Why I think GT6 was liked by reviewers, but hated by (some) fans

[avens]

I think it comes down to how fans are in general. The matter isn't about the GT series in particular.


If you want the long story, lets put an example. If you were to visit only store -as you are a fan of that one in particular- you'd notice that its paint is crumbling apart and that the store prices are climbing. Then you'd suggest some changes and if there are no improvements then you'd complain, since you've seen the decaying of the store and you care about it. Also you'd notice and praise its best features. On the other hand, if you weren't emotionally attached to one store and visited more than one then you either wouldn't notice those defects or wouldn't care about them enough to complain -as you could just visit another-, so no complaints issued and would rate particular stores objectively.

What reviewers and casual gamers do is playing lots of games inside a genre, just like visiting different stores, so if they don't like something they try some alternative, plus are less likely to find issues of particular games since they stay playing one title for little time. Instead the GT players only visit one store, so they really care about it and when some shortcoming is found (and they will since they play several hours a day) rather than trying some other game what they will do is complain.

This happens to all gaming franchises. Forza series' fans complain about it as hard as the GT series fans do, because they are attached to it and focus on the smallest of things. That's what fans do: complain complain complain.

With that said, lets be concrete. Naturally fans of the GT series notice way more shortcoming than what a reviewer does (1) and they will complain about that (2), because that's what fans do in everything.

The only other thing fans do (besides complaining) is adoring their idol to absurd extents, as they have rose tinted glasses. We've seen that many times here, across many games and users (remember the 'tears of joy and manliness'? the 'will make your hats fall off' line?).

There's polar opposites approaches within fans of something, but what both share is being emotional about the matter. As such, fans will either destroy or praise a game, giving it a 6 or a 10, while a reviewer will be more impartial and will tend to like the product if it's rather nice, giving the game the 8 it deserves.

As you can see this applies to everything in life, not only to the GT series. Tag Heuer on the 2000s has been objectively awful but it still has praising fans you know and it's just best to try everything (every store).


Finally, a personal opinion as a fan that can see the whole picture. My favorite game of the series is GT4, but I know the objectively best is GT6. Given the chance I'd play GT4, but would recommend GT6 to a friend. On that note I can't say GT6 is the best current racing game there is, because it is not and likely it's not on the podium, but I quite enjoyed some cars and tracks of it.

 

[Wolfe]

@Saidur_Ali -- If it's anything to you what I think of it, the first author in mister dog's link seemed to me like a guy who knows his racing games. It was a well-written review and his description of the physics/handling reminded me of my own impressions of the other Gran Turismo games.

It doesn't really matter what I think, though, because while borrowing my sister's PS3 and trying a rental copy of GT6 is on my to-do list (if only for that moon mission), I don't have any short-term plans to get a PS3 of my own.

 

[Imari]

You can even go further back and give the award to FM3 if you like.

Could do, but the further back we go the more games were judged by criteria that are not exactly the same as the ones we'd judge them by now. GT3 was an unbelievably amazing game for it's time, and it's still decent now but I wouldn't claim that it's at the top of the genre even though it has the highest metascore.

I think FM4 is recent enough that it's largely being judged by the same criteria as GT6. FM5 may be being held to a different standard because it's on a new system, but it's probably much the same as well.

To be honest, I still think that the two games to beat in that particular "racing game of many cars and modifications" genre are GT5 and FM4. If anyone makes a game that's outright better than both of those, they're onto a winner. While both GT6 and FM5 have areas in which they're better, I don't think either of them have managed to be complete slam dunks, in the way that say GT4 was over it's predecessors.

 

[Tornado]

misterdog for example who posted the review again has if I remember correctly never even played the game and going by that reviewer, they probably barely played it and made up things while trying to look like a valid critic and in the end in my opinion made their agendas are quite clear. I'm not surprised by your response to my post though, it is expected but I find amusing. It seems wolfe has liked that post of review misterdog linked who also might not have ever played GT6 so it is important they don't get mislead by such a bad reviewer hence me putting my opinion out there for this review again.

