Support NeoGAF

[GrizzleBoy]

I'm wondering why people say this is a simcade. What's sim about this game? Everything I've seen is an arcade through and through. I don't know why anybody would feel saying a game is an arcade is anything negative. Maybe PR talk to reach for more people?

Having to use brakes before turning is all a game needs to be sim these days.

 

[iJudged]

Goddammit, metacritic @ 72, the game does not reflect that low score, utter nonsense.

 

[GHG]

Having to use brakes before turning is all a game needs to be sim these days.

If you actually want to be competitive, win races and post good times then you need to do a lot more than use breaks before a turn.

 

[BradleyLove]

There really is enough room, and room for plenty more while we're at it.

I loved my time with Forza 5, a game that is a far bigger technical and artistic achievement than people give it credit for, but after a while running the same tracks in the same conditions does start to feel confining - yeah, even when that means classic F1 cars on the Nurburgring.

So along comes Horizon - the game that seems purposely built for everything I love about racing games - not just racing, but the driving - the getting to know the car at every level, from milling around the waterfront, to cruising down the coast, to full tilt apex nailing circuit races and in-traffic street races and hell, even kangaroo hopping over hills while classical blasts out your rain-soaked windows.

But dammit if every time I lost a race in Horizon I thought that maybe it was my tune, or my upgrades, or maybe if I didn't have to focus on the minimap I could fully commit myself to the immediacy of the race right in front of me, and maybe if that one bump in the off-road track didn't send me careening to the left instead of the right, and hey - did that AI miss a checkpoint? And why are the AI cars so perfectly grounded and stable at speed?

Then I play DriveClub. No frills indeed. Just a quick and unobtrusive menu that puts you on one of several gloriously detailed, expansive and yet linear tracks, in a matter of seconds. There you battle with the AI through every turn - it has nothing to do with tunes, or upgrades, or cheating AI or spreading your focus upon a mini-map as well as the next apex and your course through the AI cars that'll break too early - you're purely focused on the race and you know its do-able if you take the right line and if you push it just a little farther than you did last time, but the risk in that doing so just may lose the whole race for you. That's not old fashioned - that's the very heart of racing distilled into the moment to moment of it.

All of these games have their place, and they all have such wildly different offerings and strengths, we shouldn't be in a rush to crown one of them king and expect all the others to fall in line.

So far, this generation, every single racing game I've played has brought something amazing to the table, from NFS: Rivals - my surprise hit of launch - to Forza Motorsport 5 and Horizon 2 and my current addiction in DriveClub. There's plenty of room. Revel in it.

Quote for excellence. Great post.

 

[nib95]

There really is enough room, and room for plenty more while we're at it.

I loved my time with Forza 5, a game that is a far bigger technical and artistic achievement than people give it credit for, but after a while running the same tracks in the same conditions does start to feel confining - yeah, even when that means classic F1 cars on the Nurburgring.

So along comes Horizon - the game that seems purposely built for everything I love about racing games - not just racing, but the driving - the getting to know the car at every level, from milling around the waterfront, to cruising down the coast, to full tilt apex nailing circuit races and in-traffic street races and hell, even kangaroo hopping over hills while classical blasts out your rain-soaked windows.

But dammit if every time I lost a race in Horizon I thought that maybe it was my tune, or my upgrades, or maybe if I didn't have to focus on the minimap I could fully commit myself to the immediacy of the race right in front of me, and maybe if that one bump in the off-road track didn't send me careening to the left instead of the right, and hey - did that AI miss a checkpoint? And why are the AI cars so perfectly grounded and stable at speed?

Then I play DriveClub. No frills indeed. Just a quick and unobtrusive menu that puts you on one of several gloriously detailed, expansive and yet linear tracks, in a matter of seconds. There you battle with the AI through every turn - it has nothing to do with tunes, or upgrades, or cheating AI or spreading your focus upon a mini-map as well as the next apex and your course through the AI cars that'll break too early - you're purely focused on the race and you know its do-able if you take the right line and if you push it just a little farther than you did last time, but the risk in that doing so just may lose the whole race for you. That's not old fashioned - that's the very heart of racing distilled into the moment to moment of it.

All of these games have their place, and they all have such wildly different offerings and strengths, we shouldn't be in a rush to crown one of them king and expect all the others to fall in line.

So far, this generation, every single racing game I've played has brought something amazing to the table, from NFS: Rivals - my surprise hit of launch - to Forza Motorsport 5 and Horizon 2 and my current addiction in DriveClub. There's plenty of room. Revel in it.

Great post dude. Variety as they say, is the spice of life!

 

[Cthulhu_Steev]

Goddammit, metacritic @ 72, the game does not reflect that low score, utter nonsense.

72 is a good score for this game, you can't score 9/10 for the handling and the view, no matter how great they are. It's a shame that there probably won't be re-reviews in most places when the weather, photomode, replay and all the DLC, plus fan requests Evo are likely to drop in after getting feedback for new game modes, etc. But this is how it was released, for better or for worse, and like I said, 70+ is a good score.

 

[Stratn]

There really is enough room, and room for plenty more while we're at it.

I loved my time with Forza 5, a game that is a far bigger technical and artistic achievement than people give it credit for, but after a while running the same tracks in the same conditions does start to feel confining - yeah, even when that means classic F1 cars on the Nurburgring.

So along comes Horizon - the game that seems purposely built for everything I love about racing games - not just racing, but the driving - the getting to know the car at every level, from milling around the waterfront, to cruising down the coast, to full tilt apex nailing circuit races and in-traffic street races and hell, even kangaroo hopping over hills while classical blasts out your rain-soaked windows.

But dammit if every time I lost a race in Horizon I thought that maybe it was my tune, or my upgrades, or maybe if I didn't have to focus on the minimap I could fully commit myself to the immediacy of the race right in front of me, and maybe if that one bump in the off-road track didn't send me careening to the left instead of the right, and hey - did that AI miss a checkpoint? And why are the AI cars so perfectly grounded and stable at speed?

Then I play DriveClub. No frills indeed. Just a quick and unobtrusive menu that puts you on one of several gloriously detailed, expansive and yet linear tracks, in a matter of seconds. There you battle with the AI through every turn - it has nothing to do with tunes, or upgrades, or cheating AI or spreading your focus upon a mini-map as well as the next apex and your course through the AI cars that'll break too early - you're purely focused on the race and you know its do-able if you take the right line and if you push it just a little farther than you did last time, but the risk in that doing so just may lose the whole race for you. That's not old fashioned - that's the very heart of racing distilled into the moment to moment of it.

All of these games have their place, and they all have such wildly different offerings and strengths, we shouldn't be in a rush to crown one of them king and expect all the others to fall in line.

So far, this generation, every single racing game I've played has brought something amazing to the table, from NFS: Rivals - my surprise hit of launch - to Forza Motorsport 5 and Horizon 2 and my current addiction in DriveClub. There's plenty of room. Revel in it.

After reading this, and watching Daniel Bloodworth on GT talk about this game, I may just jump in..... The tracks sound like they are the star of this game?

 

[fresquito]

If you actually want to be competitive, win races and post good times then you need to do a lot more than use breaks before a turn.

It seems to me you're equating simplicity with arcades and you couldn't be any more wrong.

 

[benny_a]

After reading this, and watching Daniel Bloodworth on GT talk about this game, I may just jump in..... The tracks sound like they are the star of this game?

If you have PS+ just wait until the PS+ edition. Then you don't have to rely on anyone but yourself.

And after you've done that, you can go back to this thread and read reviews and find which reviewer most closely matches your feelings on the game. Then pay attention to that person going forward.

 

[eso76]

I understand the reviews, and also understand why a lot of people love it.

Objectively speaking, it's a fun racer, but quite barebones in the way it's structured and not groundbreaking in any way besides the tech.

The fact it was always "meant to be like this" doesn't mean the game should be awarded 9's because it perfectly achieved its unambitious goals.
Ok, so developers always came clean with their vision: you knew and it's fine with you.
That's great, you'll love the game, but reviews are meant to tell you what the actual value for money is and DC doesn't have a lot to offer compared to other titles.
It almost feels like a portable game. Or a launch game that came too late.
Of course if you don't care about a robust progression and structure, customization, car setup etc then the actual racing is fine (though i'd argue not great either).

But a review has to speak to a lot of people. You are supposed to go and read the article and if you find you don't care about any of the reasons why the score is low-ish then you're good. Problem is the only interest people have in reviews is the number they can point at to prove their game is better than someone else's....

It's fine to love the game. I quite like it myself. But you can't expect reviews not to take it's several shortcomings into account.

I do expect it to become a lot better with weather and all the stuff they're cooking though, and i can't wait for weather, photomode and replays.


Also, that engine needs to be used in TESVI or something.
Seeing the sun piercing through the dark clouds and light the top of the mountain in the distance. Man, that looks unbelievable.
I don't have a problem with a racer not being open world. But having such beautiful landscapes and being confined to the road is so frustrating it's criminal

 

[FF Seraphim]

is there any continued point to review threads? i can't remember the last one where doubting the point of professional games reviewers wasn't a major topic of conversation.

It is always nice to see how "professionals" view the game. I am still flabberghasted by how wide the range of scores are. Also, it helps people figure out what sites to use when looking at previews for games since through reviews you get a taste on how the people interact with games in general.

 

[GrizzleBoy]

Having to use brakes before turning is all a game needs to be sim these days.

If you actually want to be competitive, win races and post good times then you need to do a lot more than use breaks before a turn.

Indeed, but I think you missed my point lol.

72 is a good score for this game, you can't score 9/10 for the handling and the view, no matter how great they are. It's a shame that there probably won't be re-reviews in most places when the weather, photomode, replay and all the DLC, plus fan requests Evo are likely to drop in after getting feedback for new game modes, etc. But this is how it was released, for better or for worse, and like I said, 70+ is a good score.

