User reviews say nothing. Most of them are Forza fans bombing the franchise anway as some kind of revenge for what happened to Forza 7.

Plus people buying a game without informing themselves about it. Who’s fault is it really?! Since the first reveal PD never made a deal about what the game will be.

You already said you'd never rate a GT game below a 10, and that was before the game was even out and you could play the final version. It's not trolling to not blindly give a game a great score just because of its name.

Not sure about that.  Reading the forums there are a lot of people feeling the review did not cover a lot of stuff missing from the game that they enjoyed with the previous series.  When all is said and done, people just do not like paying 60 bones for a pretty much MP only game.

I consider this a very dismissive comment.  Anytime users are not happy they have to have some type of agenda or be for the competition.  I am pretty positive that this probably only make about 1% of the reviews or less.  There is a lot of people not happy with the MP focus.  That does not mean GT Sport is a bad game, its just not the game they were expecting.  I agree that the game should be graded on it's merits but should also pointed out for the lack of modes that were part of the other series so people can make an informed decision.  I personally do not care about that much about a particular grade but instead care if the game has the things in it that make it fun for me.  This current iteration of GT does not but then again I can easily wait to see if they updated.  Not being tied to any one system, I have enough games to fill the void until GT Sport get a better SP that I can enjoy.

Yes the 8 GTs (coming Prologue) I played I wouldn't give below than 10, because that is my personal evaluation. And there is quite a big room of maneuvering between 8 and 10 isn't there?

I have played the GTS beta and on it I could recognize all that I needed and that granted the 10 (played over 10h) on its premisse. It's far from being my favourite or having all I want, but it is even farther from being a bad game that should get lower than 8. Judging the game for what it have it is over 8 without any question and reviewers looking for what the game is and what is important on the game have done good reviews.

Except I was talking about the reviewers for the game.

I saw the backlash on this forum, yt and even PD page about the changes, and I understand people that miss those, because I also like all that GT had. I was very happy with GT5 and 6, while a lot of people were bitching exactly about the excessive cars, standard models, easy championships, etc.

People do not? Is Splatoon doing bad? Is CoD doing bad? Is Titanfall doing bad?

The demo alone took me 10h (with only 1 or 2h on MP), estimatives put the SP portion of GTS on 50-100h to gold all. So there is plenty of SP content compared to most games (majority have less than 12h, some even only 4h, campaigns).

I'm not happy with the focus being majorly online, but PD was clear that this GT would focus on this and not the SP. So would you pick overwatch and give take half the score because there is no SP? The game have to be evaluate by what it have and proposed to do, not by what you wish it have. Because if it was to be ranked on wish anyone could give a 2 to any game say what they wish and call it fair.

He is talking about the 0-4 scores probably, there is no way a score in this section isn't trolling or agenda driven.

And people were informed of it for over 2 years PD have been touting the focus on MP.

That s exactly the thing. There is enough single player value in the game, everything put together it‘s probably the same as in GTS, like Eurogamer said in their review already. The game is just organised in a different way and puts a bigger focus on driving now. People simply don’t like change, that is all.

Hynad was asking you how can they use the model and say it isn't the base model.

There were details and techniques they didn't use. And you are still to justify if they are recycling models why didn't they use all the premium assets?

This is simply not true. All cars in GTS were newly modelled for a reason. Quality above quantity. Just one car in GTS takes 4-6 months to model. The cars are modelled in 8K sufficient detail so they can use them for the next gen version.

Details it didn't had?? It's a freaking model for offline render, it's probably photorealistic if used with ray tracing. It has zero stuff with techniques, these are defined by the engine. The model is just a bunch of polygons, normal maps, etc.

They didn't used all because the model is just part of the problem. There is physics, collision, reflection, etc. There is the logic, handling, so it's not like it's just a copy and paste.

The original GT6 models had the same level of quality. They can import it into any engine, its just a 3D model. You could send them attached to an e-mail to freaking Turn 10 and ask them to use on Forza if you wanted to.

Details it didn't had?? It's a freaking model for offline render, it's probably photorealistic if used with ray tracing. It has zero stuff with techniques, these are defined by the engine. The model is just a bunch of polygons, normal maps, etc.

They didn't used all because the model is just part of the problem. There is physics, collision, reflection, etc. There is the logic, handling, so it's not like it's just a copy and paste.

The original GT6 models had the same level of quality. They can import it into any engine, its just a 3D model. You could send them attached to an e-mail to freaking Turn 10 and ask them to use on Forza if you wanted to.

Yes the 8 GTs (coming Prologue) I played I wouldn't give below than 10, because that is my personal evaluation. And there is quite a big room of maneuvering between 8 and 10 isn't there?

I have played the GTS beta and on it I could recognize all that I needed and that granted the 10 (played over 10h) on its premisse. It's far from being my favourite or having all I want, but it is even farther from being a bad game that should get lower than 8. Judging the game for what it have it is over 8 without any question and reviewers looking for what the game is and what is important on the game have done good reviews.

Except I was talking about the reviewers for the game.

I saw the backlash on this forum, yt and even PD page about the changes, and I understand people that miss those, because I also like all that GT had. I was very happy with GT5 and 6, while a lot of people were bitching exactly about the excessive cars, standard models, easy championships, etc.

People do not? Is Splatoon doing bad? Is CoD doing bad? Is Titanfall doing bad?

The demo alone took me 10h (with only 1 or 2h on MP), estimatives put the SP portion of GTS on 50-100h to gold all. So there is plenty of SP content compared to most games (majority have less than 12h, some even only 4h, campaigns).

I'm not happy with the focus being majorly online, but PD was clear that this GT would focus on this and not the SP. So would you pick overwatch and give take half the score because there is no SP? The game have to be evaluate by what it have and proposed to do, not by what you wish it have. Because if it was to be ranked on wish anyone could give a 2 to any game say what they wish and call it fair.

He is talking about the 0-4 scores probably, there is no way a score in this section isn't trolling or agenda driven.

And people were informed of it for over 2 years PD have been touting the focus on MP.

Please go there and pick us how many models they recycled and how many are new.

They were able to do the complete GT6 with models and all the other aspects that you are putting as much time consuming, and do it in basically 2 years, increasing the number of premiums by several fold. But on GTS they weren't able to recycle that content in 4.5years. Are you sure you know what you pretend to know?

You clearly haven’t played the game in 4K if you think that. Btw I was quoting Kaz when I was talking about the development time per car.