GT5 Review scores (Update :Average metacritic score)

[boxox]

I don't know, I think it works both ways. Not a lot of people were cutting 1.0 of Shift or 1.0 of Forza much slack around here, versus videos and screenshots of a GT5 they had never played. Turns out it might be harder than it looks to make a racing game on a modern console ? Sucks huh ?

 

[Playguy]

You don't need to be a rocket scientist to see those images. Just a pair of eyes. That's not a glitch . You know it. Those jagged edges, rectangular curves, those aren't new.

Anyway How can't I judge the game by footage?It's the game.If I play it in a crappy Tv it'll look even worse.

 

[Pierced Lead]

What irks me is that a particular critically-acclaimed game - Fallout 3, was in the same situation as GT5 is. It had amazing graphics, yet they were as inconsistent if not more than GT5. There were also many glitches in the game. Moreover, that game also offers hundreds of hours of gameplay, but it has a slow start and not all features are offered from the beginning - just like GT5. Hell, it also went through development hell.

Yet this game has a metacritic of 91, compared to GT5's 86.

I honestly think there is a bias among reviewers to FPS's and JRPG's because let's face it, they are more enjoyable off the bat.

In fact, shooting 'sims' like Arma II and Medal of Honor to some extent also have a considerably lower score than Call of Duty or Bad Company 2. And it just so happens I enjoyed the realism the former two games offered more than the Michael Bay-movie-like explosions and action of the latter.

I think I am seeing a pattern here...

 

[Playguy]

Well, think about it - dunno if fallout 3 was in development for 5 years, but since fallout 3 is a game that appeals more to the general public, obviously less people were waiting for it.

The contrary happens with GT5. Smaller fan base, smaller target people size. Now, considering these people were too much hyped and too blind with all the GT holyness, and the final outcome came waaaaay too short, you know why these reviews are low.

But wait, 91-86=5. Why are you complaining about 5 points?

 

[xNEVER-ONEx]

What irks me is that a particular critically-acclaimed game - Fallout 3 was in the same situation as GT5 is. It had amazing graphics, yet they were as inconsistent if not more than GT5. There were also many glitches in the game. Moreover, that game also offers hundreds of hours of gameplay, but it has a slow start and not all features are offered from the beginning - just like GT5. Hell, it also went through development hell.

Yet this game has a metacritic of 91, compared to GT5's 86.

I honestly think there is a bias among reviewers to FPS's and JRPG's because let's face it, they are more enjoyable off the bat.

In fact, shooting 'sims' like Arma II and Medal of Honor to some extent also have a considerably lower score than Call of Duty or Bad Company 2. And it just so happens I enjoyed the realism the former two games offered more than the Michael Bay-movie-like explosions and action of the latter.

There is no bias man. GT fanboys can defend it all they want, but the matter of fact is that it will always be compared to Forza, and like it or not, Forza has been very active in the last 5 years and it has raised the bar in terms of console sim racers.

Sure GT5 has 200 beautifully detailed cars, and 800 essentially GT4 ports, where as Forza has 500 cars somewhere in between the GT5 premiums and standards. The customization options (both mechanically and aesthetically) are way better on Forza. The online interface and set up is so much better on Forza.

But Forza isn't better in all areas. GT5 blows it out of the water in terms of physics. It also has more variety in racing from go karts to F1 machines. But Forza I would say has a much better car list.

PS. I don't own a Xbox or Forza, and I'm a GT fanboy through and through, but I'm stupid enough to not realize when your game is inferior.

 

[boxox]

But wait, 91-86=5. Why are you complaining about 5 points?

I suspect the one score that must really bite is seeing NFS Hot Pursuit released around the same time and scoring just that little bit higher.

 

[Playguy]

well, my fallout 3 theory applies to that game too.

Blame the kids.

And nicely put never-one

 

[Pierced Lead]

There is no bias man. GT fanboys can defend it all they want, but the matter of fact is that it will always be compared to Forza, and like it or not, Forza has been very active in the last 5 years and it has raised the bar in terms of console sim racers.

Sure GT5 has 200 beautifully detailed cars, and 800 essentially GT4 ports, where as Forza has 500 cars somewhere in between the GT5 premiums and standards. The customization options (both mechanically and aesthetically) are way better on Forza. The online interface and set up is so much better on Forza.

But Forza isn't better in all areas. GT5 blows it out of the water in terms of physics. It also has more variety in racing from go karts to F1 machines. But Forza I would say has a much better car list.

PS. I don't own a Xbox or Forza, and I'm a GT fanboy through and through, but I'm stupid enough to not realize when your game is inferior.

I know this game fell short, but relatively compared to other games this still offers alot. Physics are one of the main aspects of a simulator - and when it comes to it, at least on a console, GT5 wins hands down. I have yet to see cars behave as accurately as they do in GT5 (in particular, the Murcielago [I'm one lucky bastard ],the Golf, and the Integra).

And imHONESTo, I can do without customization - sure it's fun as hell, and it actually reflects what person you are online in FM2 and FM3 for that matter (ricers and you know what ), but I think the upgrades in GT5 are more than enough for me.

Also, while many standards are below-par visually, there are some that still look amazing even now. This is the major letdown of GT5 along with the tracks and jaggies, but surprisingly they don't even cross my mind when playing it.

Oh, and online is awesome.

I suspect the one score that must really bite is seeing NFS Hot Pursuit released around the same time and scoring just that little bit higher.

Truth be told, it's one of my favorite games of all time. I actually believe it deserves a higher score

And one would be absolutely retarded to think for a second that HP deserves lower a score than GT - in it's genre, it's the best out there. The same unfortunately, isn't the same for GT5.

 

[KilzoneStrife]

Ive played GT5 since the 24th. Everyday, give or take maybe 9-10hours a day. Yesterday, I was afraid my install was corrupted, so I deleted it and *gulp* reinstalled. In the hour it took to install and the 30min the patch 1,01 took to download, I put Forza 2 and 3 in and played around. Im sorry, Forza gfx wise, just cannot compete with GT5, so the trolls trying to say it does need to take the fanboy goggles off. I raced the same cars in Forza 2 and 3 and on the same track and they are clearly the same polygon models with a new lighting engine. Yes, the standard cars are ugly, some more than others, but we knew this already. Why moan now. Once the glitches are fixed, people wont care to insult the standards. We all expected a perfect game, especially after Kaz's comments with 'Motor Toon Grand Prix' and he vowed to never release a sub finished game, or whatever. At the end of the day, when I saw review scores for Forza 3, I knew even if GT5 came out and was perfect, they'd find things to slam it for. In my opinion, Forza3 deserves an 8 out of 10. And GT5 in its current buggy state.. A 9. If you focus on whats there, it deserves it.

 

[samdavis]

What irks me is that a particular critically-acclaimed game - Fallout 3, was in the same situation as GT5 is. It had amazing graphics, yet they were as inconsistent if not more than GT5. There were also many glitches in the game. Moreover, that game also offers hundreds of hours of gameplay, but it has a slow start and not all features are offered from the beginning - just like GT5. Hell, it also went through development hell.

Yet this game has a metacritic of 91, compared to GT5's 86.

I honestly think there is a bias among reviewers to FPS's and JRPG's because let's face it, they are more enjoyable off the bat.

In fact, shooting 'sims' like Arma II and Medal of Honor to some extent also have a considerably lower score than Call of Duty or Bad Company 2. And it just so happens I enjoyed the realism the former two games offered more than the Michael Bay-movie-like explosions and action of the latter.

I think I am seeing a pattern here...

Fallout 3 isn't really an FPS and the notion that it's garnered a higher rating because it's "for the kiddies" is a bit absurd. And Fallout 3's graphics were all-around average. Draw distances were too far and there was simply too much going on to give it a MGS4 type sheen. That's not what people played it for though.

More importantly, what are you talking about with the "but it has a slow start and not all features are offered from the beginning - just like GT5."?

Damage in a simulation racer is not something to be unlocked like a perk or special weapon in an RPG. People really need to stop saying this. You're fanboying it up right now.

I don't see how you go from Arma II rating lower than MOH being a result of one being too sim (probably true) to trying to make the same comparison between and RPG with FPS leanings and a sim racer. It doesn't make any sense. Especially when the comparisons you're trying to draw between the two are so off base. You just sound more than a bit elitist by using the tried and tested "GT is for the more refined and everything else (Forza included) is so popular because it's catering to the lowest common denominator."

Damage being unlocked as you progress further in the game is not an innovation. Like the many other wonky design and UI choices in this game, it's was a mistake.

 

[Playguy]

You see that's the problem. Fanboys just don't want progress, evolution. We're in 2010! Tell me, all in all, what's different in this game since GT2 came out? Besides cars and tracks, what did they changed? It's the same old stuff, buy a car, buy all upgrades, race alone (yeah don't count on that AI to keep up with you), get money and proceed to step one. I know forza is set around this too, but it at least you can be free with it. Variety of cars? check. Damage? check. Livery editor? check. Customization? check.

