Imari, bremics, Matvex and 5 others like this.
  7. Tyger

    Tyger

    Messages:
    4,040
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Good review. Not a million miles away from IGN's review, not that I'm a big IGN fan but I quite like the aussie guy who has reviewed the big 3 racing games recently. It's a shame this is the first GT game I haven't bought at launch, and not sure I will at all. I'm not too interested in online racing, not at all interested in photoscape or whatnot and am a lot more interested in a robust offline campaign, and a varied roster of production cars over an emphasis on race cars. And for that reason, I'm out =(
     
    Rjo, fatkid and Brend like this.
  8. Clay_GT_17

    Clay_GT_17

    Messages:
    34
    Unbiased review. Definitely the best looking racing game on console. Can’t wait until they release more tracks and cars: SPA, etc is needed!!
     
  9. Tired Tyres

    Tired Tyres

    Messages:
    10,584
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    A GT3 car model year is its year of homologation.
     
  10. Jawehawk

    Jawehawk Premium

    Messages:
    4,618
    Location:
    Denmark
    I'm not familiar with how the regulations in GT3 change year to year, but I do know that the cars don't stay the same. New regulations can and do make room for different aerodynamic designs, and so, in order to achieve a level of fairness where every car follows the exact same set of regulations, picking one single year is the way to go. For instance, and I admit this is a very contrived example, the regulations for one year might allow for a bigger spoiler to produce more downforce. The BOP factors into it as well.

    So if, for example, one GT3 car is modelled after a 2011 model, while another is modelled after a 2017 model, then the latter model might, through regulation, have better performance on the track. Surely, the year stated in-game for the cars should represent the model year of the car, rather than when it was homologated? The year of homologation is, I think, better fitted for the more detailed description of the car.

    Or maybe I am wrong, and a 2011 car is every bit as competitive as a 2017 one. I find that difficult to believe though, but I'll concede that my knowledge on the matter is limited, so I might be completely wrong.
     
  11. Tired Tyres

    Tired Tyres

    Messages:
    10,584
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    That's Bop mate. The only time you can change is with a new car. That's why manufacturers introduce new models - Audi have done several R8's Mercedes went from the the SLS to the AMG GT and so on. They are all Bopped for even performance and the old models could be totally competitive with the newer ones if the manufacturers allowed it - They do in more regional events but not in major ones as they want their customers to buy their new car. Don't try to think of GT3 in the same way as other motorsport. It isn't built the same way as a format.
     
    BLADErunner80 and Jawehawk like this.
  12. jm79

    jm79

    Messages:
    1,984
    Location:
    Spain
    Nice review, cheers.

    I disagree with nothing, but for me it's more like 5⭐. Funny how that works.

    ISR video review was also good, as an aside.

    And generally speaking, it's brilliant to live in a time with such a wide choice of detailed, involving, beautiful videogames.
     
    potvinsuks likes this.
  13. Johnnypenso

    Johnnypenso Premium

    Messages:
    28,463
    Location:
    Canada
    Finally got a chance to read the whole review. At the risk of sounding like a GTP fanboy:ouch:, how incredible is it to get a fair and honest review of a GT game on the world's biggest GT fansite? In this day an age when it seems like everyone has a hidden agenda and so many "opinions" seem to be based on a political, monetary or other hidden motive, it is incredibly refreshing to come here, read a review and never once think to yourself, "does he really mean that or is there a hidden agenda?"

    An incredibly thorough, detailed and thoughtful piece of work:bowdown::tup::tup:.
     
    Imari, VetteZR1, Jordan and 5 others like this.
  14. mikronimo

    mikronimo

    Messages:
    37
    The video quality in PC2 it's good enough (poor? Really? From when FullHD is poor?), and a game it's made of a lot of others things; when the only real good thing to say about a video game is that it have a good video quality, I think it's a quite big problem...
     
    bremics likes this.
  15. Factor41

    Factor41

    Messages:
    291
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    I'm currently trying to "reconnect to the network" and failing. This means I can't do *anything* in GT Sport. My feelings about this are not mixed.

    How are the servers still not up to spec? Did Polyphony not realise that there might be more players trying to connect during the weekend?
     
    Imari and bremics like this.
  16. bobbie424242

    bobbie424242

    Messages:
    12
    This post is spot on and largely echo my feeling with GTS.

    GTS does not know what it wants to be and has a real identity crisis. an iRacing like platform ? An arcade racer ? A single player game ? A car collect-a-thon ? An Artboook ? Wikipedia ? A camera ? Photoshop ? A social network ? ....It want to be all that.
    So much effort directed to wrong priorities or gimmicks: rally, ovals, gt vision cars, scapes (yes), being Wikipedia.
    And my main gripe: only 6 world class real racing circuits. For a game that (among zillions things) want to become iRacing
    for consoles, that's a joke. Enjoy your GR1 on ovals. Your icey Gr.B on ****** rally tracks. Only bikes and boat racing are missing at this point.

    I wish this game was more focused, instead of trying to be a little something to everyone and ending up being unsatisfactory to everyone.

    Hopefully, PD has a solid foundation to build on, but will they ? GTS screams arrogance and off-topic at times (these Wikipedia articles on the main page, WTF?), which is probably due to Kaz lunacy (GT vision cars anyone ?) or someone else at PD having "clever" ideas. Sure, the production values of each GTS feature is through the roof but...again, where are these real world circuits ? You know the thing that is used for serious racing...

    Don't get me wrong: I largely enjoy the game and its incredible attention to detail, but I am mystified by some of the priorities PD had in its design. No wonder their game take forever to be made.
     
    Kobooi and bremics like this.
  17. daibon

    daibon

    Messages:
    195
    Yup.. this is Kaz's vanity development.

    Yup.. this what happened with Ace Combat winning franchise... they saw FPS games were selling well..so they morphed their Ace Combat into a First person shooting game.. There was one mission where you do not even fly the aircraft.. you the gunner sitting at the back shooting things.. HA HA
     
  18. Haitauer

    Haitauer

    Messages:
    1,668
    Location:
    Finland
    doblocruiser and potvinsuks like this.
  19. lez67

    lez67

    Messages:
    1
    On a youtube user said that someone played a pro version of gt sport in vr & it had several cars instead of just one on one,i know sony have an agreement that whatever the original has the pro must have,in some cases its holding back sales of the pro,why cant the additional cars be added to vr mode via a patch,it will help sales of both the pro & vr headset,come pd & sony think about it,its great advertising
     
  20. scooterlord

    scooterlord

    Messages:
    186
    First of all, I was positively amazed of the review - I like that you kept it objective, leaning more towards the fans than PD, many people of which you probably know personally.

    In case anyone is interested here's my opinion - I had spent hundreds of hours in GT5 prologue and GT5 - completed almost everything in Gold, however I hated GT6; found it too easy and saw a decrease in graphics quality - let alone it wasn't too competitive with other titles when it was released, so I didn't spend more than 5 hours in total with it.

    I was too excited about GT Sport and was also filled with anxiety because I had to buy a new wheel - my G25 not being good enough for PS4 (yes, I know about the adapters), so I was going to hold off until I was ready to buy a steering wheel. When I read that it was mostly online I was shocked! Really? I never play online and don't want to be forced into it, so I am skipping the game until offline content appears.

    Concerning the campaign I really miss GT5 prologue's same-car races. I think it would be really easy to implement and would provide tons of content - I simply loved it. A different challenge for each vehicle - it would allow people to meet cars they would otherwise not bother with.

    I am sticking with Dirt Rally and Assetto Corsa for now... I didn't like Pcars either 1 or 2 - if devs don't spend any more time fixing the wheels' FFB to play properly they are missing customers like myself. :/
     
    Imari and Johnnypenso like this.
  21. BLADErunner80

    BLADErunner80

    Messages:
    113
    Location:
    England
    GT Sport has one thing i feel few other console racers have, a focus.

