@silv3rst0rm: Nobody's criticizing Diablo for being 720p in handheld mode. The Switch's screen itself is hardware limited to 720p, so it would be literally impossible for the handheld resolution to be higher. The criticism is about how muddy the graphics get sometimes in handheld mode. It doesn't sound like it's enough to ruin the experience, but it's certainly worth mentioning in a review.

@karlInSanDiego True, especially with games that make as good use of force feedback wheels as Forza does. Though I think part of the problem in this case is that there are almost no wheels that work with the Xbox One, since Xbox 360 peripherals are not compatible with the X1. I have a nice Fanatec wheel and pedal setup that I use with my Xbox 360, and won't be getting an XB1 or Forza 5 unless/until there is a way to use my wheel with the new Xbox.

Stupid, stupid. The "pro gamer" wasn't good at Forza, or driving games in general from the look of it. In any case, the outcome should have been obvious. Forza may not be the most realistic sim in the world, but it's realistic enough that any good real life racer is going to do pretty well, assuming they can get past using a controller instead of steering wheel and pedals. Give them a nice Fanatec wheel and pedal setup and they should really do well.

What I'd be much more interested in is the reverse. How well would an expert Forza racer do in real life with a track and car that they knew well in the game but had never been on in real life?

Late to the party, but I just recently found this on XBLA and gave it a try. I pretty much agree with this review, especially about the mixture of fairly realistic visuals and handling combined with silly powerups being very jarring. There is an option to disable powerups, but unfortunately for some silly reason that option is bundled with the option for turning off collisions. So if you want to make things more realistic by disabling powerups, you have to also make things less realistic by disabling collisions! It does make much sense. I'd like to leave collisions on and just disable powerups.

@M3o5nster I've been to a lot of track days, it's great fun, and I agree, any time I've happened to have the track to myself for a while was a special treat. The thing is, I've also done a lot of club racing, which is also extremely fun. So when choosing a driving simulator, accurate physics simulation is important, but so is good sophisticated AI drivers if I want to do any offline racing. I guess you could think of it as driving simulator vs. racing simulator. If I have one simulator which has better physics, but another which has better AI, I might be willing to sacrifice a slight amount of accuracy in the physics for a more realistic feeling AI. It depends how big the difference is. As far as I can tell there's not a huge difference in the physics accuracy between Forza 4 and GT 5, so I'd take the program which has a more fun overall experience. I haven't tried Forza 5 or GT 6, so maybe the difference in simulation accuracy has increased. I'll have to wait for some non-fanboy driving enthusiasts to try them both and write a review to find out, since I'm not planning to buy both consoles any time soon.

@adeathnote1 I think you're greatly exaggerating the differences in realism between Forza and GT. I agree some PC sims are much more realistic than either of these, but every driving enthusiast I've known or read reviews by who has thoroughly played both Forza 4 and GT 5 agrees that the physics are pretty close. Sure you can nitpick various aspects of each, like cars seem to oversteer too much in Forza, but most agree that they're both pretty realistic, with arguably a slight edge going to GT. The main argument I've seen Sony fanboys use to claim Forza is an arcade racer is just pointing out that Forza has various silly driving modes like car tag and soccer, as if the existence of those modes has any bearing on how realistic the physics engine is.

@Korvus85 @Sir_Claude I think it makes a big difference whether or not the game was intentionally designed to have a rate of progression that most people would find frustrating, in order to push people toward micro-transactions.

Game designers put a lot of effort into finding an optimal balance between challenge and rewards when tuning the rate of progression in a game. Going too far in either direction can ruin the fun. If a game designer honestly tried to find that optimal balance to maximize fun and satisfaction, and then you buy your way ahead in the game, then it's true that you wouldn't be playing the game the way it was designed. On the other hand, if the game designer purposefully tweaked the game's rate of progression toward the frustrating end of the spectrum in order to motivate people to use micro-transactions, then buying your way ahead in the game would in fact be playing the game the way it was intended. It would be the people who refuse to buy any currency who are playing the game at a progression rate that was intended to be frustrating, i.e. not the way it was intended to be played in order to maximize fun.

@lcrava What?!? You really don't think saying someone is a "bad joke as a person" is an insult? And you're posting on a public forum, so it's pretty silly to think your post is your own private business.

@IJONOI @bilboad No, judging the review itself, i.e. the actual content of the article, is great, and reading discussion of the article and the game being reviewed is why I read the comment section. What I want to filter out are the comments whose sole purpose is to dispute the numeric review score, and basically ignore the content of the review. I respect everyone's right to an opinion, including an opinion about the review score, but I find it very irritating when sometimes 50% or more of the comments seem to just be complaining about the numeric score, and pointing out that some other game which they don't think is equivalent got a higher or lower score, even when that other game was reviewed by a different reviewer, etc.

Also, note that when I said I wish I could filter them out, I don't mean that the posts should be deleted, I just mean I wish I could filter them out from my view of the webpage, so I didn't have to wade through so many of them to find the posts that are actually discussing the article or the game being reviewed.

I wish there was a way to filter out all the comments that are just disputing the review score. It would make the GS comment sections much more interesting to read (and a lot shorter).