GT6 Review Thread

[bashfulboson]

http://www.gamereactor.es/analisis/79324/Gran Turismo 6/?page=3

5/10

Highlights:

confusing menus

Poor course maker

drops in framerate at 15fps

...


Okay, I've had enough with the analysis.

I'm going back to play I see reading these things is a waste of time

There are always some media which tries to diminish big title like GT, so that they can feel "bigger"

 

[Lain]

If you ignore some of the laughable reviews on Metacritic, the average probably goes up to around 8.

The NowGamer (never heard of 'em) review states it's not a worthy upgrade to GT5 (I'd say the much snappier load times alone make this a worthy upgrade), then proceeds to give it a 7/10 score despite the average of their category scores (graphics, sound, gameplay, longevity) equaling 8.125.

VideoGamer's (ditto) review, the worst of the few that I've read, complains about it being on a now-outdated console, nitpicks non-issues with the menu system and ultimately concludes that GT6's new menu isn't streamlined but is in fact "convoluted" like GT5's, and constantly laments the apparent fact that GT6 has 101 Mazdas in its car roster. He also complains about the barren landscapes, presumably preferring them to look like NFS Shift's circus tracks. He ends his review by stating "Played for 11 hours. Drove quite a few Mazdas.". Wow, what a review.

 

[bashfulboson]

Really? perhaps it's only your opinion
GT6 still has the best graphics in racing games I think, it's much natural than Forza 5
not to mention the revolutionary time weather changing system that nobody else can
are these features also falling behind according to your logic?
and sound......I own a subaru sti, GT5 sounds just like it
exaggerated sound effect might be more attractive but it's certainly not real

If you ignore some of the laughable reviews on Metacritic, the average probably goes up to around 8.

The NowGamer (never heard of 'em) review states it's not a worthy upgrade to GT5 (I'd say the much snappier load times alone make this a worthy upgrade), then proceeds to give it a 7/10 score despite the average of their category scores (graphics, sound, gameplay, longevity) equaling 8.125.

VideoGamer's (ditto) review, the worst of the few that I've read, complains about it being on a now-outdated console, nitpicks non-issues with the menu system and ultimately concludes that GT6's new menu isn't streamlined but is in fact "convoluted" like GT5's, and constantly laments the apparent fact that GT6 has 101 Mazdas in its car roster. He also complains about the barren landscapes, presumably preferring them to look like NFS Shift's circus tracks. He ends his review by stating "Played for 11 hours. Drove quite a few Mazdas.". Wow, what a review.

never really trust Metacritic since there are too many unheared medias, it is so easy to decrease the score these days

 

[Lain]

Reviewers jobs are to let people know the good and BAD, stop whining over reviews that have very legitimate gripes that we all know exist. GT is falling behind the times.

Sorry, but some of these reviews have gripes that are just plain absurd.

The VideoGamer review that I mentioned earlier calls GT6's menus convoluted. Why? Because apparently he thinks the "Exit" option should be labeled "Continue" instead, and dislikes how it's all the way at the end of the menu despite the fact that you can get to it instantly by pressing circle and that it's been this way since GT3. And that's literally the only reason he provides to support his claim of GT6's menus being convoluted.

And that 5/10 review is just as bad, if not worse. 15 FPS? I've not once noticed a framerate drop yet, other than once when I got a trophy for getting a lap time where the millisecond digits were all the same. Confusing menu? It really isn't. Probably the simplest menu system GT's ever had. Bad course maker? Wasn't aware the course maker was available yet. Seriously, they must've accidentally reviewed GT5 by mistake.

 

[UkHardcore23]

it's funny how they gave 95 to GTA5
and only 80 for GT6
couldn't it be more obvious?
GT fans will buy despite the review
because we know what a good driving simulator is than these biased medias do

GTA 5 was amazing...Not quite sure what your point is here and what GTA has to do with GT?

 

[Louie_Schumii]

I hope the reviews that are coming out are based on the day one v1.01 update and not from weeks ago due to the media embargo still being in place.

 

[ildd]

Offtopic- GTA5 was a 10/10 for the 1st 2 days, but after playing without out outside of Story mode its like an 8.5


Has Eurogamer reviewed gt6 yet?

 

[Raitziger]

http://ap.ign.com/en/review/10437/gran-turismo-6-review
IGN really hate Gran Turismo because Yamaguchi decided not to pay them money in order to get higher score
These days medias like IGN and Gamespot are no longer fair
They would only give high score for those who pleased them
I only care for Inside SimRacing review because they know what they talked about
IGN, R.I.P

IGN was very well written review. I really liked that finally one major gaming review site has balls to hate sound modelling of GT!! Well done IGN. I hope PD gets the message.

 

[bashfulboson]

GTA 5 was amazing...Not quite sure what your point is here and what GTA has to do with GT?

well....they are totally different
GTA5 is surely decent game, but GT6 is a driving simulator rather than a racing game like NFS or Forza
GT series had been not so amusing and "fun" to most gamers except who loves cars.
So they are reviewing GTA5 as a "game"
and I think they made a mistake to review GT6 as a "game" as well
fun factor is important for a game
but GT had never meant to be "fun"
that's where those low rating review come from, they don't think GT6 is "fun" to them

Sorry, but some of these reviews have gripes that are just plain absurd.

The VideoGamer review that I mentioned earlier calls GT6's menus convoluted. Why? Because apparently he thinks the "Exit" option should be labeled "Continue" instead, and dislikes how it's all the way at the end of the menu despite the fact that you can get to it instantly by pressing circle and that it's been this way since GT3. And that's literally the only reason he provides to support his claim of GT6's menus being convoluted.

And that 5/10 review is just as bad, if not worse. 15 FPS? I've not once noticed a framerate drop yet, other than once when I got a trophy for getting a lap time where the millisecond digits were all the same. Confusing menu? It really isn't. Probably the simplest menu system GT's ever had. Bad course maker? Wasn't aware the course maker was available yet. Seriously, they must've accidentally reviewed GT5 by mistake.

maybe they gave it a bad rating in purpose

 

[G.T.Ace]

Offtopic- GTA5 was a 10/10 for the 1st 2 days, but after playing without out outside of Story mode its like an 8.5


Has Eurogamer reviewed gt6 yet?

Yes and they gave it a 9 out of 10, because the reviewer knew what he was doing.

 

[KKHN]

Italian Media

Everyeye.it 8.8
http://www.everyeye.it/ps3/articoli/gran-turismo-6_recensione_21244

Spaziogames 7.5
http://www.spaziogames.it/recensioni_videogiochi/console_playstation_ps3/15551/gran-turismo-6.aspx

GamesVillage 8.8
http://www.gamesvillage.it/review/59425/gran-turismo-6-gt6-recensione.html

Multiplayer.it 9
http://multiplayer.it/giochi/gran-turismo-6-per-ps3.html

Eurogamer.it 8
http://www.eurogamer.it/articles/2013-12-06-gran-turismo-gt-6-review-recensione_3

 

[ildd]

I am expecting an average of 8.1/10. I'm not counting the 5/10 reviews because those are completely ridiculous. "I couldn't driev teh bugatti venom after 30 minutes, dis game sux"

 

[loki993]

Really? perhaps it's only your opinion
GT6 still has the best graphics in racing games I think, it's much natural than Forza 5
not to mention the revolutionary time weather changing system that nobody else can
are these features also falling behind according to your logic?
and sound......I own a subaru sti, GT5 sounds just like it
exaggerated sound effect might be more attractive but it's certainly not real

The reviews should be low because there are legacy issues in the game that have gone unfixed and/or basically not even addressed since the beginning.

You highlight one car for the sound...the sound has always been an issue in this game and its hasnt been only a few people talking about it...jump in something with a V8 that's not Japanese and see how it sounds...