+1

If you rely on the basics, the basics can't just be good. They can't even just be a little bit better than much of what's out there, it has to be universally excellent or revolutionary even.

Otherwise you're just leaving yourself open to other games that do the basics just as well or better depending on who you ask, with none of the unique flavour hat could actually turn your game into a standout title.

That's exactly what the reviews reflect. Some are super happy, some are not. Some think what's offered is fine but don't see why it should be put a place above a games that they believe offers them a similar experience but offer something more that pushes it over the edge.

 

[iJudged]

72 is a good score for this game, you can't score 9/10 for the handling and the view, no matter how great they are. It's a shame that there probably won't be re-reviews in most places when the weather, photomode, replay and all the DLC, plus fan requests Evo are likely to drop in after getting feedback for new game modes, etc. But this is how it was released, for better or for worse, and like I said, 70+ is a good score.

Deserves better then 72 imho

 

[driver116]

It's fine to love the game. I quite like it myself. But you can't expect reviews not to take it's several shortcomings into account.

Pointing out shortcomings is fine. A lot of sites were comparing apples to oranges. This is the problem.

Deserves better then 72 imho

Judging by what I've seen only (UK), the game is definitely not a 4 or 5 out of 10.

Never will understand why people get upset when other people don't share the same opinions as they do, especially when its about video games.

Reviews influence the purchasing decisions of the masses. When some are considered outright unfair there's room for discussion.

 

[PBY]

is there any continued point to review threads? i can't remember the last one where doubting the point of professional games reviewers wasn't a major topic of conversation.

Never will understand why people get upset when other people don't share the same opinions as they do, especially when its about video games.

 

[Jamesways]

I understand the reviews, and also understand why a lot of people love it.

Objectively speaking, it's a fun racer, but quite barebones in the way it's structured and not groundbreaking in any way besides the tech.

The fact it was always "meant to be like this" doesn't mean the game should be awarded 9's because it perfectly achieved its unambitious goals.
Ok, so developers always came clean with their vision: you knew and it's fine with you.
That's great, you'll love the game, but reviews are meant to tell you what the actual value for money is and DC doesn't have a lot to offer compared to other titles.
It almost feels like a portable game. Or a launch game that came too late.
Of course if you don't care about a robust progression and structure, customization, car setup etc then the actual racing is fine (though i'd argue not great either).

But a review has to speak to a lot of people. You are supposed to go and read the article and if you find you don't care about any of the reasons why the score is low-ish then you're good. Problem is the only interest people have in reviews is the number they can point at to prove their game is better than someone else's....

It's fine to love the game. I quite like it myself. But you can't expect reviews not to take it's several shortcomings into account.

I do expect it to become a lot better with weather and all the stuff they're cooking though, and i can't wait for weather, photomode and replays.


Also, that engine needs to be used in TESVI or something.
Seeing the sun piercing through the dark clouds and light the top of the mountain in the distance. Man, that looks unbelievable.
I don't have a problem with a racer not being open world. But having such beautiful landscapes and being confined to the road is so frustrating it's criminal

I think that's debatable. Millage will vary person to person, but when they get the hamster wheels fixed for the servers I imagine a lot of people will be putting in many hours trying to climb leaderboards. I've already logged in 15 hours and am only about halfway through the SP portion (must get all stars), so in that respect, it's been worth the money already.

But yeah, I do get that it's missing many, many things yet that other racers currently offer.

And I'm with you on the TESVI comment! Racing around Norway I get HUGE flashbacks to wandering around the snow in the Dragonborn DLC in Skyrim. I half expect to see Horkers hanging out by the icy water around the next hill.

 

[eso76]

Pointing out shortcomings is fine. A lot of sites were comparing apples to oranges. This is the problem.

Not exactly.
A lot of sites were comparing a racing game that offers apples to ones that offer BOTH apples and oranges.

 

[Cthulhu_Steev]

Deserves better then 72 imho

It doesn't though, even if you scored it as a distilled arcade 3-track experience (like Daytona USA for instance) 72 is the high end of what it should score, the racing, scale and lighting are fantastic but there are things missing that people request, or desire in a game; racing lines, different game modes, customising etc. I don't want tuning, or racing lines but if they're aren't offered then who benefits? If you're offered them, and don't want them, turn them off. People don't want the HUD- turn it off; they don't want the soundtrack - turn it off, rewinds - same. More options isn't a disaster, and for better or for worse some want that.

I grew up with the arcades, I'm a great believer in one-setting, practice makes you better, but not everybody wants that. I love DC as it is, but it would be nice for others to have the options they require.


70% is above average-to-good for DC, I'm sure when it's complete (which it isn't, and that is another issue to get over) it will be looked on even more favourably.

 

[Kezen]

I was interested in the game but 72 metacritic puts a damper on my anticipation. :/ Considering the massive hype surrounding it I was expecting much, much better.

I'll wait until it's 20€, seems like a good price for this game.

 

[GHG]

It seems to me you're equating simplicity with arcades and you couldn't be any more wrong.

Not at all. But the modern definitions of "arcade" and "sim" for racing games means that this would slot somewhere in the middle.

Indeed, but I think you missed my point lol

Don't worry, I see what you mean now...

 

[fuzzyreactor]

It doesn't though, even if you scored it as a distilled arcade 3-track experience (like Daytona USA for instance) 72 is the high end of what it should score, the racing, scale and lighting are fantastic but there are things missing that people request, or desire in a game; racing lines, different game modes, customising etc. I don't want tuning, or racing lines but if they're aren't offered then who benefits? If you're offered them, and don't want them, turn them off. People don't want the HUD- turn it off; they don't want the soundtrack - turn it off, rewinds - same. More options isn't a disaster, and for better or for worse some want that.

I grew up with the arcades, I'm a great believer in one-setting, practice makes you better, but not everybody wants that. I love DC as it is, but it would be nice for others to have the options they require.


70% is above average-to-good for DC, I'm sure when it's complete (which it isn't, and that is another issue to get over) it will be looked on even more favourably.

I disagree, to me those things while nice are small and shouldn't hold much weight for the overall score of the game. I think it is kind of a issue with game development now. SO much focus on content and less on the actual design and game play mechanics. Games like GTA and Skyrim are good examples IMO. So much content but the core mechanics are not very good.

Driveclub has a fantastic driving model with incredible tracks and a fun online mode(when it's working). Those are the most important aspects of the game and the game excels in those areas. It's also pretty clear they didn't include tuning due to the game's design. The game is about taking a car on a track and racing with other comparable cars to see who has the most skill. It's not about tuning your car up so you have a advantage. It's not a car enthusiast game, it's a racing one. I personally think the game should at least be averaging in the mid 80's and I would score it even higher than that.

 

[twobear]

I was interested in the game but 72 metacritic puts a damper on my anticipation. :/ Considering the massive hype surrounding it I was expecting much, much better.

I'll wait until it's 20€, seems like a good price for this game.

This is not a good way to look at the score. There's been quite a spread; from 40 to 95. So that means that, depending on your own taste, you either think the game will be not that good at all, or you think that it's one of the best racing games ever made.

When the scores are this spread, the average becomes a bit meaningless. You'll have to read the content of the reviews.

 

[ComputerMKII]

Jeuxvideo.com: 12/20

http://www.jeuxvideo.com/articles/0001/00019982-driveclub-test.htm

 

[Cthulhu_Steev]

This is not a good way to look at the score. There's been quite a spread; from 40 to 95. So that means that, depending on your own taste, you either think the game will be not that good at all, or you think that it's one of the best racing games ever made.

When the scores are this spread, the average becomes a bit meaningless. You'll have to read the content of the reviews.

The Asura's Wrath Effect. Pity, those poor souls who never got to play that slice of glorious action because it has a 71 score on Metacritic.

 

[nib95]

Not exactly.
A lot of sites were comparing a racing game that offers apples to ones that offer BOTH apples and oranges.

That doesn't necessarily make sense. For example, an open world racer is fundamentally different in design and experience compared to a strictly track based racer. This is also the case with having upgrade and tuning options. Things are massively skewed in favour of those who better understand and tweak them. As NullPointers excellent post above delved in to, the focus and direction is very different. This is the same principle with the handling mechanics themselves. A simcade racer is not a sim racer, and as such will handle and respond differently.

A lot of journalists wanted Driveclub to be a game it frankly isn't and was never intended to be.

 

[driver116]

And a lot of sites were comparing a racing game that offers apples to ones that offer BOTH apples and oranges.

FTFY.

 

[rashbeep]

Goddammit, metacritic @ 72, the game does not reflect that low score, utter nonsense.

After playing for a bit, I think I'm going to say I agree with the reviews (the scores at least). I must say it is refreshing to be able to jump into a race quickly without having to deal with the extra fluff you see in modern racers. Sure the graphics are nice (although I feel have been overhyped here), sound design is pretty good, and the driving feels pretty good... but that's really all there is to the game so far. I don't feel as if it's anything more than just a "good" game, which really isn't a bad thing.

 

[eso76]

I think that's debatable. Millage will vary person to person, but when they get the hamster wheels fixed for the servers I imagine a lot of people will be putting in many hours trying to climb leaderboards.

I'm sure, but wouldn't more options and variables (options other games do offer) give the game even longer legs ?

Although yeah, to be honest the only racing games in which i put many hours trying to climb leaderboards are those with VERY FEW (1/3) tracks and cars. Too many variables are overwhelming for me.

Which is basically why i think repeating areas and enemies in Halo worked very well, but that's another story.

 

[driver116]

After playing for a bit, I think I'm going to say I agree with the reviews (the scores at least). I must say it is refreshing to be able to jump into a race quickly without having to deal with the extra fluff you see in modern racers. Sure the graphics are nice (although I feel have been overhyped here), sound design is pretty good, and the driving feels pretty good... but that's really all there is to the game so far. I don't feel as if it's anything more than just a "good" game, which really isn't a bad thing.

So do you agree with all the 4/5/6's out 10 then?

 

[rashbeep]

So you agree with all the 4/5/6's out 10 then?

Well the guy I was quoting was bringing up the 72 metascore. So that's around what I'd rate the game at this point.

 

[winjet81]

People so desperate for good review scores... seems like they're spending more time on this site crusading for better scores than actually playing the game.

 

[travisbickle]

Not exactly.
A lot of sites were comparing a racing game that offers apples to ones that offer BOTH apples and oranges.

no, it's apples and oranges, you shouldn't compare the closed circuit designs of DC to the open nature of FH.

 

[eso76]

That doesn't necessarily make sense. For example, an open world racer is fundamentally different in design and experience compared to a strictly track based racer. This is also the case with having upgrade and tuning options. Things are massively skewed in favour of those who better understand and tweak them. As NullPointers excellent post above delved in to, the focus and direction is very different. This is the same principle with the handling mechanics themselves. A simcade racer is not a sim racer, and as such will handle and respond differently.

A lot of journalists wanted Driveclub to be a game it frankly isn't and was never intended to be.

What Driveclub was intended to be is irrelevant for reviews scores.
Driveclub had little ambition (graphics aside), like i said it shouldn't be awarded 9's just because the devs perfectly achieved whatever unambitious goal they had.

A lot of journalists just wrote that driveclub only offers A, when other games offer A AND B. And tbh Driveclub's A isn't even exceptionally well done or fleshed out compared to other games's A.

Horizon offers closed circuits and p2p races as well as free roaming. Upgrades and tuning, you can just ignore or autotune in SP. Yes people who tune their cars will get better results, but you can restrict the race to stock. In Motorsport you can forget about the career and just jump in and race, turn assists and damage on or off to basically make it as arcadey as you like. Both offer greater variety and better and larger car selection etc.

So, no. This is not what journalists wanted, but they are aware and have to inform you that there are things Driveclub doesn't have compared to other racers.
Of course, it's stuff that you might never care about and that's why one should read the damn review. But a score is just a number and MUST reflect the fact that Driveclub doesn't offer as much content and variety as other racers.

I was interested in the game but 72 metacritic puts a damper on my anticipation. :/ Considering the massive hype surrounding it I was expecting much, much better.

See, you're part of the problem.
72 metacritic means nothing. Just go, read the reviews and try to understand whether you care or not about the stuff that determined the low-ish score.

 

[nib95]

What Driveclub was intended to be is irrelevant for reviews scores.
Driveclub had little ambition (graphics aside), like i said it shouldn't be awarded 9's just because the devs perfectly achieved whatever unambitious goal they had.

A lot of journalists just wrote that driveclub only offers A, when other games offer A AND B. And tbh Driveclub's A isn't even exceptionally well done or fleshed out compared to other games's A.

Horizon offers closed circuits and p2p races as well as free roaming. Upgrades and tuning, you can just ignore or autotune in SP. Yes people who tune their cars will get better results, but you can restrict the race to stock. In Motorsport you can forget about the career and just jump in and race, turn assists and damage on or off to basically make it as arcadey as you like. Both offer greater variety and better and larger car selection etc.

So, no. This is not what journalists wanted, but they are aware and have to inform you that there are things Driveclub doesn't have compared to other racers.
Of course, it's stuff that you might never care about and that's why one should read the damn review. But a score is just a number and MUST reflect the fact that Driveclub doesn't offer as much content and variety as other racers.


See, you're part of the problem.
72 metacritic means nothing. Just go, read the reviews and try to understand whether you care or not about the stuff that determined the low-ish score.

You're completely ignoring the larger picture. Yes FH2 has track based racers, but that is not the main focus, in-fact, a majority of the game is spent off road racing. If that is something someone is not interested in, they likely won't be interested in the game itself. So if you review FH2, you review how well it's done an open world racing setting, not judge it on the merits of track based racing. Similarly, if you review Driveclub, you comment on how well it's done track based racing, not complain about it's lack of open world design, which actually seems to be one of the main complaints in the lower scoring reviews, coupled with disagreeing with the type of driving model Evo chose (simcade instead of sim or vice versa, in other words, some journalists don't agree with the balance), and the lack of "soul" whatever that means.

 

[mujun]

People so desperate for good review scores... seems like they're spending more time on this site crusading for better scores than actually playing the game.

Driveclub is misunderstood!