Is this actually English? Which person did what? Who are we supposed to be shaming? You changed subjects so many times that I'm not sure if we're supposed to yell at Wolfe for liking a post, mister dog for linking a review or the reviewers (it was two reviewers by the way. Did you actually read it?) for writing it. Pretty sure the answer to that doesn't explain what was wrong with the review, though.



One more thing:

Is this how you thought it might be a good example of a good review as it suited your agenda and my post didn't?

I'll make this extra clear for you, just so you don't get the impression you can throw this card around without blowback. Regardless of how you want to tar Wolfe or mister dog, I have played GT6. I've made posts longer than that entire review about specific flaws I've found with GT6. Problems with the career structure. Problems with the licence testing. Problem with the car unlock philosophy. Problems with the menu design. Problems with the online play. Problems with the AI usage and race structure. All of these are things that PD GT6 changed from GT5, but GT6 didn't improve from GT5 or even are worse than GT5 was when support was dropped for it. I based these judgements on a couple dozen hours put into the game before abandoning it entirely to go back to GT5 and GT2.
That review is the only one from a regular review site I saw when the game was new that I feel touches upon the problems GT6 had rather than feel like a generic AAA game review with keywords inserted and some measured criticism for good measure. That review fit my "agenda" because it was a reasonable reflection of my own, actual experiences with the game in spite of the odd things it talked about. Your post didn't fit my "agenda" because it was disingenuous enough to completely dismiss the entire review without even bothering to give the slightest justification. "Why don't you read it" isn't reasoning; and I already outlined my thoughts on the review which are the same as they were when the review was new and other people were wondering the same thing about the facts that were off from the game that went on sale.


So if you're going to wave around how the review was so objectively poor that it shouldn't have tarred GT6's Metacritic score without actually responding to any of the things brought up in it against GT6 that other people in this thread have also talked about, you for damn sure better at least explain the faults that apparently invalidate the whole thing as a piece of criticism. Casting blame at people like Wolfe or mister dog for liking the review because of confusingly worded allusions to their posting history doesn't take the spotlight off your initial statement; and probably isn't a box you should be opening in the first place.

 

[Shirrako]

GT6 is the best Gran Turismo after GT4 for me.

But I can't help but realise that the franchise needs something completely new to keeps fans happy. GT7 on PS4 will most likely focus on adding those new features.

 

[avens]

Since you are discussing about the ever tedious Forza against GT topic, it seems like this time around both games will clash and on the same gen console.

No excuses this time for any of those too (GT about PS3's power, Forza about refreshing the content).

 

[Jbaffoh]

I haven't read the whole thread, but a couple of things stand out:

1: The missing features were advertised as being present in the game when preorders were solicited. Only the fanboys who hang on Kaz's every word knew they would not arrive in December 2013. That is an epic failure, and PD does not somehow gain truth in advertising just because Rockstar also failed in some respects.

2: Since when is "5" ok? In US schools, anything below a 6 is usually a failure. "Ok" falls in the range of 7.0-7.9.

People were promised features that were not in the box. People paid for those features, and many are still not here. And, the one major feature that did arrive (online community), is ill thought out and poorly implemented crap, which is vitually unuseable for it's stated purpose.

Finally, the OP rant could use some paragraph breaks and organization to make it readable.

 

[Downhill Dino]

Might I at least ask what the apparent huge problem with the community feature is?

 

[Jbaffoh]

Might I at least ask what the apparent huge problem with the community feature is?

Ask the guys who have tried to organize multiple races in one meeting like a typical race day. You can't. That's just one example. Even single club events are cumbersome to get your times entered, and the leaderboard is nothing but a series of messages in chronological order instead a listing of times. There are many more complaints expressed by race organizers. Finally, compare it to GT5.

 

[Downhill Dino]

I don't see much wrong with it, it could be better but not getting at what you're saying. I see some others aren't having much difficulties with it, or complaints. Perhaps they're just not speaking about it.

Finally, compare it to GT5.