Direct graphics comparisons have been made to Forza 5 and Forza beats it in nearly everything...which to be honest it should its on a next gen system with orders of magnitude better graphics capabilities...they get a pass on that its not a fair fight


I think the IGN review summed it up the best.....Tons of tracks, Tons of cars and great handling...but the sound is still terrible....the AI is still bad, the car list is bloated, tired and dated......same performance customization as previous iterations, no livery editor etc etc......

For me the sound is the most telling though.....for one I feel personally that sound is as important as graphics for an immersive experience...so if that's off the game is already not right. I've dealt with it up to this point hoping they would fix it and tried to let the games other great qualities outweigh it.....one of 2 things are obvious now though...one they don't see it as an issue, which is a problem because everyone else sure does..or 2 they do but refuse to do anything about it. Whatever the reason they are obviously not fixing it, they have had 6 games and 3 different consoles to address it and they haven't....

They keep making the same game with better graphics and some more tracks and fail to address core complaints of the game that have been there since nearly the beginning....GT5 was basically the last hope for me...I was hoping some of it would have been addressed in 6 and it obviously hasn't....and most of all the game has just gotten boring....so based on what I'm seeing in the reviews this game is a pass for me.....

 

[Zevious Z]

Yes and they gave it a 9 out of 10, because the reviewer knew what he was doing.

so just for future reference, a positive review = somebody who knew what he was doing, and a less than positive review = some hack gamer who doesn't have a clue. Got it.

 

[eSZee]

This thread is hilarious.

 

[warp9engage]

The IGN review pretty much addressed most of the important concerns. I liked that review and the 8/10 is fair in my opinion. The game is good at the core but has flaws that prevent it from being excellent. You could say it's a Ferrari with some dents and scrapes in it.

 

[carracerptp]

I figured this game would be getting 60-70s on reviews so 70s and 80s and 90s are being kind.

I would give it a 80 now then wait for the January patch, and I'm a fan.

 

[G.T.Ace]

so just for future reference, a positive review = somebody who knew what he was doing, and a less than positive review = some hack gamer who doesn't have a clue. Got it.

Are you only reading the scores, or the actual articles?
Some of them even admit that they can't drive and constantly crash etc.
The guy from Eurogamer made a really good review, mentioning in-depth physics stuff and so on.

EDIT: By the way, I can understand an 8, but scores like 4 of 10, or 65 of 100 are pure nonesense.

 

[tinram]

so just for future reference, a positive review = somebody who knew what he was doing, and a less than positive review = some hack gamer who doesn't have a clue. Got it.

I'm pretty sure your being sarcastic but pretty much that's the way it is.

 

[Imari]

This thread is hilarious.

I agree.

I think the IGN review for GT5 was spot on, and people whinged about it then too. 10/10 sim, 5/10 game. I think they hit the nail on the head for GT6. The game is unsurpassed in the amount of content it provides, and the simulation is good (although no longer best in class), but it all other areas it's somewhere between acceptable and didn't-people-stop-doing-this-ten-years-ago?

Particularly as it stands now, it's missing features that were in launch spec GT5, and it actually adds very little beyond streamlining a lot of the more egregious usability issues of GT6. They're reviewing what the game is right now, not what it will be in a year if all the patches come out. I think if anything people are being fairly generous giving it 9s. It's certainly not a 9/10 game, although it is certainly an 8 just for content if nothing else.

I'm seeing a lot of people raging because their favourite franchise didn't get 10/10s, when it in no way deserves them.

 

[gambleboyen]

Even if GT got 82, there's no linear reason that GT6 should get 90 because it's better.

Are the improvements enough to warrant another $50?

Should three years of development produce something motre than this?

So far I'm thinking the improvements are minimal, it's like GT 5.5

 

[Lain]

I agree.

I think the IGN review for GT5 was spot on, and people whinged about it then too. 10/10 sim, 5/10 game. I think they hit the nail on the head for GT6. The game is unsurpassed in the amount of content it provides, and the simulation is good (although no longer best in class), but it all other areas it's somewhere between acceptable and didn't-people-stop-doing-this-ten-years-ago?

Particularly as it stands now, it's missing features that were in launch spec GT5, and it actually adds very little beyond streamlining a lot of the more egregious usability issues of GT6. They're reviewing what the game is right now, not what it will be in a year if all the patches come out. I think if anything people are being fairly generous giving it 9s. It's certainly not a 9/10 game, although it is certainly an 8 just for content if nothing else.

I'm seeing a lot of people raging because their favourite franchise didn't get 10/10s, when it in no way deserves them.

IGN's review is spot-on. I don't see a lot of people raging about IGN's review, or arguing that GT6 is a perfect game deserving of a 10.

 

[G.T.Ace]

The review from IGN is okay indeed, not agreeing with every single world, but he voiced his opinion and that's all right.

 

[Lain]

I think IGN's review is the best critical review and that Eurogamer's review is the best on the more forgiving end of the spectrum, which is the end I find myself leaning to.

 

[Lawndart]

If you ignore some of the laughable reviews on Metacritic, the average probably goes up to around 8.

The NowGamer (never heard of 'em) review states it's not a worthy upgrade to GT5 (I'd say the much snappier load times alone make this a worthy upgrade), then proceeds to give it a 7/10 score despite the average of their category scores (graphics, sound, gameplay, longevity) equaling 8.125.

VideoGamer's (ditto) review, the worst of the few that I've read, complains about it being on a now-outdated console, nitpicks non-issues with the menu system and ultimately concludes that GT6's new menu isn't streamlined but is in fact "convoluted" like GT5's, and constantly laments the apparent fact that GT6 has 101 Mazdas in its car roster. He also complains about the barren landscapes, presumably preferring them to look like NFS Shift's circus tracks. He ends his review by stating "Played for 11 hours. Drove quite a few Mazdas.". Wow, what a review.

There are a couple factors or stigmas that will be hard to overcome... One being the reviewers are all in next gen so their heads are recalibrated to gfx. Most reviews seem to be on a 5 point scale so far so that messes up the average, and GT didn't make any leaps in the largest areas of feedback like audio and campaign structure.

But some of the reputable outfits saw past some of this and did give a good review.

 

[TokoTurismo]

IGN's review is spot-on. I don't see a lot of people raging about IGN's review, or arguing that GT6 is a perfect game deserving of a 10.

Don't you just really hate it when others assumes this and that about others who're fans of certain series are raging? It's so annoying. Nobody is saying "Oh IGN sucks, GT6 should have gotten a 10/10". Sure I had a slight issue with it but got over it thanks to others saying 8/10 really is fair and the IGN guy voicing his opinion.

I like some review scores so far, I hope GT6 makes it to 80.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

The high scoring reviews are not rushed either??? Surely it works both ways here.

Speaking of things working both ways: folks are complaining that reviewers "only" played a game 11 hours before writing a review, but have no qualms with members here announcing GT6 the best GT ever a mere hour or so into play. Wha?!

I expect metacritic to settle around high 70's or very low 80's. That's still not a bad score, people.

 

[avens]

Jalopnik's Travis Okulski review (no score, described as 'fantastically infuriating'):
http://jalopnik.com/gran-turismo-6-is-fantastic-infuriating-fantastically-1476092800

 

[G.T.Ace]

See, this is what I mean with nonesense in reviews:

It doesn't even look good for a PS2.

I think someone needs to play some PS2 again.

EDIT: Fair article though, but things like that are getting on my nerves.
The cars don't look like from 1998, not even the Alto does.

 

[hyyperactive]

(I'd say the much snappier load times alone make this a worthy upgrade)

LOL wow really? You'd buy gt6 for 60€ just for snappier menus?