My point is after all these years, GT hasn't bring anything new to the sim genre. Just 'perfected' (after GT4 I use this term loosely on gt) the driving physics. But there's much more about car culture than just the physics. Personalization plays a big part too. And variety too.

 

[mastorofpuppetz]

You see that's the problem. Fanboys just don't want progress, evolution. We're in 2010! Tell me, all in all, what's different in this game since GT2 came out? Besides cars and tracks, what did they changed? It's the same old stuff, buy a car, buy all upgrades, race alone (yeah don't count on that AI to keep up with you), get money and proceed to step one. I know forza is set around this too, but it at least you can be free with it. Variety of cars? check. Damage? check. Livery editor? check. Customization? check.

My point is after all these years, GT hasn't bring anything new to the sim genre. Just 'perfected' (after GT4 I use this term loosely on gt) the driving physics. But there's much more about car culture than just the physics. Personalization plays a big part too. And variety too.

Agree, although Gt upgrades are enough for me, one thing and one thins only kills me about GT, DAMAGE, how can it be a sim if you can smack into other cars all day? Needs realistic damage.

 

[gtracedriver]

Fallout 3 isn't really an FPS and the notion that it's garnered a higher rating because it's "for the kiddies" is a bit absurd. And Fallout 3's graphics were all-around average. Draw distances were too far and there was simply too much going on to give it a MGS4 type sheen. That's not what people played it for though.

More importantly, what are you talking about with the "but it has a slow start and not all features are offered from the beginning - just like GT5."?

Damage in a simulation racer is not something to be unlocked like a perk or special weapon in an RPG. People really need to stop saying this. You're fanboying it up right now.

I don't see how you go from Arma II rating lower than MOH being a result of one being too sim (probably true) to trying to make the same comparison between and RPG with FPS leanings and a sim racer. It doesn't make any sense. Especially when the comparisons you're trying to draw between the two are so off base. You just sound more than a bit elitist by using the tried and tested "GT is for the more refined and everything else (Forza included) is so popular because it's catering to the lowest common denominator."

Damage being unlocked as you progress further in the game is not an innovation. Like the many other wonky design and UI choices in this game, it's was a mistake.

Meh, according to rumors they will release a patch to have damage in arcade mode too.

As far as Forza goes, yes it has good ratings and is a fun game. I do not consider it as a sim. Rewind function and pretty much same damage as previous Forza, cool crashes and of course paint job makes it popular. Their drive train modification is stupid and make no sense.

GT is far superior with variety and more importantly is a proper sim with cars, tracks

 

[Playguy]

'Their drive train modification is stupid and make no sense.'
Ever went to hybriding forums here? It's full of people who want to make stupid things that make no sense. But their fun. Oh damn.

'GT is far superior game with variety and proper sim with cars, tracks'
Porsche?Ferrari?Koeninsegg(orwtvr)?Lamborghini? I know GT has some of them now, but guess who had them before? I know, 1000 cars. Doesn't help when 200 of them are skyline,mx5, or civic copies right?
Proper sim? GT2 a bit, GT3 a lot. GT4 not really (no oversteering?). GT5?I'll tell you when I play it, but I know it'll be better - I just don't how much.

 

[Pierced Lead]

I never said Fallout 3 was for 'kiddies'

and if GTR and F1 2010 are any indication...
Reviewers don't really look at how accurate physics are, they look more into how enjoyable the game is and it's features.

And while I do agree damage should be there from the start, I think early reviews didn't really take it into account because of that, which could actually question how much they played through the game before giving their score, same goes for online; IGN, for example...

Also, bear in mind I am of the notion that this game deserves 90 at best. I know this game has many, many design flaws, but it's not something I can't keep up with, and it's pros far outweigh its cons.

'Their drive train modification is stupid and make no sense.'
Ever went to hybriding forums here? It's full of people who want to make stupid things that make no sense. But their fun. Oh damn.

'GT is far superior game with variety and proper sim with cars, tracks'
Porsche?Ferrari?Koeninsegg(orwtvr)?Lamborghini? I know GT has some of them now, but guess who had them before? I know, 1000 cars. Doesn't help when 200 of them are skyline,mx5, or civic copies right?
Proper sim? GT2 a bit, GT3 a lot. GT4 not really (no oversteering?). GT5?I'll tell you when I play it, but I know it'll be better - I just don't how much.

You do realise that they couldn't get those manufacturers due to licensing constraints?