GT5's online kind of sucks in comparison. Unless you're trying to count Shuffle racing or something.

 

[jimipitbull]

Problem with the car unlock philosophy.

Can you please elaborate further on the problem with GT6 car unlock philosophy?

 

[Jbaffoh]

I don't see much wrong with it, it could be better but not getting at what you're saying. I see some others aren't having much difficulties with it, or complaints. Perhaps they're just not speaking about it.



GT5's online kind of sucks in comparison. Unless you're trying to count Shuffle racing or something.

We seem to be talking about two separate things. I'm talking about the absurd limitations of the online community features that came in 1.14, not the online race rooms we've had forever.

 

[Tornado]

Can you please elaborate further on the problem with GT6 car unlock philosophy?

Nope. Anything else?

 

[Downhill Dino]

We seem to be talking about two separate things. I'm talking about the absurd limitations of the online community features that came in 1.14, not the online race rooms we've had forever.

Maybe, I'm kind of confused myself.

 

[mister dog]

misterdog for example who posted the review again has if I remember correctly never even played the game and going by that reviewer, they probably barely played it and made up things while trying to look like a valid critic and in the end in my opinion made their agendas are quite clear. I'm not surprised by your response to my post though, it is expected but I find amusing. It seems wolfe has liked that post of review misterdog linked who also might not have ever played GT6 so it is important they don't get mislead by such a bad reviewer hence me putting my opinion out there for this review again.

True i didn't buy it. Been there for the GT series up until 5 though and i enjoyed the physics of the GTA demo before 6 was released, but i've been around long enough to know how PD operates and seeing that apart from the menu design being upgraded somewhat almost none of the series flaws that irritated the hell out of me for years now (such as slow AI, dated career mode, weird grids, chase the darned rabbit, horrible engine sounds, standard cars) weren't touched yet again, i refuse to spend even a dollar on a game that will disappoint me for sure because of those in your face flaws.

Also other racing games do get those things right, so it would feel like a serious downgrade to play "catch the 7 grannies on their way to the supermarket before the laps run out", whilst listening to a hairdryer that is supposed to resemble a V8 all from inside the cosy confinement of a blacked out interior.

The guys in the review i posted mentioned valid criticisms which sound all too familiar to me, as they are almost PD trademarks of bad game design by now.

 

[KinLM]

I found this to have been the best review of GT6 back when it was released, by 2 dudes that actually know their racing games 👍:

http://www.gamereactor.eu/articles/101974/Gran Turismo 6: One Game, Two Verdicts/?page=1

You must be joking.

Those were the worst reviews that I have read in a long time.

It is clear that they spent about 5 minutes playing the game. I'm not trying to say GT6 deserves all positives, but some of the things they say simply aren't true. Evidence:

Are these bozos even playing GT6?! "Not possible for me to downgrade my cars again" oh seriously he must be joking.

 

[Jbaffoh]

You must be joking.

Those were the worst reviews that I have read in a long time.

It is clear that they spent about 5 minutes playing the game. I'm not trying to say GT6 deserves all positives, but some of the things they say simply aren't true. Evidence:View attachment 291733
Are these bozos even playing GT6?! "Not possible for me to downgrade my cars again" oh seriously he must be joking.

Chassis rigidity.
Oil changes require miles to undo.
The rest is BS.

 

[mister dog]

You must be joking.

Nope you can hammer on the inconsistencies and comfortably ignore all the valid points they do raise, but like I said the review code they had differed from the final version and I believe this review was translated from Swedish so there might have been some errors due to translation. In any case GT6 is not a game that deserves 90% scores neither, so I can pick out those reviews and call them bs too

 

[ron86]

In any case GT6 is not a game that deserves 90% scores neither, so I can pick out those reviews and call them bs too

Thats your opinion. In my opinion it deserves 95%

Physics, graphics, amount of cars an tracks - thats enough to be better than all other racing games, atleast for me!

And about that gamereactor review..

