Forza also doesnt have to be more popular. I would still place my bet that FM7 would outsell GTS due to it being judged a better driving game if it released on PS4.

GTS does not have better physics than Forza 7, it has different physics to FM7, thats the big difference gamers need to understand. Forza is far from a broken game and offers great physics for what its trying to achieve and thats the direction Turn 10 chose to go for. PD chose to go more simulator which we can claim is more focused on however that does not mean GTS should be rated better than FM7 and FM7 doesnt need points deducted because they opted for a different blend of physics either. Exact same thing applies to the sound, its a dev choice not a criticism. Apparently many gamers enjoy those directions Turn 10 opted for hence the higher reviews.

Now for GTS opting to go more simulator than arcade, does it do it better than Project Cars 2? A game focused on more simulator? Same goes with the sound? From what majority say, PC2 does the best simulator phyics and aims for the most realistic sounds. Plus the visuals are the best based on many. So does GTS score higher than PC2 with less content, less features, sim phyics arent as good and sound is dabatable? I wouldnt say it does. The brand name doesnt change that.

Don, you cant just pick and choose what reviews deserve to be valid and ones that dont. If majority of reviewers think the same thing than its as legit as it can be. You cannot tell me that majority of GTS critics are troll reviews. They all stated the same issues.

If you think the core is the only thing that matters, and everything else is frivilous, you should be playing RFactor, IRacing Assetto Corsa, or even Project Cars instead of GT. All have more realistic physics.

According to your logic Project Cars is undeniably better than GT.....so then why don't you defend that instead?

This thread has gone WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY beyond its initial question. To address the question at hand, "Why does GT not get any acclaim in mainstream media?" here's what needs to be said but hasn't been addressed directly because of petty arguments and console wars and deflection.

The main point brought up in the OP was that titles like Rainbow Six: Siege, For Honor, and No Man's Sky have been revisited and given "second chances" by mainstream media as they've continued to evolve post launch. So why hasn't GT: Sport?

Here are the simple reasons why:

• Those titles have been out longer than a year. A lot of the revisits to these titles have come on anniversaries of their launch. GT: Sport has not been out for a year. Once it is out for a year, GT: Sport will likely get an anniversary revisit from some media outlets to talk about the accumulated improvement the title has had over the year. I previously posted Ars Technica's revisit of the title and they had more glowing things to say.
• Some of those titles have transformed into and advertised themselves as live services with "seasonal" aspects. Different seasons are getting mainstream media attention. GT: Sport does not have such a notion (yet), despite getting consistent updated content and patches. If Polyphony and Sony advertised GT: Sport as an seasonally evolving experience, mainstream media would be more likely to revisit the title at these seasonal launches.
• Some of those titles have advertised themselves with their updates as a new iteration of the game with an update (i.e. No Man's Sky: NEXT). This has garnered mainstream media attention. GT: Sport has not "relaunched" itself with such branding with any of its updates (yet). If it does so with a "GT: Sport Spec B" branding or something, it is more likely to be revisited by mainstream media.

This is why those other titles have been revisited by mainstream media while GT: Sport has not. The added unfortunate situation with GT: Sport is that its anniversary falls square in the busy season of AAA releases so the mainstream media will be focused on new title coverage over GT: Sport. With the titles you mentioned, No Man's Sky launched in mid-summer and For Honor launched post busy season in February. Rainbow Six: Siege often gets revisited in the new year when things have calmed down, even though it launched during the busy season. This is likely to do with the turning of seasons that the game updates with.

Now can we please let this thread rest instead of continuing on with pointless back and forth?

Well at least we both can agree with something, its the taste of the individual. Yes GT focuses more on Simulation while Forza focuses more on Simcade/Simulator. And neither do it wrong. Its all the dev's choice that suits there games. However we cannot judge a game for being better because its more simulator, its like saying Ace Combat shouldn't get better reviews than Flight Simulator because FS offers realistic Simulator physics in comparison.

If we look back at last gen, Forza games were top of its class in the sound department and so was the crash damages. GT sounds were a major criticism back in there days, many reviewers referred to them as vacuum sounds while also not offering or barely offered any crash damage on there car models while Forza games did and they did them well, weather its simulated or not, seeing a car hit the wall and watching the cars gain dents and scratches over the time of the races was a major bonus to the genre. Crash damage has become a standard with car racers today. (Just remember one important part to my post, I am referring to at the time not comparing to today.)

Turn 10 has always been amazing when it comes to offering a great package for racing fans, that's why they tend to favour the reviewers. Sure hardcores might go elsewhere but that doesn't take away from what Forza does right.