    This feels more like iRacing for console racers than just another GT title, and that is something i welcome.

    If this was a brand new franchise from a new developer i think it would be rated higher, what GT Sport has to contend with is people's expectations.
    You had in past GT games a huge car list (of various quality) and a campaign that got very samey very quickly. PD have decided instead of repeating themselves yet again and trying to compete directly for the same market as other titles, to instead push console racing forward by developing what is usually the weakest point, the online racing. Time will tell how good a job the DR and SR systems will do, but online racing is already a huge step ahead of some rival titles.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2017
    CHEN255 and MikeV27 like this.
  22. aurcom

    aurcom

    Messages:
    32
    Second last paragraph in his review, and perhaps the most important.

    Forza Motorsport's after-release-development and PAID DLC slows down when the next Horizon game is getting hyped/released

    pCARS2 was announced while pCARS1 was less than a year old and still missing features and bug fixes.

    Polyphony has a track record of FREE DLC and game updates going +2 years after the release of each major game.

    The release day battle may have been lost, but I think GT fans should be the most opportunistic for the future and winning this generations simcade war!
     
  23. setablazebyyou

    setablazebyyou

    Messages:
    5
    Funny, bc sears and blockbuster stayed with their winning formula. Your analogy only works with the power of hindsight. Also sugary softdrink consumption is at an all-time low.

    https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2016/03/29/soda-sales-drop-11th-year

     
  24. Northstar

    Northstar Premium

    Messages:
    22,084
    Location:
    United States
    Of the 2 games PD released on the PS3 one had 0 paid DLC (but had micro transactions) while the other charged you for RM versions of existing cars and single use paint chips. I would say they are batting .500 in that category.
     
    fatkid and ImaRobot like this.
  25. Johnnypenso

    Johnnypenso Premium

    Messages:
    28,463
    Location:
    Canada
    PD had free DLC in the last game but it was pretty skimpy compared to the overall DLC from the competition. Both Forza 6 and PCARS1 had paid DLC but I believe their free DLC was at least equal to, if not greater than GT6's.
     
    Imari, fatkid and ImaRobot like this.
  26. Benny44

    Benny44

    Messages:
    872
    Location:
    Canada
    I’ve been a huge GT fan since GT1. I remember trying tirelessly for days to beat mission 34 and that feeling of unabashed joy I felt when I finally did. I loved 6 even though many serious types bashed it. I have great memories of the series.
    But one major problem I have is lack of cars. One car not from the last 15ish years is not acceptable for me. Where are my old Jags, Astons, Hondas, Datsuns? I’ll miss a little 70s Alpine battling a big Mustang. I’ll miss my Daihatsu Midget II going toe to toe with a Ferrari Dino. It just seems like they bowed to the (way more vocal) minority of sim racers rather than give us fans who’ve always loved it what we wanted. Maybe it’ll work for them. I hope it does for their sake. But more than anything I hope they make a proper sequel so those of us who do it casually, for fun, or have a passion for classics can enjoy this game.
     
  27. photonrider

    photonrider

    Messages:
    7,417
    Location:
    Canada
    Great review, Slipz - even at 5000 words quite the succinct piece of writing on a very complex evolution of our beloved game.
    Kudos! :cheers:
     
  28. Skiddy

    Skiddy

    Messages:
    382
    that is an excellent batting average.
     
  29. Atwork

    Atwork

    Messages:
    131
    I assume there will he some free stuff but I fully expect paid dlc with a decent amount of stuff. It is just the way of the industry now.
     
  30. zargdin

    zargdin

    Messages:
    164
    Location:
    Ireland
    On Metacritic the negative reviews by users are double that of positive reviews (145 to 77). Many of these negative reviews are quite savage in tone and give scores of 0 or 1. These ultra-low scores are of course a bit silly, but they represent the anger of a fan base which feels betrayed.

    Incidentally, I haven't bought the game yet - probably won't as I don't like online racing.