You're completely ignoring the larger picture. Yes FH2 has track based racers, but that is not the main focus, in-fact, a majority of the game is spent off road racing. If that is something someone is not interested in, they likely won't be interested in the game itself. So if you review FH2, you review how well it's done an open world racing setting, not judge it on the merits of track based racing. Similarly, if you review Driveclub, you comment on how well it's done track based racing, not complain about it's lack of open world design, which actually seems to be one of the main complaints in the lower scoring reviews, coupled with disagreeing with the type of driving model Evo chose (simcade instead of sim or vice versa, in other words, some journalists don't agree with the balance), and the lack of "soul" whatever that means.

Have you played much of Horizon 2? I beat the single player a couple of days ago and would say of the main races something like half of them are closed circuits.

 

[driver116]

People so desperate for good review scores... seems like they're spending more time on this site crusading for better scores than actually playing the game.

How does one play the game if it's not out yet?

 

[Ashad Mamood]

After reading this, and watching Daniel Bloodworth on GT talk about this game, I may just jump in..... The tracks sound like they are the star of this game?

Exactly! Game at the core is good. It's hard but boy does it race well!
The good thing about the GT trailers video is they give a perfectly good explanation as to why FH2 is so polished up and has all the extra trimmings. It's a sequel and they've just basically bought all the good stuff over from Forza 5 which gave the game a massive head start!

 

[Melchiah]

What Driveclub was intended to be is irrelevant for reviews scores.
Driveclub had little ambition (graphics aside), like i said it shouldn't be awarded 9's just because the devs perfectly achieved whatever unambitious goal they had.

A lot of journalists just wrote that driveclub only offers A, when other games offer A AND B. And tbh Driveclub's A isn't even exceptionally well done or fleshed out compared to other games's A.

I wouldn't call achieving near perfect arcade racing an unambitious goal. It is exceptionally done, and exactly what I personally wanted. The open world and pure simulator racers couldn't interest me less.

 

[Ashad Mamood]

The way I see it gamers shouldn't be afraid of Driveclub cause of some of the clearly biased and negative reviews. If you like racing games then you'll enjoy this game more than the average reviewer!

 

[driver116]

Driveclub had little ambition (graphics aside), like i said it shouldn't be awarded 9's just because the devs perfectly achieved whatever unambitious goal they had.

I love the way you think everyone wants it to score 9's.

 

[eso76]

You're completely ignoring the larger picture. Yes FH2 has track based racers, but that is not the main focus, in-fact, a majority of the game is spent off road racing. If that is something someone is not interested in, they likely won't be interested in the game itself. So if you review FH2, you review how well it's done an open world racing setting, not judge it on the merits of track based racing. Similarly, if you review Driveclub, you comment on how well it's done track based racing, not complain about it's lack of open world design, which actually seems to be one of the main complaints in the lower scoring reviews, coupled with disagreeing with the type of driving model Evo chose (simcade instead of sim or vice versa, in other words, some journalists don't agree with the balance), and the lack of "soul" whatever that means.

I don't care what the game is 'intended' to represent.
I review it based on what it actually offers, value for money.
If a dev comes out and says they want to make a shitty game it won't score 9's when it's released and it's indeed shitty as intended.

The "score", as in the number at the end of the review, must reflect a few things too many for it to be taken into much consideration, but has to give you a rough idea of what the game accomplishes and in DC's case i think it's fair to say it's not as complete a package as other titles. Of course, it could still be just your cup of tea and the best thing you could buy with your money.

I also thought that Jeff's (was it him ? i don't even remember) comment was quite awkward the way he worded that the game feels outdated because not even open world. That's BS. On the other hand though, he just reviewed a game that is open world while doing track based racing better in a number of ways (AI, car selection, events variety etc) and you can't overlook the fact that a game which is much more limited in scope and focus isn't especially better at what it does than another game that offers a little bit of everything.

 

[Always-honest]

I don't care what the game is 'intended' to represent.
I review it based on what it actually offers, value for money.
If a dev comes out and says they want to make a shitty game it won't score 9's when it's released and it's indeed shitty as intended.

The "score", as in the number at the end of the review, must reflect a few things too many for it to be taken into much consideration, but has to give you a rough idea of what the game accomplishes and in DC's case i think it's fair to say it's not as complete a package as other titles. Of course, it could still be just your cup of tea and the best thing you could buy with your money.

I also thought that Jeff's (was it him ? i don't even remember) comment was quite awkward the way he worded that the game feels outdated because not even open world. That's BS. On the other hand though, he just reviewed a game that is open world while doing track based racing better in a number of ways (AI, car selection, events variety etc) and you can't overlook the fact that a game which is much more limited in scope and focus isn't especially better at what it does than another game that offers a little bit of everything.

Yeah reviewers also have to give a buying advice based on content. I can understand they compare the game to other racers with way more content.
Having said that, there sure was some nonsense in these reviews. But i agree the game is not going to be everyone's cup of tea. Luckaly it's exactly my cup of tea. And then it's just a very good game.

 

[Amir0x]

There really is enough room, and room for plenty more while we're at it.

I loved my time with Forza 5, a game that is a far bigger technical and artistic achievement than people give it credit for, but after a while running the same tracks in the same conditions does start to feel confining - yeah, even when that means classic F1 cars on the Nurburgring.