"When Kazunori Yamauchi finally opened up about Gran Turismo 6, one of the first things he mentioned was that the new title would include a brand new physics system, with far greater precision that'd better interpret horse-power battles with asphalt. That system seemingly never materialises, and we again have to settle with heavy vehicles, regardless of their described weight, handling like they're filled with cement.

The experience is made all the more frustrating by the fact that the game seems, at times, to abandon the rules of physics. Braking suddenly or colliding rewards you with the unexpected response of your car attempting a deranged techno dance as the car's front rapidly jumps from side to side. It looks strange, has nothing to do with reality, and makes the whole experience completely unpredictable.

Improvements are insanely well-hidden behind the game's automatic help systems which are enabled by default. If you want something that's remotely reminiscent of reality, you should start by turning the game traction control off completely and then gradually do the same with all the other options that make for such an underwhelming experience from the start.

It probably aounds a bit elitist, but unlike several of its competitors such choices are simply necessity in GT6 because the game, by default, is set up completely wrong and offers a sterile driving experience. If you don't tweak, you can use the tracks like a pinball machine without penalty, and gain faster lap times than would be possible if you followed the planned route. No matter what you're driving on - asphalt, gravel or snow - you'll feel no difference in the traction. It's crazy."

The write complete nonsense!

 

[Johnnypenso]

Thats your opinion. In my opinion it deserves 95%

Physics, graphics, amount of cars an tracks - thats enough to be better than all other racing games, atleast for me!

And about that gamereactor review..

"When Kazunori Yamauchi finally opened up about Gran Turismo 6, one of the first things he mentioned was that the new title would include a brand new physics system, with far greater precision that'd better interpret horse-power battles with asphalt. That system seemingly never materialises, and we again have to settle with heavy vehicles, regardless of their described weight, handling like they're filled with cement.

The experience is made all the more frustrating by the fact that the game seems, at times, to abandon the rules of physics. Braking suddenly or colliding rewards you with the unexpected response of your car attempting a deranged techno dance as the car's front rapidly jumps from side to side. It looks strange, has nothing to do with reality, and makes the whole experience completely unpredictable.

Improvements are insanely well-hidden behind the game's automatic help systems which are enabled by default. If you want something that's remotely reminiscent of reality, you should start by turning the game traction control off completely and then gradually do the same with all the other options that make for such an underwhelming experience from the start.

It probably aounds a bit elitist, but unlike several of its competitors such choices are simply necessity in GT6 because the game, by default, is set up completely wrong and offers a sterile driving experience. If you don't tweak, you can use the tracks like a pinball machine without penalty, and gain faster lap times than would be possible if you followed the planned route. No matter what you're driving on - asphalt, gravel or snow - you'll feel no difference in the traction. It's crazy."

The write complete nonsense!

Most of that is accurate for most people IMO.

Turn off aids to get a better driving experience - yes
GT is a sterile driving experience - no flags, no standing starts, chase the rabbit, no intensity or excitement, rinse repeat - yes
Can you bounce off other cars all over the place to work your way through the career to win like a pinball game? - yes there are no penalties for wreckless driving.

The physics part is obviously incorrect - to us hardcore fans. I'm guessing your average punter/couchbound button pusher would be hard pressed to notice the difference.

 

[ron86]

Most of that is accurate for most people IMO.

Turn off aids to get a better driving experience - yes
GT is a sterile driving experience - no flags, no standing starts, chase the rabbit, no intensity or excitement, rinse repeat - yes
Can you bounce off other cars all over the place to work your way through the career to win like a pinball game? - yes there are no penalties for wreckless driving.

The physics part is obviously incorrect - to us hardcore fans. I'm guessing your average punter/couchbound button pusher would be hard pressed to notice the difference.

Whats bad with "Turn off aids to get a better driving experience"?

With "sterile" i think they rather meant the feeling of driving than the races. So they argue about that you have you disable srf and other helps to not have that sterile driving! If there werent those helps possible they would argue that the game is too hard and so on.

And no, you dont do faster lap times by bouncing around the track like a pinball...


