Symptoms include,
"sickness"
being "unbearable"
"shame"
"ignoring"
"babbling inside a self created delusion bubble"?

Wrong diagnosis there doc.
Those are all symptomatic with "ass-hat troll-itis", and I hope you have medical insurance, as from the look of things, you seem to have contracted a heavy dose pal.

GT5 = 16 cars

Forza 3 = 8 cars

That says it all for me!

@Zootang

F-Zero GX = 30 cars

GT5 = 16 cars

Forza 3 = 8 cars

Am I getting this right?

No point

Use your mind please
F-zero is a fabulous game, but its last gen, in 480i, much lower level of effects and visuals.
Its like saying Dynsaty warriors has far more enemies on screen compared to God of War 3, hence its better

How come no one noticed that in GT5 he put the car right on the line where traffic passes and in Forza he put the car to the left of the dark part of the road where cars frequently drive? I call BS on this one. Do the video again and put the Forza car on the darker part of the road and see what happens.

Why are people going out of there way to make these kind of comparisons when they aren't even going to do them fairly?

@thief

He was just using reverse logic, as it seems like zootang likes to think that the more cars the better.

@zootang

So now, "no point"?

Ahahahahah. Jesus.

@8-bit:

Actually, it's hard to see, but the car is right on the racing line in both instances. If you look closely you can see the triangles of the Forza line.

Anyways, I hear that GT5's AI gets better at advanced stages, but they should have probably had smarter AI right from the start. It's never as fun racing against dumb opponents, and there are better ways to balance difficulty.

@Neckbear

We want to advance not stagnate. Would that not mean more cars on screen at better quality which GT5 has? Have you even played GT5?

In GT5 they put the car in the direct racing line, and Forza sligtly outside racing line to create the illusion that the cars try to avoid collision.

Another fail...

Game on..

But the cars comparison does make sense in GT vs Forza, as more cars means more taxing on AI. Its like having 2 opponents versus 6 at any time in a shooter game.

In any case, whether you agree with the AI levelling approach or not, its fair to say that you have to compare GT5 AI after level 40 to make a comparison. And I haven’t heard anyone deny that at that level, GT5 AI/damage is better than Forza – which is impressive considering that supposed to Forza’s strong point, while GT5 is indisputably superior in graphics, car detail,, physics, handling.

AI Fail in Forza 3

Unlock the AI skill at higher levels and then do a comparison:

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Damn gaming media don't actually play games before they have opinions on them. It's like watching 3/4 of a movie and doing a review on it, or listening to half a music CD and doing a review on it.

Play B-Spec and you will realize how smart the AI is...

On B-Spec when the drivers are pressured they start making more mistakes. They get pressured when they are near other cars and they calm down when they are leading the race.

The AI is fine the only problem is that in the beginner levels the AI is retarded.

I think PD should have let you chose a level from the start and let you play from there on instead of doing what they did because a lot of people are complaining about damage etc...

suck it shinobix

http://www.youtube.com/watc...
&
http://www.gtplanet.net/for...

Gran Turismo 5 Gaming on a Six LCD?

Unnecessary but WOW!!!

The 6 screens should be around the player so that you could look around the full 360 degrees.

Imagine how awesome it would be to turn and look behind to see if there are any cars coming.

no I cant think of a game where the physics chane as you level up. But so what?

"every other racing game doesn't do that"

it doesnt matter. as a reviewer you should play the entire game to the full so that you can review it fairly and accurately. This applies to all games.

What if, for the first time a JRPG is landed on western shores? And this reviewer, who has NEVER heard or experienced a JRPG woudn't know what to expect, played for a few hours and the verdict would end up like this:

- No story
- Endless grinding
- Cubersome menu system
- Higher lvl enemies to difficult for beginners

4.0 out of 10.

So, I guess it's the developers fault for not revealing the story and advanced game mechanics in the beginning to the player. Is that right?

-End of line

@Lord_Doggington

You're obviously too slow... A reviewers job is to FULLY complete the game (Unless its extremely long, then they have to FULLY experience every single feature of the game which they didn't in this case. For example, IGN was blaming GT5 for not having damage... retards). If a reviewer does not FULLY experience the game, then the review is bad and invalid. Are you following?

@Lord_Doggington

so what you're saying is that you fault them for not following other racers? The point of progressive and improving games sometimes lie in the developer's choice to do something different.

From your logic all new takes on old genres should get blasted for not being like the others and the copycats should get high scores.

How does that make sense. The level system is a great idea and the damage being limited to certain level progressions work more than just seeing a lot of damage. Remember that if affects performance when racing and you pay to fix it on premium cars.

It would appear superficial if you allowed full damage from the get go but not performance loss and fixing cost until a certain level. That's why I enjoy PD games, they try their best to get it feeling like you're out there on the track, with limitations and compromises of course.

Its like any other game where you unlock better things at higher levels, only in this case you also get a rise in difficulty and sometimes have to rethink how you race.

How can anyone who actually and truly love racing games not get excited over that. All this fanboyism is not about which racer is better but which system.

The racers are too busy playing the hell out of the game to be bothered by these articles and comments. I would be there also if my copy was not delayed now you all will have to hear me until the 6th or 7th when I will finally get the damn game.

"it's digital polyphony's fault for making a game that is unreviewable w/in the confines of a normal time-span for reviews"

are you actually complaining about the game having too much content?

it's not uncommon for devs to give disclaimers about radical changes in gameplay (and yes this is a radical change) as you progress. many reviews out there for gt5 had NO IDEA that it changed as you progressed. because this is a new implementation, it should be recognized by the devs as to avoid any confusion in the reviews.

you idiots are defending something that was completely unfounded until someone wrote about it in a review. how about PD describing this as a positive feature BEFORE the game came out. they did it with the weather effects. they did it with the 1000 cars. why not say, "we're also featuring a level-up damage system for the first time in racing game history." Then every reviewer would be justifiably wrong because they didn't adhere to PD's PUBLIC statement. Instead, they decide to "test" the reviewers? What an idiotic plan!

most reviewers do not have time to sink 20-30 hours into one game for a review. They have to play OTHER games as well. So yes, they don't have time to see the differences in the game after 15-20 hours, but again, why would they? no one ever told them that a key element of gameplay would drastically change after all that time.

again, no other games do this. PD keeping everyone in the dark (including you) about a feature that is expected from the very moment you first crash should rightfully lead to mixed reviews of GT5

@Lord_Doggington

I don't understand what the problem is, many many games have twist and features not spoiled by the developer for the benefit of us the consumer. Imagine if you owned this game, ignore reviews and ignore comments, you sit down to play and for a little while you see small dents and damage but as you progress you get more and more damage shown but now you see that your vehicle performance drops and you have to pay for repairs.

To me that would be excitiing as I discovered even more depth to the game. Now look at a reviewer, they have a duty to complete the game before giving reviews. I have seen reviewers rating games that are almost unplayable and they still play from beginning to end. Why not with GT5 as they play they would notice the features and additions, plus as reviewers they will actively look for everything in the game.

Since when does a reviewer rely on a developer listing and explaining every feature in a game, its their job to develop and sometimes market(usually a separate department for that) the game, not spoon feed reviewers.

What this really shows is how much of the game the reviewers actually played, I mean if you cannot mention something like progressive damage in a game like this then you clearly have not played to that point. Its not exactly something you can gloss over or forget about now is it?

I don't know if Sony and PD did it intentionally but the fact that they did not mention much or anything on the level up system increasing damage shows exactly which reviewers rate a game after a few hours of gameplay and which ones actually play the game in its entirety no matter how much there is to do.

Its really a shocking exposure on the game reviews industry and companies showing exactly how much you can trust reviews. And if you're not more alarmed by that than some shoddy AI initially then you really don't care what happens to gaming and the dedicated people who create these amazing games for us. I mean reviews hurt or help sales and these companies can die without good sales and that's not an exaggeration.

..."PlayStation is dominating on every level"....

...Really???

PlayStation are soon heading into a new generation in the not to distant future. They currently have the worst customer satisfaction they've ever sustained as a company. The company is heading for a huge crash while at the same time they'll need to be planning how they are going to try and win back that favour and the build up to their new releases.

Yes financially they're winning but they're going to have to ride out this complete public corporate disaster. No one has faith in the company or the product anymore. They've damaged their public image so much this generation. Greed can kill anyone.

Hulst is a disaster......