Does GTS deserved to be reviewed again? I would say no it doesn't and that's due to the industry has a stance with that, plus personally FM5 copped similar criticism and that game never got another go at the review boards. There are some exceptions like SFV and maybe some outlets might give it another go, but lets be honest here. If GTS got reviewed again, does it really matter? You seem to enjoy the game, if Sony re-releases GTS again its going to cost them more money on marketing, packaging and all the bells and whistles on a game that's already out just to try to get better reviews.

And as this thread has been modded, I wouldn't want to keep adding fuel to the fire.

Simulation racing games all attempt at the same level of realistic simulation as each other with varying degrees of success. That doesn't exempt any of them for criticism due to the devs lack of ability to reach said level of simulation. Forza 7 should rightfully be criticised for failing to do so to such an extent. GT Sport deserves some of it too, but Forza 7's physics are worse so more points should be taken of it. To be fair, PC2 deserved some more appraisal for being the most realistic simulator on consoles. Same with sound. Simulation racing doesn't have the creative freedom on core aspects that say arcade racing does, so Forza 7 should get more flak from reviewers for it unlike Forza Horizon which doesn't attempt to be realistic.

You also seem to not care about the other points I mentioned regarding online play, but it makes a massive difference. Its noticeable, the online hoppers in Forza 7 are disastrous fotr the most part. Only a few of my races were clean and respectful, mostly in A and S class. My favourite class, P class, was ruined by noobs and rammers. GT Sport started out just as bad with noobs, but atleast they were ghosted. When I reached A+ DR and S SR the races were incredible as the competition was fierce and fair. I'd say online play is as important as it is in fighting games.

GT Sport got a campaign later on, and along with the cars and tracks added in the game, it justifies what I'm asking for in this topic. A rereview of a game which has far exceeded the package it was at release.

I'm scratching my head to how hard it's to make it to you. When we are talking about simulators, the better game is the one who simulates better (and I'll repeat that the reason I didn't buy PC2 even with people saying it's better is because I was burned by PC1). And if you go see the reviewers most of them wouldn't even know GT is a better simulator than FM even if they like FM more or have more fun with it, that is because most of them don't know a thing about simulation.

Crash damage that is totally unreal, so for me, pointless, but yes Forza got there first... although GT6 had it, it severely impacted driving and thus people usually turned it off (just further proving the point that the crashing is more bragging than anything). As I said, in real racing once you really hit someone your race is over (GT6 online had so many races you had to early retire because of crash). But the physics of crash of Forza was laughable, I do remember the YT videos posted in VGC.

Sure it doesn't take away what forza does right, and I wouldn't have a problem with Forza selling more or being more popular (it isn't neither), but when reviewers at large fail to see it, you can't claim their credentials as an argument of authority. And also doesn't put Turn 10 as the leaders on the genre, since they aren't the best at simulating, at graphic, at popularity, at sales, they are only leading MC scores or reviewers.

About it being reviewed, I don't really need it to be reviewed, the reviewers would still be the same people that doesn't look at what the game is supposed to be.

Thats the thing, you are considering Forza doesnt deserve good reviews because Turn 10 opted for a different feel. The issues between Forza and GT has nothing to do with the simulation. Its all to do with the package. Even with a Campaign mode, GTS lacks tons of content compared to there competition and thats the biggest flaw with the game. Basically theres nothing GTS offers that FM7 or PC2 doesnt offer already except with those games they have a huge roster and features to choose from. Sure its a welcome addition to offer a campaign mode, something that should have been there from day one, its nothing to praise the game for, especially when they tried to take that mode away from us.

Im still scratching my head as to why your trying to justify this game. The game got reviewed less than Forza, and so it should. The problem isnt with the simulation, the problem is with the package. GTS just lacks so much for a car racer, it offered less cars than FM5, a car racer that got heavily criticized for a lack of cars. 

Even if it got reviewed again, the game is still far behind the 8 ball when it comes to content. 

You keep using PC1 as a reason why you didnt buy PC2, PC1 offered the best simulation at its time and PC2 continues that feat, not GT. So if you want a racer with close to realism physics than put GTS and FM7 down and buy PC2. If you want the best features and variety of cars than FM7 is a no brainer.

Thats the thing, you are considering Forza doesnt deserve good reviews because Turn 10 opted for a different feel. The issues between Forza and GT has nothing to do with the simulation. Its all to do with the package. Even with a Campaign mode, GTS lacks tons of content compared to there competition and thats the biggest flaw with the game. Basically theres nothing GTS offers that FM7 or PC2 doesnt offer already except with those games they have a huge roster and features to choose from. Sure its a welcome addition to offer a campaign mode, something that should have been there from day one, its nothing to praise the game for, especially when they tried to take that mode away from us.