Some people will never be happy, and as such, it's actually pointless to explain anything to them.

Fact of the matter is GT sets the bar for other games, and if it so happens it cannot exceed that bar itself, it will be frowned upon. Not to mention KY's constant unfulfilled promises aka lies...

 

[Pierced Lead]

double...

 

[Playguy]

yet, forza did. Outstanding don't you think?

 

[Pierced Lead]

yet, forza did. Outstanding don't you think?

Forza 2, yes. In some aspects though... when it comes to physics, I don't think so.

 

[samdavis]

Meh, according to rumors they will release a patch to have damage in arcade mode too.

As far as Forza goes, yes it has good ratings and is a fun game. I do not consider it as a sim. Their drive train modification is stupid and make no sense.

GT is far superior with variety and more importantly is a proper sim with cars, tracks

So drivetrain modification is your reason for it not being a sim, and I don't see much of an explanation of what, on the other hand, makes GT5 a "proper" sim. You just said cars and tracks, but we already know of the issues with the PS2 quality standard cars, and the low res (and lack of) older tracks.

It's fine if you're partial to GT, but calling it a proper sim while shooting down the competiton without an actual explanation isn't really saying anything.

 

[Playguy]

forza 3 also has it, and with much more freedom.and the engine convertions. and changing the engines themselves.

 

[Pierced Lead]

Love the trolling on this forum...

So drivetrain modification is your reason for it not being a sim, and I don't see much of an explanation of what, on the other hand, makes GT5 a "proper" sim. You just said cars and tracks, but we already know of the issues with the PS2 quality standard cars, and the low res (and lack of) older tracks.

It's fine if you're partial to GT, but calling it a proper sim while shooting down the competiton without an actual explanation isn't really saying anything.

Yep, because that's what makes LFS a sim

 

[mechwarrior]

I do agree with the people saying that the graphics aren't quite as good as they were made out to be. The vids and pics I saw aren't even close to the in game graphics. At 1080p the jaggies are present, the shadows are a jagged mess, the tracks themselves are quite ugly.

The art was disappointing when I saw it. I can deal with the standard cars, they really don't look all that bad;however, the environments for the most part are terrible. There is a lack of proper diffuse, normal, spec, light and cube maps on everything, they're just photo skins. They tackled the level assets poorly, and the trees are of ps1 quality. They're about 10 triangles max for all of them, that doesn't cut it. Sure, it'll look good in film mode when everything is bloomed and motion blur is fading the scars of the level, but when you're just racing around checking out the scenery, it truly is terrible. I was really let down by the level art, but the game is so enjoyable and has so much positive about it that I can forgive them

 

[MKVSupra]

Honestly I doubt many of the lesser reviewers actually gave the gamer the time needed to unlock the best parts.

 

[djm99]

Sure the standards aren't great, but there is no way in hell GT5's graphics are poor. You're hyperbolising now. Wait, no, that's not strong enough.

You're being a fanboy now. GT5 has the best graphics for a racer to date. Somehow you're blinding yourself to that. Need I go grab EVERY SCREENSHOT AVAILABLE for this game to prove that?

Screen shots are fine, you cant see the pop up,screen tear, dodgy framerate..etc. I'm not a fanboyat all, i'm playing the game and enjoying it as i have all other GT games, The graphics are only seen as poor, when you've seen whats done on the other console. Personally i would have rather seen the game set at 30FPS, v synced then we would have no screen tear, no dips in frame rate and probably no pop up. Burnout Paradise on PS3 runs beautifully, and looks relatively beautiful at 60FPS (3yr old game), why can't this?

I think it would be nice if in a patch it would be possible to switch between 30 & 60 Fps if it did make a difference.

 

[paulpg87]

I thought your PS3 YLOD'D when you installed GT5



lol... a lot of trolls in here

already buy a new one, slim, used. Same day at block buster.

i'm level 13 now, just made a race with the berlinette RS or something like that, i think is the worst looking standard car, worse than gt4 ps2. I don't know what goes wrong with this game... after 5 yars they can't deliver such a crap.

 

[djm99]

Meh, according to rumors they will release a patch to have damage in arcade mode too.

As far as Forza goes, yes it has good ratings and is a fun game. I do not consider it as a sim. Rewind function and pretty much same damage as previous Forza, cool crashes and of course paint job makes it popular. Their drive train modification is stupid and make no sense.

