GT5 Review scores (Update :Average metacritic score)

  • Thread starter DoctorFouad
  • 1,417 comments
  • 171,032 views
Gamespot gave a very weird review. I don't understand if they were happy or not. And please - bad music? Are they really giving grades also based on soundtrack? I don't understand why they felt the need to point that out, especially when you can choose your own music to play.

They say it's the best GT yet, but that it's lacking in areas (obviously). It has many features, arguably more then any console racer out there, but it looks not as good? I am confused. It's a weird review, and I came out confused from the outcome.

Most reviews about GT5 have been like that; mainly because the game is as inconsistent as the reviews... maybe also not to upset all those million of fans out there? Defenately IGN's review smelled like a lower rating than 8.5. A game like GT5 is huge, putting it down with a bad rating will make a lot of people upset (just look on this forum) and can damage a site's credibility (how ironic that might sound).
 
^The part where they put the consist inconsistency seems to me the graphics. Everything else in GT5 just reeks of content. I agree the hype was over the top, but common... He even says it plays the best out there.

No logic between the reviews and the grades.
 
Because you aren't always on a track, so if the extra content feels like a let down and you quantify you might actually spend three-quarters of a race in the menus before and after, then it can be enough to mark a game down.
 
A reminder:

Any posts that imply a publication is being any less than professional because they have given GT5 a lower score than Forza 3 will be deleted on sight. These posts will be considered to be trolling, and dealt with accordingly.

Thank you.
 
Gamespot gave a very weird review. I don't understand if they were happy or not. And please - bad music? Are they really giving grades also based on soundtrack? I don't understand why they felt the need to point that out, especially when you can choose your own music to play.

They say it's the best GT yet, but that it's lacking in areas (obviously). It has many features, arguably more then any console racer out there, but it looks not as good? I am confused. It's a weird review, and I came out confused from the outcome.
As far as I know, every review source rates how good the sound of a game is, and that includes music. There's nothing to suggest the game was down-scored because of it either; it's briefly mentioned in the text, and not listed in "The Bad" section.

8.0 is considered "Great" by Gamespot, so I'd say they were definitely happy with it.
 
Well Gamespot just gave GT5 a 8.0

i have nothing more to say :crazy:

what happen PD :(

this company really needs more people to help them ..
8.0 is what this game deserves. Anything higher than that is just being generous. 5-6 years and only 20% finished is unacceptable.
 
The next time I see somebody go off-topic, I'm going to close the thread. This is a discussion about professional reviews of the game. It is not a discussion of your own personal reviews or how complete the game is or what your favourite car is or whatever is being discussed. I will close this thread if you continue.
 
8.0 is considered "Great" by Gamespot, so I'd say they were definitely happy with it.

yea honestly the only complaints they had were the inclusion of standard cars, unlockable damage and limited online (which is being patched). they may have been a little strict on the scoring, but i hope it shows sony/pd that they shouldn't make the weird decisions that they made with this game.
 
A reminder:

Any posts that imply a publication is being any less than professional because they have given GT5 a lower score than Forza 3 will be deleted on sight. These posts will be considered to be trolling, and dealt with accordingly.

Thank you.

Still, American reviews these days need to be watched out for, because of this.
European reviews are i think, better in general to check scores, because we're not biased, being in the middle of the 2. :)


And by the way, i love how most early reviewers complained about alot that was "not there", but actually is build in an unlockable way, wich caught all reviewers off-guard by showing themselves as not particulary playing this game for long...

http://gamer.blorge.com/2010/11/27/...led-yamauchis-damage-test-incomplete-reviews/
 
Last edited:
Not sure if this was mentioned (not that I can see) but Games.on.net has reviewed GT5 and given it a 3/5. Games.on.net is a gaming website run by Australian ISP "Internode".

Closing statements:
We're left with a very strong feeling that GT5 bit off far more than it could chew. Rather than try to incorporate a rudimentary track editor, and the interesting yet ultimately boring B-spec mode, PD should have focused on the core aspects of the game - the A-spec mode and online racing. Rather than squeeze 1000 cars into the game, 800 of which are ugly PS2 models, the team should have spent its time getting all of the 200 premium cars right. We'd have much preferred a better looking daytime racer than an average day/night/raining/fog racer. There is so much pruning to be done that almost half of the game's functions and features could have easily been left on the cutting room floor, yet not been missed by gamers.

It's a damming indictment to note that GT5 is at its best when it's just you and the track, racing against a rapidly ticking clock, unencumbered by bumper car AI and an overly generous penalty system. In time trial mode it's apparent that GT5 has excellent physics, wonderful track design and a plethora of interesting cars to drive. But as a racer, be it against AI or humans, GT5 comes second to its console competition, and isn't even in the same league as the simming delights available on PC. Only time will tell whether Polyphony Digital can shape this game into the experience we were all expecting.

Read the full article here: http://games.on.net/article/10921/ber_Review_Gran_Turismo_5

GT5 fans will be happy to know the comments section is filled with people defending it. It's kinda funny, the community and the reviewer are having a little fight :)
 
Guys chill out and stop defending what u lot thought would be the biggest and baddest racing title ever.
I think an 8 is a good score fot G5. PD are so inconsitant and so un organised. all these promises the told us about and did they deliver?
To sum up GT5, it's pretty boring rcingm u can't actually do as many upgrades to your car as otehr raing games out there, its gt4 where some cars have dents and better graphics and a bit better AI. the problem there is that we are on next gen consoles, we dont need a slightly improved gt4 we need the big bang which we all hoped for cos it took so bloody long!
I'm dissapointed and not ashamed to say it. I'm not gonna stick up for PD and defend their lack of effort in their game!
 
