There is no point explaining why I think GT5 is inferior, the professional critics have more than done that job for me.  Lets just say I think any criticism raised against GT5 would incite more hassle than it's worth.  I've been quite open with my explanations about all the other votes I've done but I cannot be bothered arguing with some of this sites GT fans who are, for want of a better word, devout.  As Jay pointed out though, there are others who have posted nothing but a "because it's better" and lets not forget all those fans who couldn't be bothered to write at all but just anonymously voted and left the thread.

There is no point explaining why I think GT5 is inferior, the professional critics have more than done that job for me.  Lets just say I think any criticism raised against GT5 would incite more hassle than it's worth.  I've been quite open with my explanations about all the other votes I've done but I cannot be bothered arguing with some of this sites GT fans who are, for want of a better word, devout.  As Jay pointed out though, there are others who have posted nothing but a "because it's better" and lets not forget all those fans who couldn't be bothered to write at all but just anonymously voted and left the thread.

Ok here is my opinion and although I am by no means a pro reviewer, I will state it from the point of view of a gamer. Reach to me lacked the brilliance of CE and 3 which had left a sense of closure yet at the same time the possibility of the continuation of the series. On the bright side the engine was refined, the physics were pretty good, controls tight as usual, the community throughout the series has always been good but nothing was really a huge wow factor. However, the anticlimatic Kat situation (I don't want to spoil it) was well done as it wasn't outright cliche and felt a bit more like Saving Private Ryan. With that said, all the other stuff that happened felt cliche (including the Emile bit), and the last stand felt a bit...I dunno, empty (Kat thing was more emotional in a sense). The situation with Noble Team felt like the first Tom Cruise mission impossible movie (IMO) which upset me severely. The Covenant itself was scary, but the urgency and fear of them felt more prominent to me in CE. The space battle was a bit short but had its moments.

On GT5, it is absolutely the best racing sim and every site has stated it. It could have easily scored similar if not better than Reach and you out of all people despite your blindfold should know this. The expectations created by Sony and Polyphony were really stupid and harmed the reviews which did not review the game as professionals but more as fanboys and so-called gaming journalists. GT5 was not reviewed on its own merits. Unlike Reach which really could not disspoint. Hell ODST was like a 3 hour long rehash (not counting mp) with not even a polished engine yet still got a free ride. Explain to me how that is fair??? It is not. The expectations for GT5 were too high and was reviewed as such. GT5 kept very tight controls (especially if you have the wheel, be it Logitech or other), the tracks are diverse and different environments add beauty to everything. My only criticism is the stupid menu and the lack of polish on the non uber cars (I haven't played since the more recent patches which have fixed ALOT). However the meat what GT5 set out to do which was create as much a realistic experience on car handling as possible was an absolute success. If reviewers have named it the absolute best racing sim how come it even scored less than Forza??? That makes no sense and you know it, however because it is you I do not expect you to understand nor accept when you are wrong so we will agree to disagree.

You might as well make another thread with Seece and Insanity bashing any Sony exclusive and stating how everything M$ is superior when in some cases is not. You can also bring up all these reviewers blah blah blah, but in the end its opinions of people who express loyalties to M$. You know how broken the review system is so at the very least explain what you like about something and dislike about the other game and what is so great about your pick. Although you will not care, at the very least I will respect your opinion any day because if you are a true gamer, you will be able to point out the flaws in your choice. Heck I even have a little site I created for school where I have reviews on KZ3 and Trine from the perspective of a GAMER. Never forget that you are a gamer and not a f......y, I know it's in you, so hopefully you will add something to this discussion other than "boo hoo Reach is the superior game but people are picking the Sony product".

Ok here is my opinion and although I am by no means a pro reviewer, I will state it from the point of view of a gamer. Reach to me lacked the brilliance of CE and 3 which had left a sense of closure yet at the same time the possibility of the continuation of the series. On the bright side the engine was refined, the physics were pretty good, controls tight as usual, the community throughout the series has always been good but nothing was really a huge wow factor. However, the anticlimatic Kat situation (I don't want to spoil it) was well done as it wasn't outright cliche and felt a bit more like Saving Private Ryan. With that said, all the other stuff that happened felt cliche (including the Emile bit), and the last stand felt a bit...I dunno, empty (Kat thing was more emotional in a sense). The situation with Noble Team felt like the first Tom Cruise mission impossible movie (IMO) which upset me severely. The Covenant itself was scary, but the urgency and fear of them felt more prominent to me in CE. The space battle was a bit short but had its moments.

