Gran Turismo 5 will fail to sell...

[Alby_da_Wolf]

Vexxmania said:

Michael-5 said:

pizzahut451 said:

IGN bases popular games's reviews on hype, not the game itslef. Do you honestly believe that if the hype was smaller, the game would have got the same score???  

Well now that I played the game for a few hours, yes I do. I disagree with you on IGN reviews, I think everyone gives some games too much credit because of hype (MW2 with it's 4-5 hour campaign vs. Medal of Honor), you can't focus it on one source. IGN in gereral I found gave PS3 gaves over inflated reviews (Resistance 2 - 9.5?), and generally they let one or two people have too much power in judging the review score (Super Mario Galaxy 2 and GTA IV 10/10??).

Overall I found that their scores might not be the most repesentative of the reasoning, but their comments are solid. Reading their review, I see that all my concerns about the game have come back to dissapoint me, and I can see why they gave GT5 such a low score (GT1-4 got 9.5 or 9.8 scores, so you can't blaime hype).

Personally I feel the game deserves a little higher of a score, perhaps a 9/10 simply because the amount of content, but it's still full of disapointments.

I'm going to wait for IGN Europe and GameTrailers to make their reviews. Generally I find GT the most reasonable score-wise, but IGN explains the reasoning best.

The IGN review is flawed. First, there's no mention of 3D and how it affects the game, which might be one of the reasons why the game was delayed in the first place.

Second: "And like bumper cars they're likely to bounce off each other with little consequence. The inclusion of damage is so slight as to be insignificant, and even the most violent of crashes will only result in a polygon shifting slightly ajar."

This reviewer didn't even know that there are 2 other levels of car damage, which are unlocked at levels 20 and 40. This serves only as further proof that reviewers need to spend more time with a game before judging it. Frankly, I don't understand why anyone would waste their time on such an incomplete review.

I didn't know about successive levels of damage before reading about it, but I don't own either a PS3 or GT5. A professional reviewer should have known it, unless he's extremely sloppy. Or was the review made by an amateur?

This said, a realistic simulator should give players the option to set damage to realistic since the start, if so they like, the best PC racing sims do it. But my personal opinion on this issue has nothing to do with the reviewer knowing very little about the game he was reviewing. BTW, a careful reviewer would have told us a couple of useful things: how GT5 and Forza compare with 8 AI controlled cars each, and from how many AI controlled cars PS3 starts showing its limits and screen tearing becomes noticeable.