So along comes Horizon - the game that seems purposely built for everything I love about racing games - not just racing, but the driving - the getting to know the car at every level, from milling around the waterfront, to cruising down the coast, to full tilt apex nailing circuit races and in-traffic street races and hell, even kangaroo hopping over hills while classical blasts out your rain-soaked windows.

But dammit if every time I lost a race in Horizon I thought that maybe it was my tune, or my upgrades, or maybe if I didn't have to focus on the minimap I could fully commit myself to the immediacy of the race right in front of me, and maybe if that one bump in the off-road track didn't send me careening to the left instead of the right, and hey - did that AI miss a checkpoint? And why are the AI cars so perfectly grounded and stable at speed?

Then I play DriveClub. No frills indeed. Just a quick and unobtrusive menu that puts you on one of several gloriously detailed, expansive and yet linear tracks, in a matter of seconds. There you battle with the AI through every turn - it has nothing to do with tunes, or upgrades, or cheating AI or spreading your focus upon a mini-map as well as the next apex and your course through the AI cars that'll break too early - you're purely focused on the race and you know its do-able if you take the right line and if you push it just a little farther than you did last time, but the risk in that doing so just may lose the whole race for you. That's not old fashioned - that's the very heart of racing distilled into the moment to moment of it.

All of these games have their place, and they all have such wildly different offerings and strengths, we shouldn't be in a rush to crown one of them king and expect all the others to fall in line.

So far, this generation, every single racing game I've played has brought something amazing to the table, from NFS: Rivals - my surprise hit of launch - to Forza Motorsport 5 and Horizon 2 and my current addiction in DriveClub. There's plenty of room. Revel in it.

It's great to see another person who gets it perfectly.

 

[h3ro]

It's great to see another person who gets it perfectly.

Agreed. I'm happy I get to experience all these different types of driving/racing games. Heck, I'm ready for Project Cars as well. I need some sim action and the track listing looks fantastic.

Think about that, in just the span of weeks, we get a balls out circuit arcade racer, an open world driving game with the guts of a sim (FH) and then a full on PC sim game on console.

Fantastic time to be a racing game fan. (once they get these damn servers working right).

 

[supaflyryguy]

Edit: Wrong thread!

 

[Mascot]

There really is enough room, and room for plenty more while we're at it.

I loved my time with Forza 5, a game that is a far bigger technical and artistic achievement than people give it credit for, but after a while running the same tracks in the same conditions does start to feel confining - yeah, even when that means classic F1 cars on the Nurburgring.

So along comes Horizon - the game that seems purposely built for everything I love about racing games - not just racing, but the driving - the getting to know the car at every level, from milling around the waterfront, to cruising down the coast, to full tilt apex nailing circuit races and in-traffic street races and hell, even kangaroo hopping over hills while classical blasts out your rain-soaked windows.

But dammit if every time I lost a race in Horizon I thought that maybe it was my tune, or my upgrades, or maybe if I didn't have to focus on the minimap I could fully commit myself to the immediacy of the race right in front of me, and maybe if that one bump in the off-road track didn't send me careening to the left instead of the right, and hey - did that AI miss a checkpoint? And why are the AI cars so perfectly grounded and stable at speed?

Then I play DriveClub. No frills indeed. Just a quick and unobtrusive menu that puts you on one of several gloriously detailed, expansive and yet linear tracks, in a matter of seconds. There you battle with the AI through every turn - it has nothing to do with tunes, or upgrades, or cheating AI or spreading your focus upon a mini-map as well as the next apex and your course through the AI cars that'll break too early - you're purely focused on the race and you know its do-able if you take the right line and if you push it just a little farther than you did last time, but the risk in that doing so just may lose the whole race for you. That's not old fashioned - that's the very heart of racing distilled into the moment to moment of it.

All of these games have their place, and they all have such wildly different offerings and strengths, we shouldn't be in a rush to crown one of them king and expect all the others to fall in line.

So far, this generation, every single racing game I've played has brought something amazing to the table, from NFS: Rivals - my surprise hit of launch - to Forza Motorsport 5 and Horizon 2 and my current addiction in DriveClub. There's plenty of room. Revel in it.

I have no opinion either way, but didn't want to be the only person on GAF who hadn't quoted this post.

 

[Mobius 1]

There really is enough room, and room for plenty more while we're at it.

I loved my time with Forza 5, a game that is a far bigger technical and artistic achievement than people give it credit for, but after a while running the same tracks in the same conditions does start to feel confining - yeah, even when that means classic F1 cars on the Nurburgring.

So along comes Horizon - the game that seems purposely built for everything I love about racing games - not just racing, but the driving - the getting to know the car at every level, from milling around the waterfront, to cruising down the coast, to full tilt apex nailing circuit races and in-traffic street races and hell, even kangaroo hopping over hills while classical blasts out your rain-soaked windows.

