I mean it’s one thing to disagree and debate on the topic… but just to leave little emoji’s like that on all post you don’t agree on and not even comment is weird in my opinion, but all within the rules I guess.😆You leave poop reacts on any comment that has anything good to say about the game nobody's surprised you think it's biased
I paid £80 for a beautiful but (yet again) flawed racing game!This is the discussion thread for an article on GTPlanet:
Gran Turismo 7 Review: Return of the King
As it celebrates its 25th anniversary, the Gran Turismo franchise finds itself in a bit of an odd position. After a somewhat forgettable Gran Turismo 6 and a rebellious Gran Turismo Sport, a lot of critics have claimed that despite strong sales, the series had lost its way, turning away from many of the founding principles that made it so popular in the first place...
And change the Multiplayer review score 🤣@Jordan Please update the review and mention microtransaction-fraud to get special cars.
Its a shame what Sony/PD is doing here.
And they betrayed all reviewers and customers by revealing it AFTER the launch.
Daaamn, that was generous by me. Since then I’ve deleted the game, and almost threw up thinking about Kaz.Not that anyone cares, but my final score is 5/10.
There are things I absolutely love, but the game on a whole is fundamentally broken because of micro transactions. Especially considering the core element is to collect cars.
I almost feel like I now have two jobs. One where I earn real money and one where I earn credits in GT7.
Boy, this line sure aged like milk.Frankly, I have never fully understood the controversy around connectivity requirements. To be clear, I have a lot of sympathy for those who do not have access to reliable connections. I have no doubt it is a massive headache and would make the game difficult, if not impossible, to enjoy. While it certainly deserves a mention for anyone reading whom it might be an issue, I don't see it as a major headline and would never consider it something that would affect a game's reviewed score.
It did, if you completely ignore the context or point that I was making.Boy, this line sure aged like milk.
The issue is that anyone and their mother could have realized that making an online only game out of an ostensibly single player experience was a bad idea, and that it would behoove a reviewer to point it out and hold it against a game because it wouldn't take much for everyone to have their game be turned into a glorified paperweight. It was a worry in GT Sport too, but it was insulated by the fact that it was a competitive game first off, and a single player campaign bolted onto it later. But in a game designed and advertised as a return to a traditional single player experience? Absolutely, games should be taken to task, negatively, for forcing players to play it in an always online setting when there is little reason to do it other then (as we have a clearer understanding now) to force people to always have the pall of micro-transactions hanging around every action that requires spending of credits.It did, if you completely ignore the context or point that I was making.
A lot of things turn into "glorified paper weights" if they don't have services or infrastructure to back them up. This is a review for a video game, not a ventilator.The issue is that anyone and their mother could have realized that making an online only game out of an ostensibly single player experience was a bad idea, and that it would behoove a reviewer to point it out and hold it against a game because it wouldn't take much for everyone to have their game be turned into a glorified paperweight. It was a worry in GT Sport too, but it was insulated by the fact that it was a competitive game first off, and a single player campaign bolted onto it later. But in a game designed and advertised as a return to a traditional single player experience? Absolutely, games should be taken to task, negatively, for forcing players to play it in an always online setting when there is little reason to do it other then (as we have a clearer understanding now) to force people to always have the pall of micro-transactions hanging around every action that requires spending of credits.
It just so happened that it took all of two weeks and a bit to realize what would transpire that was crystal clear even going back to GT Sport, and is why I brought the comment back up again now.
Huh. Seems strange then that I can go buy a PS3, buy a copy of GT5 and 6, and be able to play the majority of their features even though online servers have been shut down. Not so with GT Sport and potentially 7 - and the only reason why I have this outlook is because we have prior history of what (and more specifically, how fast) Polyphony shuts down server access in previous games. Doesn't exactly bode well for a game that was, as mentioned time and time again, designed around a single player element to the point where online was literally not expanded upon until right before launch as a 'oh hey, this is here too' element. Not exactly that great to have a person's $120 or however much 25th Anniversary physical copy be an effective paperweight because Polyphony decided that always online DRM was a good idea.A lot of things turn into "glorified paper weights" if they don't have services or infrastructure to back them up.
Then what is it then? It sure doesn't seem like the always online requirement is to prevent cheating (more so a knock on effect and something Polyphony can point to as a potential reason even though the locked down nature of the PS4 and 5, and the competitive nature of Sport Mode means that most skill comes down to race-craft and tuning more so then straight line speed that a hybrid'd car ala GT5 could provide) and considering how utterly rampant micro-transactions, and the shoving of those MTX's are in the game at the moment, it sure isn't hard to connect the dots to what the potential likely outcome and narrative is.You are connecting a lot of dots in an effort to construct a conspiratorial and speculative narrative.
I'd say it is very important for consumers to know why there is a connectivity requirement, especially if there is a very clear statement, from the developer, before launch, that the game was going to be single player focused. Especially when, as like so many problems with the game at the moment, most of that 'why' eventually loops back around to the in game economy and the micro-transactions.For the consumer, it doesn't really matter why the game has a connectivity requirement, they just need to know that it has one.
Because the game is designed to push them with the stingy race pay outs. $200 or 20 hours minimum of race time to buy 1 car.I really don't understand why people are so mad about the Micro Transactions.
It's there if someone don't wan't to play the game, but wan't to shortcut gettings cars, so what.
I will never used it, but the fact that is there don't brake anything for me
Only if you wanted to download each car and/or track every race. Which isn't a good idea, so everything does still need to be installed to the console storage.Shouldn't it have a much smaller footprint because it's always online?
no lolIs there anything that prohibits them from making it to where you can play your single player custom races without being online?
It is the combination of outrageously expensive credits for real money with very stingy in-game economy and limited content which causes the outrage. People are pissed off they payed 70 pop for a game and then have to grind 20 hours to get the car they want.I really don't understand why people are so mad about the Micro Transactions.
It's there if someone don't wan't to play the game, but wan't to shortcut gettings cars, so what.
I will never used it, but the fact that is there don't brake anything for me
Go earn enough credits to buy the McLaren F1 before it leaves the Legends dealerships, come back and tell us how you did it.I really don't understand why people are so mad about the Micro Transactions.
It's there if someone don't wan't to play the game, but wan't to shortcut gettings cars, so what.
I will never used it, but the fact that is there don't brake anything for me
Maybe you are not supposed to buy one of the most expensive car in the game, 14 days after launch. I don't see this as a bad thing, but as a good thing. We allready know that more events will be added later, and you build up economy over time.Go earn enough credits to buy the McLaren F1 before it leaves the Legends dealerships, come back and tell us how you did it.
That experience should answer your question as to why many consider the economy to be broken.
Then why on earth did PD add it into the rotation for the Legendary Car Dealership (along with the 917k at Cr.18m)?Maybe you are not supposed to buy one of the most expensive car in the game, 14 days after launch. I don't see this as a bad thing, but as a good thing.
Yet PD can't tell us what they are and actively put the in game economy back with the last updates.We allready know that more events will be added later, and you build up economy over time.
I don't like games, to be easy, and in my opinion some kind of grind is okay , if you could get all the best cars in 2 weeks, the game in my opinion would have been a failure, but that's just my personal preference.Yet PD can't tell us what they are and actively put the in game economy back with the last updates.
You launch a game with a solid and considered economy and then you build on it, the only time you should get a pass for not doing so is if it's a free to play title (and most of them are a pox on gaming) or in early access. GT 7 has neither of those excuses.
There is a difference between difficulty and just being time consuming though.I don't like games, to be easy, and in my opinion some kind of grind is okay