-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Gran Turismo 6 Review Thread
- Thread starter astarisborn94
- Start date
funny value.
A human translation of the gamereactor.es review part in the OP:
Other points of interest:
-The site says the reviewer is "el único de nuestros compañeros que pilota en la vida real", or "the only one of us who races in real life".
-The reviewer considers that over the years the game part of GT has been neglected over the simulation part. He found GT6 not fun or realistic enough, and that made it "a mediocre racing game and one of the biggest disappointments of the year"
edit: staticneuron pointed out that the crossed out part ahead didn't make sense, so I checked and found out I made a mistake translating (new text in italics). I'm terribly sorry
-After the intro race,he played events for 4 hours to buy a Honda Jazz he was given a choice between 4 cars. He chose a Honda Jazz and spent the next 4 hours playing events in order to make money and be able to buy things for the Honda. He found that slow and boring. Also, he didn't like that car, he found it handled like a slow miniature van, so racing with it was unexciting
-He didn't like the license requirement to unlock different Classes in Career mode, because he found getting licenses slow (9 races in total before the first exam phase that also takes some time to beat)
-I think this part sums up his expectations:
-Wasn't happy with loading times and menus. The last ones are easier to navigate but still have problems, like having to press 9 buttons in order to get to the next event after winning a race or having the cursor on "Race again" by default instead of "Next race"
-Found the physics enhancements minimal and most of them insignificant. The only one he really noticed was cars having more lateral grip. Overall, the physics are lifeless and mechanic, and lack unpredictability and feeling of speed. He found Forza Motorsport 4 to have the perfect equilibrium. Even deactivating all the aids and turning Traction Control to 0 it never seems really dangerous or risky to move the center of gravity of the car abruptly, since it's almost impossible to completely lose traction.
-He has a Nissan GT-R R35, which is also in the game, but the game doesn't capture the sensation of driving it. Has apparently driven an actual Mitsubishi Evolution IX and says the game version feels like a completely different car. He expands on that point, but I don't know much about cars so I can't translate that.
-Another nice quote:
-Physics in asphalt are weak, in snow are worse and in gravel even worse. Rally sections are the worst in the entire subgenre.
-Drifting feels great and close to the real deal.
-Graphically, some cars look great while others reek of PS2. Got framedrops to ~15 on some races. I'm not very fluid in graphics lingo so I don't understand this part: "About the lightning in the game, in several occations it looks too flat"
-He didn't like the music in the menus or the sound effects. "A Corvette Stingray 2014 sounds like a sewing machine [...]. Crashes sound even worse, and when you slam against a resistance it sounds like in its predecessor, like if you slammed together two empty tupperwares like cymbals"
-He liked the online part. Better presentation, more fluid and has more functions than previous games
5/10
+Tons of cars, numerous circuits, expanded online elements, good drifting
-Rigid, lifeless physics. Stupid AI, slow Career mode, weak feeling of speed, mediocre sound
Disclaimer: I haven't played any Gran Turismo game, but I found this review interesting and I like translating things. Checked game specific terms in google, but it's harder when it's between different languages, so I can only hope I didn't get anything wrong
Other points of interest:
-The site says the reviewer is "el único de nuestros compañeros que pilota en la vida real", or "the only one of us who races in real life".
-The reviewer considers that over the years the game part of GT has been neglected over the simulation part. He found GT6 not fun or realistic enough, and that made it "a mediocre racing game and one of the biggest disappointments of the year"
edit: staticneuron pointed out that the crossed out part ahead didn't make sense, so I checked and found out I made a mistake translating (new text in italics). I'm terribly sorry
-After the intro race,
-He didn't like the license requirement to unlock different Classes in Career mode, because he found getting licenses slow (9 races in total before the first exam phase that also takes some time to beat)
-I think this part sums up his expectations:
-Wasn't happy with loading times and menus. The last ones are easier to navigate but still have problems, like having to press 9 buttons in order to get to the next event after winning a race or having the cursor on "Race again" by default instead of "Next race"
-Found the physics enhancements minimal and most of them insignificant. The only one he really noticed was cars having more lateral grip. Overall, the physics are lifeless and mechanic, and lack unpredictability and feeling of speed. He found Forza Motorsport 4 to have the perfect equilibrium. Even deactivating all the aids and turning Traction Control to 0 it never seems really dangerous or risky to move the center of gravity of the car abruptly, since it's almost impossible to completely lose traction.
-He has a Nissan GT-R R35, which is also in the game, but the game doesn't capture the sensation of driving it. Has apparently driven an actual Mitsubishi Evolution IX and says the game version feels like a completely different car. He expands on that point, but I don't know much about cars so I can't translate that.
-Another nice quote:
-Physics in asphalt are weak, in snow are worse and in gravel even worse. Rally sections are the worst in the entire subgenre.
-Drifting feels great and close to the real deal.
-Graphically, some cars look great while others reek of PS2. Got framedrops to ~15 on some races. I'm not very fluid in graphics lingo so I don't understand this part: "About the lightning in the game, in several occations it looks too flat"
-He didn't like the music in the menus or the sound effects. "A Corvette Stingray 2014 sounds like a sewing machine [...]. Crashes sound even worse, and when you slam against a resistance it sounds like in its predecessor, like if you slammed together two empty tupperwares like cymbals"
-He liked the online part. Better presentation, more fluid and has more functions than previous games
5/10
+Tons of cars, numerous circuits, expanded online elements, good drifting
-Rigid, lifeless physics. Stupid AI, slow Career mode, weak feeling of speed, mediocre sound
Disclaimer: I haven't played any Gran Turismo game, but I found this review interesting and I like translating things. Checked game specific terms in google, but it's harder when it's between different languages, so I can only hope I didn't get anything wrong
BloodMoney
Banned
ohhhh, you know, his obvious disinterest in reviewing the game...
lets focus in on this line "My lack of digital driving skills is without question. Yet, here I am reviewing Gran Turismo 6, Polyphony Digital’s latest entry in its long-running “Real Driving Simulator” franchise."
Hypothetical: I'm a heterosexual, but my boss told me I need to do are review about what its like to receive anal... Ok! here we go. Final Verdict: My butt hurts 1 out 5.
Can Crusher
Banned
Reading reviews from people who don't care for sims or even appear to know driving basics is a pain. It's like reading some Madden fan who doesn't like football review Fifa or Pro Evo, I mean seriously, who gives a fuck about what you think? No it doesn't have to be fun for you, since the real sport isn't.
What if your doctor walked into the room and said that with a grin on his face then continued to operate on you anyway?
QuicheFontaine
Member
Lol, personally I'd check my terms of employment if my boss asked me to do that!
Why am I not surprised to find peterb0y defending the press in here after some of them wrote some truly atrocious reviews? You're the hero they don't need right now. You definitely don't need to defend the mario kart fan who hates racing games. That review would be like me trying to play this and reviewing it as someone who normally can't get into racing sims that much.
BloodMoney
Banned
I would subtract even more points from my GT6 review score.
^^ In regards to loading times, when is the comparison thread going to happen for GT6 with standard HDDs and SSDs? SSDs made GT5 infinitely quicker to load, one of the few games that seemed to take full advantage of it. For hardcore racing guys who spend years on these games it is definitely worth checking it out and investing in a SSD if it is anywhere near as big of an improvement as we saw in GT5. As I said though, we'll have to wait for an awesome GAF'er or someone else to make the comparison.
Salvor.Hardin
Banned
Okay so this game is getting crucified by critics. 75 on Metacritic right now. Didn't expect that, especially after you go through the reviews which cite the same points as previous GT reviews. Weird.
Diablo Rosso
Member
I'm writing a review but it hasn't gone live because I got the game Wednesday and two days is no where near long enough to write a review for a Gran Turismo game.
phosphor112
Banned
This fucker didn't play the game and VB should retract the review.
Fuck that noise.
jakonovski
Member
I'm pretty sure that it's because the game is a long, slow burn (in good and bad), and game reviewers as a group increasingly want games that are quick and easily digestable, in and out experiences.
Glass Shark
Banned
Come on, boys, grab your pitchforks! We must protect the Metacritic score! You know, the thing we claim not to care about until a game we like gets a bad one.
(Also, the VentureBeat review was written by a woman. I keep seeing people refer to the reviewer as "he". Just wanted to point that out.)
(Also, the VentureBeat review was written by a woman. I keep seeing people refer to the reviewer as "he". Just wanted to point that out.)
Risk Breaker
Member
Even IGN said this after the FM 2/10 disaster:
Exactly the problem in venturebeat review. Only, they didn't like the game from the start and didn't even bother to see why.
Exactly the problem in venturebeat review. Only, they didn't like the game from the start and didn't even bother to see why.
Can Crusher
Banned
Pretty damning. I guess I'm not buying Gran Turismo, again. They really need to work on the sense of speed, the sound and the damn physics.
Polyphony is dropping the ball with this franchise, I hope they get their heads of their ass on PS4 and realize this shit isn't supposed to be mainly a car collecting game.
75 is being crucified??? That's a good score and just shy of forza 5, I bet that in your opinion that wasn't being crucified?
doesn't matter who wrote it really.
Back in the days, when printed magazines were still a thing, I remember most of them had the main article typically written by a journalist, and then there were some short paragraphs written by others, popping up elsewhere in the review page(s), even from those who hated the entire genre the game belonged to.
Of course hearing opinions from all perspectives is a good thing, but ffs main review has to be written by someone who enjoys the genre and knows what he is talking about. What's the point of writing/reading a review of a hard metal album when the reviewer only loves rap?
