UK Edge magazine rates GT3 8/10..WHAT?!!!

I\'m not really that pedantic when it comes to scores, and I acknowledge that 8 out of 10 is a very good score.

But here we have a game with almost faultless graphics, a 60fps update meaning ultra smooth movment and perfect gameplay, a huge amount of prizes to win, 150 cars (thinking anout it, it\'s a lot!), link-up modes, split screen etc, perfect engine sound etc,.

What the f**k is up with these people!!!!!!!  Christ, they even say that Le Mans on the DC is a better racing game!!!!!

And they bemoan the lack of damage as one of the main problems.  Who really gives a toss when you\'ve got all the other features!!!!

Does this p*ss other people off too?  Do they find Edge can be too critical when it\'s unjustified?

Lack of damage ????

Its well known that damge to liscensed cars is not allowed.

If GT3 didn\'t have liscnesed cars they would have given it low score

but oh well, what can be said abouth this. People see things differently, thats why you read 5 - 10 reviews and put all the info together and come up

[Evi]

...maybe they just don\'t like Gran Turismo?...or they\'re ill...either way...it\'s still a great game...July 10th is the day of GRAN TURISMO!!

Some people are just dumb i guess

maybe not dumb .. maybe they just don\'t like that kind of game ! anyway they still suck  JULY 10 th  can\'t wait

Originally posted by ddaryl

but oh well, what can be said abouth this. People see things differently, thats why you read 5 - 10 reviews and put all the info together and come up

yeah. there are always idiots that are anti sony, or are weird with their grading.
dont worry too much about it:D

P.S i like youre pic, JP6666.

I\'ve been reading edge for about a year now and they seem to not like Sony.

If it comes out from Nintendo or Sega, they always seem to get better reviews but they always critise Sony.

I was not surprised that Edge gave the game 8/10. This made it - in their view - a worse game than MSR, Gran Turismo (1 & 2) and Colin McCrae.

When the whole world is singing the praises of GT3 (rightly) Edge was a sure bet to play it down.

They said the graphics in MSR gave GT3 a run for its money (or words to that effect). I completely and  utterly disagree. The cars look like they are made of plastic in MSR. They shine and move with lifelike fluidity in GT3 - you would be hard pressed to say otherwise.
They also said LeMans played a better racing game.
That (since its a gameplay issue) is debatable - but in my opinion GT3 is LEAGUES ahead.

With the arrival of the Dreamcast, Edge magazine lost its prior...\'enthusiam\' with Sony\'s Playstation (long time Edge readers will know that they used to be considered very Sony-biased) and now they have shifted toward the other end of the spectrum. No PS2 game preview is complete without repeated digs at the systems failings and that goes for pretty much any other article of late.

Its sad because Edge is a great mag and I have judged my purchases on their reviews in the past. These days I read it as the perfect antithesis to all the PS2 mags that never stop singing the PS2\'s praises.

Colin McRae Rally and Jarret and Labonte SCR both had REAL LIFE car models (Nissan, Toyota, Vauxhall, Lincoln, BMW, Audi etc) and also featured damage. I\'ve said this many (MANY) times that I would take fewer car models but with a damage model (which, DOES, greatly improve the gameplay and makes it not only more realistic but also more fun), over more cars and no damage model.

In other words, I\'d take improved gameplay over graphics and car selection any day of the week.

Colin McRae has damage because thats a part of Rally racing. Everyone knows things are going to happen to Rally cars.

But car makers dont want their cars looking all banged up on GT3 cause it wont look good for their cars. But I find that dumb cause everyone knows if you crash into someone else at 200 km/h your car is going to be banged up. It\'s not Polyphone\'s fault they cant have damage. I\'m sure they would if they could, it\'s the licencenses they have with the car makers fault they wont let them.

But I find nothing wrong without having damage. GT2 is the greatest racing game in my opinion

J&L was touring car racing (with Sedans) - damage is an integral part of the racing experience. If there\'s no damage in GT3 then it\'s not a racing game, it\'s a driving game - or as someone else said, \'an advanced driver\'s ed simulation\' - what\'s the point of having agressive AI if you can just bump off the other cars.

When you have car damage you have to be cautious - you have to pay greater adherance to the racing line and you can\'t be all kamikaze and try to overtake everyone in the first lap or you\'ll be screwed over. People think this makes a game less fun - but they haven\'t played games like J&L - a damage model makes everything so much more exciting, because there are greater consequences for the increased risks you take in driving. I\'m sure GT3 will be an excellent game, I\'ve already pre-ordered mine, I\'ll probably end up getting the racing wheel, but unless they implement car damage it will only ever be the ultimate driving simulator and not the ultimate racing simulator.

Racing is more fun - and that\'s perhaps what this magazine pointed out, that GT3 isn\'t pushing the envelope as far as it could have, and one of the reasons the PS2 was supposed to be great is that it could open up new GAMEPLAY avenues - GT3 will basically be GT2 with better graphics and better handling, when it comes to the actual racing how will it be any different than \'bumper car\' overtaking like in Ridge Racer?

Flame away.

well Lavan, your points are valid

but again if manufacturers allowed for visual damage in GT3 cars Polyphony would have implemented it

There is however some damge in GT3 its just not visible

But if the trade off is no liscesed cars and damage vs: Liscesed cars with no damage what would you pick

A huge part of the GT series appeal is liscensed cars.

and GT3 is the Ultimate driving simulator, until a agme can actually take that tile away. No game comes close to offering what GT3 offers. Not yet anyway

In all honesty ddaryl, hand on my heart, I would take the non-licenced cars but with a damage model - J&L (an upgraded version of TOCA for you Euros) is just an incredible game, and I\'ve still play it long after GT2 has now gone on the shelf.

However, I do understand that since very few people have played a racing game with an accurate physical damage model, most would take the licenced cars.

My only problem is that J&L proves that you CAN have both - a licence and a great racing/damage model. And like I said, I would gladly take half the number of cars in GT3 (ie eliminate those brands that don\'t want their cars damaged in the digital realm) for a damage model.

In the end, as you said, the licences are a large part of the appeal for many people, and I guess more people would have been turned off had there been fewer models (those companies that wouldn\'t mind their cars being damaged) - Polyphony took his into account I\'m sure. Money talks.  I think it\'s a real shame, especially since the game looks so beautiful and the cars supposedly handle so well.

However, I also read at Gamespot that because the GT series is so popular, car manufacturers are actually ASKING Polyphony to put their cars in the game - that level of exposure (which will surely increase once the jaw-dropping GT3 is released) will definately increase Polyphony\'s bargining position, and if there isn\'t damage in GT4 then I won\'t even think about buying it - Polyphony will then become like EA Sports.

who cares about the words of some biased mag editor?

[Bobs_Hardware]

O - P - I - N - I - O - N

:fro: