Its not a racing crash and burn game. Reviewers and any gamer have to understand that. The system is there for people who are not so skilled to get used to the tracks, and as they level up it becomes more challenging. C'mon now people, its that simple to understand..

so, you'd like to drive your car in the first race and completely wreck it in the first corner you slide into, ending the race? because that is what happens when you make it "realistic"

i think the leveling of damage is a great thing as you get used to it as you get better at the game.

review sites just got owned.

man gt is owning a lot these days

It's not that crazy. It's similar to the way in the "noob" races earlier you can cut corners and ram into other cars without penalty. But in the "professional" races later on you are penalized for ramming and corner cutting.

So it seems the damage progression is an extension of that. At the start damage is not an issue. Later is will be.

That's a funny sort of defence. Should movie critics base their movie reviews on the first 20 minutes of a film only? Should theatre critics base their reviews on only the first act of a play? Even in a crap movie/play/concert/whatever reviewers stay for the whole show...nearly always. Reviewers should be let of fthe hook merely because games last longer? I don't think so.

If a gamer is expected to put 40 hours into a game then a reviewer should do as much. It's only 1 week's work at 8 hours a day for a 5 day week. Man, give me a job like that, I'd be happy to do it. If a reviewer wants to throw out an early review for the website hits, then call it a first impressions review without giving it a score...Hey I think at least one reviewer did exactly that, because he realised he couldn't justifiably give a review score without putting a lot more time into the game. There's obviously some integrity in the review community.

GT5 has been around long enough that reviewers should know playing a cursory few hours of the game doesn't give you the complete experience. I don't expect a reviewer to get the platinum trophy (or the Xbox equivalent in achievement, or whatever the Wii has) before reviewing the game, but I do expect them to play it to some sort of completion. Noting that for GT5 and some other games the notion of completion is a somewhat nebulous concept.

I also notice the VGC review for GT5 isn't up, I wonder if that means our own reviewer is putting more than a cursory 6 hours into the game. I've come to expect quality reviews from this site and it looks like GT5 will be the same.

All early GT 5 reviewers will get surprises each day about hidden features in the game :P  

Yamauchi is my new god.

Also, reviewers cannot judge a game harshly for guessing. This is ignorance on their part (IGN and so forth).

We all know they cannot play each game to 100%, but their is a problem. GT5 is the biggest thing this year (by far). You need to get all your facts straight and spend a bit more time than a regular game. Also when you're entering in a huge game, you should leave yourself a lot of time to experience most of the game. Level 20 is easy to get too, it tells me that IGN and other reviewers are terrible and didn't give two sh**s. Can get to their level 17 or what ever in a day, or two.

So yes, what I am saying is you NEVER penalize a game for guess work. This is where you lose credibility. Grade what you experienced, that's it.

Hey all. Just a heads up that I will be reading and responding to everyone in a couple of days. For the moment I don't have time

Twesterm is just pissed that GT5 has more cars than Ghostbusters.... just saying.