On GT5, it is absolutely the best racing sim and every site has stated it. It could have easily scored similar if not better than Reach and you out of all people despite your blindfold should know this. The expectations created by Sony and Polyphony were really stupid and harmed the reviews which did not review the game as professionals but more as fanboys and so-called gaming journalists. GT5 was not reviewed on its own merits. Unlike Reach which really could not disspoint. Hell ODST was like a 3 hour long rehash (not counting mp) with not even a polished engine yet still got a free ride. Explain to me how that is fair??? It is not. The expectations for GT5 were too high and was reviewed as such. GT5 kept very tight controls (especially if you have the wheel, be it Logitech or other), the tracks are diverse and different environments add beauty to everything. My only criticism is the stupid menu and the lack of polish on the non uber cars (I haven't played since the more recent patches which have fixed ALOT). However the meat what GT5 set out to do which was create as much a realistic experience on car handling as possible was an absolute success. If reviewers have named it the absolute best racing sim how come it even scored less than Forza??? That makes no sense and you know it, however because it is you I do not expect you to understand nor accept when you are wrong so we will agree to disagree.

You might as well make another thread with Seece and Insanity bashing any Sony exclusive and stating how everything M$ is superior when in some cases is not. You can also bring up all these reviewers blah blah blah, but in the end its opinions of people who express loyalties to M$. You know how broken the review system is so at the very least explain what you like about something and dislike about the other game and what is so great about your pick. Although you will not care, at the very least I will respect your opinion any day because if you are a true gamer, you will be able to point out the flaws in your choice. Heck I even have a little site I created for school where I have reviews on KZ3 and Trine from the perspective of a GAMER. Never forget that you are a gamer and not a f......y, I know it's in you, so hopefully you will add something to this discussion other than "boo hoo Reach is the superior game but people are picking the Sony product".

Ok here is my opinion and although I am by no means a pro reviewer, I will state it from the point of view of a gamer. Reach to me lacked the brilliance of CE and 3 which had left a sense of closure yet at the same time the possibility of the continuation of the series. On the bright side the engine was refined, the physics were pretty good, controls tight as usual, the community throughout the series has always been good but nothing was really a huge wow factor. However, the anticlimatic Kat situation (I don't want to spoil it) was well done as it wasn't outright cliche and felt a bit more like Saving Private Ryan. With that said, all the other stuff that happened felt cliche (including the Emile bit), and the last stand felt a bit...I dunno, empty (Kat thing was more emotional in a sense). The situation with Noble Team felt like the first Tom Cruise mission impossible movie (IMO) which upset me severely. The Covenant itself was scary, but the urgency and fear of them felt more prominent to me in CE. The space battle was a bit short but had its moments.

On GT5, it is absolutely the best racing sim and every site has stated it. It could have easily scored similar if not better than Reach and you out of all people despite your blindfold should know this. The expectations created by Sony and Polyphony were really stupid and harmed the reviews which did not review the game as professionals but more as fanboys and so-called gaming journalists. GT5 was not reviewed on its own merits. Unlike Reach which really could not disspoint. Hell ODST was like a 3 hour long rehash (not counting mp) with not even a polished engine yet still got a free ride. Explain to me how that is fair??? It is not. The expectations for GT5 were too high and was reviewed as such. GT5 kept very tight controls (especially if you have the wheel, be it Logitech or other), the tracks are diverse and different environments add beauty to everything. My only criticism is the stupid menu and the lack of polish on the non uber cars (I haven't played since the more recent patches which have fixed ALOT). However the meat what GT5 set out to do which was create as much a realistic experience on car handling as possible was an absolute success. If reviewers have named it the absolute best racing sim how come it even scored less than Forza??? That makes no sense and you know it, however because it is you I do not expect you to understand nor accept when you are wrong so we will agree to disagree.

You might as well make another thread with Seece and Insanity bashing any Sony exclusive and stating how everything M$ is superior when in some cases is not. You can also bring up all these reviewers blah blah blah, but in the end its opinions of people who express loyalties to M$. You know how broken the review system is so at the very least explain what you like about something and dislike about the other game and what is so great about your pick. Although you will not care, at the very least I will respect your opinion any day because if you are a true gamer, you will be able to point out the flaws in your choice. Heck I even have a little site I created for school where I have reviews on KZ3 and Trine from the perspective of a GAMER. Never forget that you are a gamer and not a f......y, I know it's in you, so hopefully you will add something to this discussion other than "boo hoo Reach is the superior game but people are picking the Sony product".

Quite the hypocritical comment like most of your post. Anyway games are suppose to be fun. Thats why its scored less then Forza. Because the reviewers found forza to be a better, and more fun experience, despite the fact that cars in GT handle more realisticaly which is really the only edge GT5 has and "if you think otherwise than you are the naive one"(talking like you did in your post on purpose btw). This is the same reason the most realistic shooting game isn't the best scored one either. There is no conspiracy. Microsoft isn't paying off reviewers to give sony games lower scores. I also don't understand why you wrote a 3 paragraph essay ranting about how good a game is that you haven't even bothered to play after the patches that supposedly fixed the problems you complained about. Blindly defending sony games you don't even want to play isn't any better than blindly bashing them.