Reviewers "trolled" by Yamauchi's damage test!

[JamaicameCRAZY]

twesterm said:

pezus said:

http://gamer.blorge.com/2010/11/27/gran-turismo-5-reviewers-failed-yamauchis-damage-test-incomplete-reviews/

 

 

"As investigated by GTPlanet.net forum, Gran Turismo 5 has a progressive damage system. This means that as you level up and become more experienced each level of damage becomes unlocked. A report indicates that at level 20 in the game, near full damage becomes unlocked with moderate mechanical issues and at level 40 full damage becomes unlocked with significant mechanical issues.

 

At full damage, mechanical failures play a critical role in the vehicles drivability and aerodynamics. At this level car hoods, trunks, and even doors will be hanging by a hinge as pieces of the car fall off.

I'm sorry, but that's one of the dumbest things I've ever read.  No offense to GT5 but as you level up you can do more damage to your car?

If you're making a realistic racing sim, why does my level 1 car damage different than my level 40 car?  That's just plain stupid.

And as for reviewers missing it, it sound like a stupid system.  If damage was one of your big features, you either at least hint to the reviewers it's hidden and unlocked or accept that they're going to miss it.  If you hide a big feature, people are going to miss it and mention in the review that it's not there.

To I guess this should serve as a note to Polyphony and any other developers-- don't hide major features in silly systems while telling nobody about it or expect reviewers to ding you for not having the feature or the feature not living up to promises.

Im going to have to completely disagree with you here. I thinks its a rather neat little system. Why, because its a way lesser skilled people can get into the story mode and encourage them to do better as oposed to current systems that just have you play on easy not really improving at all. If it is just always on i am sure there is people that wouldnt have any money and wouldnt be able to actually finish the game.

Now perhaps they should have let reviewers know but now we know who has played through a decent chunk of the game now dont we. So those who havent i think deserve some flack because they ar not doing what they are paid for. I mean do you think it ok for reviews to not eve get to the end of games and rate them? Also it does make for quite a nice surprise.