GT is far superior with variety and more importantly is a proper sim with cars, tracks

GT5 a sim? ...i'm not so sure. Sims don't have rubberbanding. I've now had several races where i have been in the middle of a race, been taken out by a car that's followed it's pre-defined path. Within half a lap i've caught up with them. That's a good thing in my book, if it's too hard there's no fun for me or my son. The cars in GT5 in my book are a lot easier to drive than in previous incarnations, again for me that's a good thing.

 

[Tenacious D]

So drivetrain modification is your reason for it not being a sim, and I don't see much of an explanation of what, on the other hand, makes GT5 a "proper" sim.

I will tell you a couple.

You can set up a Forza car in some crazy incorrect ways, where say the ride height is all the way up, and there are no performance issues.

4WD destroys just about every other drivetrain type on any car.

These are two. But in top of that, even GT5 Prologue felt like Live For Speed and GTR Evo, two of my PC sims and highly regarded. Forza 3 with the best physics of the series, not quite as much.

Forza is a decent series, and the Livery Editor is great, when you're painting cars which don't have issues, or your decals don't number too much over 100.

 

[A Funky Rhythm]

Hi all,

This is my first post here, so go easy!

I find it amazing that the issue of force feedback wheel support hasn't been mentioned much, if at all in this thread.

I've been an avid simracer now for several years, mainly on PC sims, the likes of GTR, LFS, Richard Burns Rally, rFactor, and I am an iRacing subscriber. Despite my bias towards PC to get my sim-racing fix, I have followed the release of GT5 with interest.

IMHO you cannot play a racing sim properly without a decent wheel. I'm sure there are those out there who play quite happily with a pad, and more power to you. But in terms of realism, and immersion, you NEED a wheel to play a racing sim properly.

Now I know that talk of another racing game on another console is frowned upon here, but here goes. FM3 could be the best console sim ever, but without support of a decent wheel, I won't be playing it. The only wheel worth having for 'the other console' is the Fanatec, which is now discontinued.

I can use my G25 on both the PC and my PS3, and as such can play GT5 as it was meant to be played. GT5 could be just FM3 ported over to PS3 for all I care, and it would be 10x better played on the PS3 with the G25, than played with a gamepad.

I think that PD were never going to satisfy everybody at the same time. They are trying to please both the casual crowd and the hardcore crowd at the same time. Unfortunately for us hardcore folk, casual gamers outnumber us 10 to 1, so GT5 was never going to be the be-all and end all sim that people hoped for from the pre-release hype. Its too diluted in some areas to please the hardcore, but too nuanced in others to please the pick up and play crowd.

From what I gather, FM3 is a more FOCUSED game. Turn 10 knew what they wanted to do, who they were aiming at, and put their resources towards that goal. As such it is a more cohesive game overall, and this reflected in the review scores.

Reading the GT5 reviews however, it just seems to have been down to the luck of the draw as to who was reviewing it. Some reviewers are looking at it as a sim, in which case it is scoring highly. Those that are viewing it as a game are giving it more mixed reviews. To be honest a game like GT, or any sim for that matter takes more than a few days to evaluate properly, and I think a good few reviews are based on just a few hours play at best.

As it stands I'm loving GT5 at the moment. I appreciate what its trying to be, even if it doesn't achieve its (lofty!) goals in every respect. Its not iRacing, but it scratches my sim-racing itch (I think theres a cream for that....) perfectly. It isn't perfect, there are some almost unforgivable omissions (no damage until later levels, and standard vs premium cars being the main ones) but it does what it says on the tin. And I can use my G25, which is a HUGE deal to me.

If you've read this far, congrats! 👍

 

[Rodpunisher]

already buy a new one, slim, used. Same day at block buster.

i'm level 13 now, just made a race with the berlinette RS or something like that, i think is the worst looking standard car, worse than gt4 ps2. I don't know what goes wrong with this game... after 5 yars they can't deliver such a crap.

lol..ok.. I believe you

 

[GTsimms]

I have Forza 3 and GT5 on my 42", I put both games on Tsukuba Circuit and GT5 was definitely the winner. I have played just about every Simbin game and most other PC sims. GT5 feels awesome!

Forza = my post from PSN forum

Negativity about GT5, if you want to complain! There is another game that might have your car. It will not be properly modeled in cockpit view, no wipers, no headlights,no night time racing(just bad daytime lighting, so crank up the brightness like a NASCAR race), no head tracking, no rain/snow/dirt, no wheel (MS wheel and the Fanatec are in very limited numbers.), make sure you wake up and turn it on at 3:00 am with your sunglasses off with that white menu screen, and there is more! Better off with Kinectable Motorsports 4 due in 2011.