Again, complete BS -->

"That system seemingly never materialises, and we again have to settle with heavy vehicles, regardless of their described weight, handling like they're filled with cement."

"Braking suddenly or colliding rewards you with the unexpected response of your car attempting a deranged techno dance as the car's front rapidly jumps from side to side. It looks strange, has nothing to do with reality, and makes the whole experience completely unpredictable"

"No matter what you're driving on - asphalt, gravel or snow - you'll feel no difference in the traction. It's crazy"

 

[NLxAROSA]

The physics part is obviously incorrect - to us hardcore fans. I'm guessing your average punter/couchbound button pusher would be hard pressed to notice the difference.

You have to be a real blind fanboy to ignore all the issues with the physics and cars. From the broken suspension, camber and toe settings to the borked ABS implementation to cars that don't even have the same settings as the real deal and aren't able to match real life speeds (or go way beyond it) to the completely broken FWD physics, it's pretty abysmal down the whole line. I don't understand why people keep saying GT physics are the best on console while there is tons of (scientific) proof that it's complete ****.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Whats bad with "Turn off aids to get a better driving experience"?

With "sterile" i think they rather meant the feeling of driving than the races. So they argue about that you have you disable srf and other helps to not have that sterile driving! If there werent those helps possible they would argue that the game is too hard and so on.

And no, you dont do faster lap times by bouncing around the track like a pinball...

No one said it was bad to turn aids off for a better experience, the assertion was that the article was "complete and utter nonsense". Yes some of it is rubbish, but much of it is also right on the mark and in line with other initial reviews of GT6.

And yes you can be faster overall using other cars as a guardrail. You can go full barrel into corners and Rick O'Shea off other cars to avoid going off track or spinning. Punters do it all the time, visit an open lobby some day.

Its hard to argue that the GT experience is anything but sterile. An arcade style career mode with possibly the worst rubberbanding AI in history, no standing starts, very short races, no damage or tire wear etc. etc.

 

[JerseyDriverSS]

You have to be a real blind fanboy to ignore all the issues with the physics and cars. From the broken suspension, camber and toe settings to the borked ABS implementation to cars that don't even have the same settings as the real deal and aren't able to match real life speeds (or go way beyond it) to the completely broken FWD physics, it's pretty abysmal down the whole line. I don't understand why people keep saying GT physics are the best on console while there is tons of (scientific) proof that it's complete ****.

I have to agree about the physics. I just don't get it. To go fast in GT you have to do everything that would slow you down in real life. The year i made National finals i was amazed at what i had to do to go fast. Being smooth and precise gets you no where. Drive it deep, induce over steer and power out. Not the combination of going fast in the real world, but it sure works in GT.

 

[tomcat66]

For gods sake its a marketing slogan.

I dont think so. There is very much truth in that "slogan".

They say "driving" and NOT racing! Very true. GT was never about racing, because racing is very poor in GT.

"Simulator" and not "game"! For me a game is focused toward fun, emotion and excitment. And GT lacks that a lot. Related to other competitors GT feels "sterile" and "bloodless" (just think about the AI).

Nevertheless I still love GT and play it more than any other "game".

 

[PR3D4TOR]

I dont think so. There is very much truth in that "slogan".

They say "driving" and NOT racing! Very true. GT was never about racing, because racing is very poor in GT.

"Simulator" and not "game"! For me a game is focused toward fun, emotion and excitment. And GT lacks that a lot. Related to other competitors GT feels "sterile" and "bloodless" (just think about the AI).

Nevertheless I still love GT and play it more than any other "game".

PD shifted more focus on fair online racing as the "fun" factor. A-Spec never ends if you include the Seasonal's GTA soon to be FIA etc. Most full on sims don't have a A-Spec at all really. It's got driving games & events of all kinds, love Sierra, its definitely a game on a console, not a sim on a PC.



While its a cleaver slogan, it's really the Driving Simulator Game.