I know that Jordan did not get offered a review copy - but is there any expectation of a clear, blanaced, objective review on this site?

Such a review would be valued.
 
I know that Jordan did not get offered a review copy - but is there any expectation of a clear, blanaced, objective review on this site?

Such a review would be valued.

If any1 on this site does a review then u know it wouldnt be balanced. Cos they would be a hardcore GT fan. If you look at all the current reviews, they all have a trend. just get an average score from it.
they can't all be wrong!
 
If any1 on this site does a review then u know it wouldnt be balanced. Cos they would be a hardcore GT fan. If you look at all the current reviews, they all have a trend. just get an average score from it.
they can't all be wrong!


I didn't imply that this site was unable to give a balanced review (but can see how my comment might have read that way)

Merely, that someone in Jordan's position should be able to give an authorative review of the game, good, bad, innovative, frustrating, needing upgrades / patches etc.

This would be valuable as it would cut across the raft of polarised opinion on the forums.

Not saying it would be easy - Jordan would have to strike a careful balance - but that is where the true value would lie.
 
I didn't imply that this site was unable to give a balanced review (but can see how my comment might have read that way)

Merely, that someone in Jordan's position should be able to give an authorative review of the game, good, bad, innovative, frustrating, needing upgrades / patches etc.

This would be valuable as it would cut across the raft of polarised opinion on the forums.

Not saying it would be easy - Jordan would have to strike a careful balance - but that is where the true value would lie.

Ok i get you mate.
Well Jorrdan has his own copy, i'm sure he can do a review or get some1 to do 1!
 
As far as I know, every review source rates how good the sound of a game is, and that includes music. There's nothing to suggest the game was down-scored because of it either; it's briefly mentioned in the text, and not listed in "The Bad" section.

8.0 is considered "Great" by Gamespot, so I'd say they were definitely happy with it.

8 IS great. But it's not what you would expect from reading that review.

This is what I meant, and I don't think they would mention it if this was not important to them (which shouldn't really, as you can choose your own music and it not like something that some can and some can't do...):

57242160.jpg


Seriously, is that a criteria?
And terrible first impression? I get opinions, but that is absurd. Who was this review targeted at? The review for GT fans and the score to everybody else? Or vice-versa? That is not the first time they got me to raise an eyebrow... I don't get the point they were trying to make.
 
ARS Technica releases there review even later than gamespot...

Fans of the series will still claim this is as good as it gets, but the problems and limitations of the game are inexcusable considering how much time and money was spent trying to get it right.

Verdict: Rent

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/revie...-race-a-racing-fan-reviews-gran-turismo-5.ars

It seems to me that these later reviews, which are taking more time to really plow into the game are coming up with less and less love...
 
Last edited:
After playing for about 30 hours, I sincerely believe that reviews nowadays are by no means reliable. Reviewers don't play the game enough and pretend they are professional - it's just plain stupid. And some people who have not even bought this game, come to gtplanet, register and complain about lack of mechanical damage and jaggies and crap. I am only getting the impression that they don't like car. When I was on gtplanet a year ago, people were dying for daylight transitions, skidmark(fairly stupid), weather and etc. Now PD has delivered quite a lot what we wanted, and some kids just can't shut up. You don't like any of the "flaws", really, don't play it.
 
Your inappropriate use of air quotes amuses me.


And by the way, i love how most early reviewers complained about alot that was "not there", but actually is build in an unlockable way, wich caught all reviewers off-guard by showing themselves as not particulary playing this game for long...

http://gamer.blorge.com/2010/11/27/...led-yamauchis-damage-test-incomplete-reviews/
Which is arguably a problem in and of itself.

(which shouldn't really, as you can choose your own music and it not like something that some can and some can't do...)
You keep banging on about this as if you think that was the major reason that Gamespot gave the game an 8. They only mentioned it in passing once in the actual text.

And terrible first impression? I get opinions, but that is absurd.
No, it is actually a very fair criticism to make, and they went to great lengths to actually explain that bit in the review.
 
Last edited:
They actually gave that a game emblem... Just goes to show that while the faults are there, they are minor. And they ARE minor compared to the big picture.
Terrible first impression is something that happens when the first screen you see in a game is a wall of text or the likes, not when you first race in a mazda demio. Please, they gave their opinion, and I respect that (to a degree), but that is pretty a moronic thing to say.
 
Terrible first impression is something that happens when the first screen you see in a game is a wall of text or the likes, not when you first race in a mazda demio. Please, they gave their opinion, and I respect that (to a degree), but that is pretty a moronic thing to say.
The first thing I saw in the game was a loading bar while I sat around for nearly an hour while the game installed, and was treated to a bunch of long loading times afterwards anyways the first time I did anything in it. I dunno about you, but that gave me a pretty damn bad first impression of what was to come regardless of if the game picked up later, and that was in fact one of the specific things that the reviewer mentioned as taking an issue with. He also went on to mention several other things in his review that he felt justified his opinion, and none of them seem particularly "moronic" to me.
 
After installing the game, the loading is not that long at all. And besides, sitting in front of your TV while the game installs is your own fault. I know I did other things when the game installed. That is not bad first impression, that one is entirely on you.

In line with that, every game I bought on steam took a couple of hours to download and install, talk about bad impression... Please, those are lame points.
 

Latest Posts

Back