Unlocking something as fundamental as damage in a "sim" is stupid and the game deserves to lose points for that.  It's the same as unlocking characters in a fighter to play online - a waste of everyone's time.

First impressions matter a lot.  Nobody should be expected to grind through subpar gameplay to unlock something that should have been a menu option, especially in a "sim".  If a game doesn't impress in the first 5 minutes, it deserves to go in the trash cause reviewers and player's aren't going to waste their time, no matter what the fanboys or devs promise.  Luckily most gaming companies understand this.

1. As commercial advice I expect them to play a significant proportion of the game and test all the features that will be used. One user may not use feature x but may use feature y, but all features will at some point be utilised. A reviewer is obliged to test all features to gove the best possible impression for consumers. To do otherwise is giving a false impression.

2. A review does not have to be released within the day of release. Many publications will review a game a month after release to give a good review. Many are holding off on GT5 reviews even now to ensure a decent review.

3. It's perfectly acceptable to expect them to delve hours into a game, it's their job! I read a review of the original Baldurs Gate back when it was released; 200 hours to completion and the reviewer managed to play through the whole game. This is before Bioware made it big so it was just another game release. It is not an unreasonable expectation that a truly professional reviewer will play a substantial proportion of the game. Over 100 hours is a bare minimum for a content rich game like GT5. 

4. Short-term thinking. Short-term profitability vs long-term credibility which if continued, will eventually equate to lower long-term revenue.

Gran Turismo has always been about unlocking. What were the licenses for anyway?

LOL???? Unlock every thing at the beggining just to amuse the casual plug and play players within their 5 min playing the game? HELL TO THE NO.

The difference here is that damage has a major influence on the gameplay. Unlocking a character in a fighting is frustating, I know, but it's not essential.

The damage model actually changes the the whole driving aspect. For a beginner it would be incredibly frustrating to loose the race because of the damage. That's why more damage get's unlocked the better you get, or in other words, the higher your level is.

Sounds like a pretty stupid system to me. You could just turn damage on and off, couldn't you? Does PD ever heard about option for different difficulty settings?

Plus in GT you have to play through ten thousand driving tests before actually going into a real good race, and in the driving tests you'll have failed long before doing anything to damage the car. And if these tests doesn't work as a leaning curve then nothing will.

Should developers go this way and Call of Duties won't come with the option of turning off aim assistance, since you need to be good to play it that way. No option to turn off gambits in FFXII, no manual assignment of points in Mass Effect because you aren't ready yet for it. Better yet! You won't be able to die anymore on hard games unless you beat them, for it could frustrate players!

What surprises me the most is the way fans are actually buying the excuses of this guy without second thoughts. Everything he says or does is deserving of applauses now or what?

Oh dear. This is wrong in so many ways.

I agree with you on the on/off.  I guess it's a bit of my old PC bias, but if there's one pet hate of mine on consoles it's the fear of having a detailed options screen and the belief the developer should decide for the player.

I think the leveling system makes sense to allow for gamers who want progression that way, but I think you should have an option to enable full damage right away if you're confident in your driving (which I am) or even better, if the damage is tiered then matching options to pick the level you want.

Seriously, if the option exists in the game give it to the player, whatever it is (with the exception of say online leveling that the game is built around, like unlocking more powerful guns or the like).

Off topic - my main example of this is the skip cutscene option I have to select for every cutscene if I don't want to watch them (I do actually normally watch them, but it's the principle).  Why not give me a setting in the option screen that enables me to just once note that I always want to skip cutscenes?

Please, console orientated developers - trust us with options.

I can always tell a developer with a lot of PC background as they will tend to give a lot more options in the menus than developers with strong console backgrounds.

yeah, on arcade mode, before any patch. F40 on the wall, I succeed relatively quickly to make the "front side" hanging over after 2 contact on the wall at mid speed. It was not bad, but nothing spectacular.

I have also seen some damage on nascar, special event. I was simply behind a car, just pushed it a little and the "back side" had a little deformation. This was really a little push.

So far, my honda "prelude" Honda BALLADE SPORTS CR-X 1.5i ‘83 (edited) that i m playing in the GT mode is a standard car and doesnt seem to have any damage (level 13 so far)

Also, I have noted fropm GTplanet screenshot etc ... that car/car long duration contact seem to induce more damage that a car/wall low duration heavy contact. Back, before GT5 release, some screenshot showing damage were obtain by pushing a lamborghini vs a wall during a long period (side by side "sliding move) while, from others videos, I didnt see big damage by any direct big wall car crash