PS3 only
I'm not defending some amorphous, all encompassing "press." Rather, I was defending one reviewers take, not even the whole review itself. I don't subscribe to the notion that GAMES JOURNALISM is broken, or really is fucked in the way you seem to (I actually find takes like the concept behind the VB review good for videogames as a whole). Instead, I just find the reviews generally awful as written pieces.
I think a review should be able to stand alone as a written piece, and entertain me for the few minutes it takes me to read it. Most are just awful, no more than a checklist in paragraph form, going sometimes into too much detail that doesn't give me a good sense of the reviewer's overall personal reaction to the game.
What if it were a super hot chick giving you anal though? I didn't know being heterosexual meant you couldn't enjoy it
I understand your point, but obviously that review isn't for you if you have experience with racing, and the fact that the person doesn't have experience doesn't mean they can't be impressed with a racing game either. Hey, at least he was honest, which is the best we can ask for.
It doesn't look like that at all from the perspective of someone who loves night racing and weather effects while driving. Also, this is on PS3, so we don't have to waste money on a next-gen console. Higher score ≠ better game. They are no doubt both good, but it isn't a competition. Racing fans will get both if they have both consoles. Those that are happy with just the one console will get the one game. Simple as that, they are exclusives and aren't in direct competition.
Oh yeah, and Bathurst (on current gen) and more tracks and more cars. I know what the better game is for me. Just my opinion.
Risk Breaker
Member
The way it should be
This fucker didn't play the game and VB should retract the review.
Fuck that noise.
Wow, this is embarrasing.
I'd read that review
IISANDERII
Member
Perhaps the first time ever that a 9/10 review has me deciding to not buy the game.
I don't give a lick a bout the NFL. Didn't grow up in the states, don't understand why the superbowl is so popular. what use would my nfl madden review serve you if i don't at least look up what its rules are and what its about?
I think a reviewer needs to have a appreciation for the type of game he is reviewing, just as reviewers of other products do.
You don't review a car like a boat.
Sinks like a stone. 7.5/10.
Other than that I agree with your point that every reviewer does not need to be an expert, but they need to understand what they are reviewing. If not, you end up with stuff like that IGN Football Manager review.
phosphor112
Banned
By the sound of the microtransaction thread, you made up your mind before that review. I'm sure you made up your mind before that as well.
Of course, it's always fun to try to sound like you had a genuine interest.
Risk Breaker
Member
Why? What would you expect to learn from such a review? That someone who doesn't like metal... doesn't like metal? Wow.
GT6
Salvor.Hardin
Banned
How so? The review is full of praise.
phosphor112
Banned
GT6 is an upgrade in every way to GT5. GT5 would only piss you off as it's navigation is extremely slow, and the game has a lot of flaws in itself.
Check his post history. He was dumping on GT6 as much as he could in previous threads.
If we're talkin about collision physics sure.
I'd hope that a review would be more than just conclusions, and that the reviewer would lay out his arguments and experiences in a readable, thought provoking fashion.
Reviews are more (or should be more) than the conclusion at the end.
I think it's all ok, if the reviewer just states his stance on the matter clearly enough, like that Venture Beat guy did.
It tells you right away, that the target audience for the review is people like him. It's an entirely different thing if the reviewer has no clue, but pretends he does.
Parakeetman
No one wants a throne you've been sitting on!
But you need to agree that the article was a pretty poor piece and really provides the reader with nothing useful besides pointing out the writer obviously has no idea what they are talking about.
See its like a debate with various parties involved. They may not all agree with eachother, but at least every one of them has an understanding of the subject at hand. Now that is what I would call useful opposing views from different backgrounds.
This on the other hand was just all around bad. :/
Risk Breaker
Member
Yeah, well, what I learnt from venturebeat's review is that they don't like cars, they don't know shit about cars, they are terrible at driving in games, they don't care about racing games and they don't like racing games unless they play themselves and hold your hand, which is not the case with GT6. Which is, basically, all the same thing: they absolutely dislike the genre. What does that do for someone who is interested in the game and wants to know about what it does and how it works?
And yet Metacritic is some all powerful overseeing eye that publishers feel they must strive to look good for.
It probably is the most ridiculous review I've read, and that's saying a lot.
Next-time he will review a flight simulator or something and complain about how the game doesn't explain how an airscrew works.
Risk Breaker
Member
opticalmace
Member
Some of those reviews are downright embarrassing.
Thanks both of you, good to know. Dont get why the reviews are so mediocre if it is indeed an upgrade over GT5 (which from what little I have played, seemed really great).
SmashN'Grab
Member
None of these reviews really surprise me, except for that VentureBeat one I suppose (I get what they were going for, but it's still quite odd).
I think the Digital Foundry teardown on this will be far more interesting than any review could be. Looking forward to that, hopefully this weekend.
I think the Digital Foundry teardown on this will be far more interesting than any review could be. Looking forward to that, hopefully this weekend.