But dammit if every time I lost a race in Horizon I thought that maybe it was my tune, or my upgrades, or maybe if I didn't have to focus on the minimap I could fully commit myself to the immediacy of the race right in front of me, and maybe if that one bump in the off-road track didn't send me careening to the left instead of the right, and hey - did that AI miss a checkpoint? And why are the AI cars so perfectly grounded and stable at speed?

Then I play DriveClub. No frills indeed. Just a quick and unobtrusive menu that puts you on one of several gloriously detailed, expansive and yet linear tracks, in a matter of seconds. There you battle with the AI through every turn - it has nothing to do with tunes, or upgrades, or cheating AI or spreading your focus upon a mini-map as well as the next apex and your course through the AI cars that'll break too early - you're purely focused on the race and you know its do-able if you take the right line and if you push it just a little farther than you did last time, but the risk in that doing so just may lose the whole race for you. That's not old fashioned - that's the very heart of racing distilled into the moment to moment of it.

All of these games have their place, and they all have such wildly different offerings and strengths, we shouldn't be in a rush to crown one of them king and expect all the others to fall in line.

So far, this generation, every single racing game I've played has brought something amazing to the table, from NFS: Rivals - my surprise hit of launch - to Forza Motorsport 5 and Horizon 2 and my current addiction in DriveClub. There's plenty of room. Revel in it.

Bravo. Beautifully stated.

 

[AgentP]

There really is enough room, and room for plenty more while we're at it.

I loved my time with Forza 5, a game that is a far bigger technical and artistic achievement than people give it credit for, but after a while running the same tracks in the same conditions does start to feel confining - yeah, even when that means classic F1 cars on the Nurburgring.

So along comes Horizon - the game that seems purposely built for everything I love about racing games - not just racing, but the driving - the getting to know the car at every level, from milling around the waterfront, to cruising down the coast, to full tilt apex nailing circuit races and in-traffic street races and hell, even kangaroo hopping over hills while classical blasts out your rain-soaked windows.

But dammit if every time I lost a race in Horizon I thought that maybe it was my tune, or my upgrades, or maybe if I didn't have to focus on the minimap I could fully commit myself to the immediacy of the race right in front of me, and maybe if that one bump in the off-road track didn't send me careening to the left instead of the right, and hey - did that AI miss a checkpoint? And why are the AI cars so perfectly grounded and stable at speed?

Then I play DriveClub. No frills indeed. Just a quick and unobtrusive menu that puts you on one of several gloriously detailed, expansive and yet linear tracks, in a matter of seconds. There you battle with the AI through every turn - it has nothing to do with tunes, or upgrades, or cheating AI or spreading your focus upon a mini-map as well as the next apex and your course through the AI cars that'll break too early - you're purely focused on the race and you know its do-able if you take the right line and if you push it just a little farther than you did last time, but the risk in that doing so just may lose the whole race for you. That's not old fashioned - that's the very heart of racing distilled into the moment to moment of it.

All of these games have their place, and they all have such wildly different offerings and strengths, we shouldn't be in a rush to crown one of them king and expect all the others to fall in line.

So far, this generation, every single racing game I've played has brought something amazing to the table, from NFS: Rivals - my surprise hit of launch - to Forza Motorsport 5 and Horizon 2 and my current addiction in DriveClub. There's plenty of room. Revel in it.

Excellent post. This thread has been a sea of shit due to console wars, but I'm glad there are people out there that can enjoy all the games for what they offer.

 

[BloodMoney]

Then I play DriveClub. No frills indeed. Just a quick and unobtrusive menu that puts you on one of several gloriously detailed, expansive and yet linear tracks, in a matter of seconds. There you battle with the AI through every turn - it has nothing to do with tunes, or upgrades, or cheating AI or spreading your focus upon a mini-map as well as the next apex and your course through the AI cars that'll break too early - you're purely focused on the race and you know its do-able if you take the right line and if you push it just a little farther than you did last time, but the risk in that doing so just may lose the whole race for you. That's not old fashioned - that's the very heart of racing distilled into the moment to moment of it.

Agreed

For starters, the menus are excellent and quick, the load times once you initiate a race are best in class. The AI is challenging, and any frustration I've had with them is alleviated once I really learn the track. While not sim, DC really is at it's best when you approach it like a sim and devote time to learning the tracks. It is a racing game, and a very good one at that.

I spent the latter part of last night running the downhill variant of the Putre point to point race with 11 semi-pro AI. What a blast. I've still got a few more corner to perfect, but it is so rewarding to run a clean race, being tail to tail with the AI, jostling for position (especially at dawn... drop dead gorgeous sunrise).

 

[GlamFM]

The notion that every game should be reviewed in a vacuum is a stupid one.

The constant comparisons to FH2 are stupid as well. Seems like a cheap excuse too because some reviewers mentioned "open world" design.

Compare DC to other racing games if you want and it still looks slim in content and scope.

What is does it does beautifully, meta 72 or 7/10, good game, fair score.