Im still scratching my head as to why your trying to justify this game. The game got reviewed less than Forza, and so it should. The problem isnt with the simulation, the problem is with the package. GTS just lacks so much for a car racer, it offered less cars than FM5, a car racer that got heavily criticized for a lack of cars. 

Even if it got reviewed again, the game is still far behind the 8 ball when it comes to content. 

You keep using PC1 as a reason why you didnt buy PC2, PC1 offered the best simulation at its time and PC2 continues that feat, not GT. So if you want a racer with close to realism physics than put GTS and FM7 down and buy PC2. If you want the best features and variety of cars than FM7 is a no brainer.

GOWTLOZ said:

I already mentioned Vision GT cars, neither Forza Motorsport 7 nor PC2 have that. But more importantly, for the racing experience itself, GT Sport has driver and sportsmanship ratings and a penalty system, which drastically improves the online racing experience with players matched based on said ratings making for more even races and penalty system prevents rammers from getting their way and ruining the experience of other racers, which is a major problem in Forza Motorsport 7 and a smaller but still existing problem in PC2. It might look like a nitpicky thing here but it makes all the difference online.

GT Sport also has the best HDR and wide colour support of these games. Its a pleasure to look at as well as to play.

The rest of what I said also matters. PC2 having better physics than GT doesn't excuse FM7 from having worse physics, the same for graphics when comparing PC2 on PC, GT Sport on Pro and FM7 on PC and sounds.

Sure GT has vision cars and they added a campaign.. but lets talk realistically here.

PC2 sits on a 82 metacritic and GTS on a 75.

Now with both games aiming for realistic simulation. Tell me why you think GTS deserves a higher rating than PC2? Now keep in mind PC2 offers more cars, tracks, modes and even offers better realistic simulation physics for a console racer. You will also notice that PC2 also matches or betters GTS in sound and visuals as well.

Both games have there pros and cons in the visual and sound department so even if we take the visual and sound side of things out of the equation I am interested in where you think GTS shines over PC2 a game that came out 1 month before GTS. 

Visual comparison

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3roNpZMvUjU

Thats the thing, you are considering Forza doesnt deserve good reviews because Turn 10 opted for a different feel. The issues between Forza and GT has nothing to do with the simulation. Its all to do with the package. Even with a Campaign mode, GTS lacks tons of content compared to there competition and thats the biggest flaw with the game. Basically theres nothing GTS offers that FM7 or PC2 doesnt offer already except with those games they have a huge roster and features to choose from. Sure its a welcome addition to offer a campaign mode, something that should have been there from day one, its nothing to praise the game for, especially when they tried to take that mode away from us.

Im still scratching my head as to why your trying to justify this game. The game got reviewed less than Forza, and so it should. The problem isnt with the simulation, the problem is with the package. GTS just lacks so much for a car racer, it offered less cars than FM5, a car racer that got heavily criticized for a lack of cars. 

Even if it got reviewed again, the game is still far behind the 8 ball when it comes to content. 

You keep using PC1 as a reason why you didnt buy PC2, PC1 offered the best simulation at its time and PC2 continues that feat, not GT. So if you want a racer with close to realism physics than put GTS and FM7 down and buy PC2. If you want the best features and variety of cars than FM7 is a no brainer.

Sure GT has vision cars and they added a campaign.. but lets talk realistically here.

PC2 sits on a 82 metacritic and GTS on a 75.

Now with both games aiming for realistic simulation. Tell me why you think GTS deserves a higher rating than PC2? Now keep in mind PC2 offers more cars, tracks, modes and even offers better realistic simulation physics for a console racer. You will also notice that PC2 also matches or betters GTS in sound and visuals as well.

Both games have there pros and cons in the visual and sound department so even if we take the visual and sound side of things out of the equation I am interested in where you think GTS shines over PC2 a game that came out 1 month before GTS. 

Visual comparison

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3roNpZMvUjU

Since you brought it up Forza Motorsport 7 has 87 on Xbox One on Metacritic. A game with worse physics, sounds, graphics and online scored better than GT Sport and PC 2. Is that fair? Not really, not at all. Its scores fail to reflect its inferiority as a sim racer.

Errorist76 said:

GTS has more cars than project CARS 2 and it do way more at release than pC1 at release. If you think pC1 had better physics than GTS you don’t know what you’re talking about. You, just like those reviews, are measuring with different measures.

GT Sport‘s cars are modelled in way more detail, both visually and in terms of physics, than any car in Forza. It’s not even close, so the quantity argument is moot. Quality trumps quantity every day of the week, so yeah...the game was never rated fairly, just in comparison to other, older games and purely in terms of quantity by many.