 

[Tornado]

Again, complete BS -->

"Braking suddenly or colliding rewards you with the unexpected response of your car attempting a deranged techno dance as the car's front rapidly jumps from side to side. It looks strange, has nothing to do with reality, and makes the whole experience completely unpredictable"

Normally I'd break these down more thoroughly, but this one was so widely reported on GTP when the game was new and was so easily demonstrable that I'm at a real loss to figure out why you twice singled it out as being BS when it was the most obviously true anecdote in the entire review.

Now, first the obvious. Collision physics in GT have always been atrocious. You simply bounce straight off of whatever you hit a set distance (and no more) as if it was rubberized, after which the physics will go back to work; and if you hit another car it's trajectory would barely be affected so long as it wasn't a head on hit or anything. Cars have always carried so much disproportionate forward momentum that attempting something simple as a low speed PIT maneuver on two similar cars would present itself like you were trying to spin out a garbage truck with a lawn mower.



As far as braking goes:


And when I sold GT6, you could still replicate that with any moderately (at least 60:40) front heavy car on any decently (comfort soft or better) grippy tires and stock suspension. Crest a hill or do anything that unsettled the suspension in a similar way and hit the brakes, and the car would completely flip the 🤬 out. Almost literally, at times.

 

[gtracedriver1]

Yeah there was no hype at all. It's not like they took over an entire town in Spain and had a street named after Kazunori Yamauchi in what was "arguably one of the largest launch events in the history of the video game industry". Now if something like that had happened, that would be hype!! Oh wait I found something...

https://www.gtplanet.net/gran-turismo-6-comes-to-life/

LMAO launch parry is not equal to hype

GT5 is what I call the hype. They always had amazing trailer, news for it at E3 and other gaming events. On a new console they could could obviously do more things. PS2 to PS3 jump was also pretty big. It had lot going for it. GT6 was just more refined game with changes to gfx engine, gameplay etc and throwing a launch party.

Looking at nearly 8yr old trailer.


It was way ahead of its time. Even now that gameplay trailer look good. As someone said if they had GT6 on PS4 they could hype about graphics and more realism with powerful console. In those 5yrs of GT5 they already got everything from PS3 and could just improve for GT6 and were limited due to hardware. I would think GT7 would get same attention as GT5 and definitely more than GT6 lol.

 

[PR3D4TOR]

GT5 took years to finish, always got delayed, and wasn't all that finished when released anyways, but it was more "complete" as far as content.

GT6 took 6 months and at a year on the table its still got 3.5 years to take working on it before it's at GT5 waiting time forget the 1 year mark for GT5, that's like the 6 year mark for GT6... If it takes another 2 years for CM and B-spec its still less time than we were waiting on GT5 and we still have the main game to play only waiting 6 months for it while they work on improving the other features to be added.

GT5 people complained they would have preferred the game in semi finished state if we would of got it sooner, so they do exactly what we ask in GT6 but now the complaint is we didn't get a finished game.

GT5 had 5 years of Hype build up, GT6 only 6 months the difference is GT6 is much more progressive and has continuous hype as it grows where GT5 was more complete at release.

 

[Imari]

GT6 took 6 months and at a year on the table its still got 3.5 years to take working on it before it's at GT5 waiting time forget the 1 year mark for GT5, that's like the 6 year mark for GT6... If it takes another 2 years for CM and B-spec its still less time than we were waiting on GT5 and we still have the main game to play only waiting 6 months for it while they work on improving the other features to be added.

Are you actually counting from the announce date as though that has any bearing on how complete the game is? A game should be finished or damn near it at release, or it should be sold very clearly labelled as Early Access.

Both games were terrible misjudgments. GT5 was far too ambitious for it's own good, and so they half-assed bits of it to get it out the door. GT6 was far too ambitious for it's own good, so they simply cut bits of it to be promised for later.

The correct thing is to cut the bits of the design that won't make it to release and simply sell the game as is. Don't BS customers that the game is going to become something that it's not. If the game isn't going to sell well based on what's there at the release date, then perhaps think about delaying until it's a worthy purchase instead of selling snake oil.