Because it's the main issue that FM hasn't gotten right so far - their scope is also to adress the sim-crowd. Or do I need to mention all the buzz-word dropping done by Dan in the last couple of weeks? Though I have to say some of the showcased fantasy tracks do reassemble more PGR/Shift 2 style than anything.
Exactly, the focus is to
also adress the sim crowd. It's not the only thing FM4 set out to do. The way this was initially worded implied that FM4 could be better
in every single aspect aside from track accuracy and physics, and it would
still be second to GT. So, I reiterate my point: If everything in a Forza game is miles ahead of a GT game, and the physics and track accuracy is slightly worse, does that mean that that Forza game isn't as good as that GT game?
I'll repeat myself if necessary, but both GT and FM offer more than pure simulation, so why should that be the only thing that indicates which game is better?
XBL wasn't bullet-proof and that's all I'm saying. Of course the PSN hack had a different quality, but if you state that one of the positives about Forza is the more secure online environment, then you are wrong. Just face it and get over it.
Forza is on the Xbox and uses XBL, which you said yourself is superior. All I said was having the superior online service is a plus in my book. You can wiggle around all you want, but that's what it comes down to.
Also, this isn't just black and white. as you said, the PSN hack was on a completely different level than the FM2 glitch - which would mean that, yes, Forza has a more secure online system than GT5. Because, so far, there hasn't been an issue where anywhere near as mmany people were affected, nor were they affected anywhere near as severe.
Of course, XBL isn't perfect, and I never said so. All I'm saying is, FM has the superior online service with XBL.
Nonsense.
Personally, I don't need much of a "game" in the sense I have a motherload of prefabricated races, a phony careere mode where I can progress up the ranks and some bloke reassuring me how good it was racing me.
So, you don't need all the stuff that Forza allows you to do which GT5 absolutely does not? Hey, that's all fine and well with me, really. I still don't want to give up on things like Rivals Mode or Leaderboards, because these give me more options to enjoy the game in a way I like. Same with the career, I have the option to enjoy a pretty vast career mode, as opposed to GT5's very, very limited one.
I'm more than happy to explore GT like I, and a few others, did in the 4 hrs Nürburgring companion thread for example. Take any car, throw it at any race and see what comes out in the end. Find the limit in performance, tyres, whatever and see if you can pull it off. Compare starting grids and see how fast the opponents are.
You know the interesting bit? You can do that in FM4 just as well, nobody's stopping you from doing that. With the online lobbies being fully adjustable, you can do just about anything you want.
I love the fact that GT doesn't tell me what to do but let me find out myself. That's what I like about the series.
The problem is that GT5 couldn't tell you what to do even if you wanted to. In Forza, I have the choice to do whatever I want. In GT5, I have to make the game a game by myself because it isn't out of the box.
I don't really get why that's a good thing in your book, though. I can do that same stuff in Forza - and then some. But GT5 is better because it does give you less options? I mean, not they didn't hear the "öess options = better" argument before, but it still boggles my mind.
However I can understand that to many, not familiar with this franchise, it all gets a bit too complicated. I see how they would need more guidance and restrictions to help them progress through the game.
So, everyone who expected a career mode along the lines of GT4 is a newby, or what?
I know that video game journalists must treat every game as a "game" to have some sort of standard at least.
In that respect, and I gladly repeat it for you, I can see how IGN states a 5/10 for gameplay. But as I'm very familiar with GT, I rather give it a 8/10 because it keeps me interested and happy. It's tremendous fun to find that perfect car/race combo. To me.
Oh, I'm not saying you have to agree with the review scores yourself. What I'm saying is, they're ratings of the game are indeed indicative of the overall quality. Most importantly because they aren't factoring one thing over the other. In that regard, most reviews are more unbiased than most people in here would rate the games... I guess most of us would, for example, value stuff like the physics, force feedback or the car list higher than a reviewer, while we would probably deem stuff like a plethora of driving aids to be less important than them.
That's all well and good, but it doesn't take away from those scores being somewhat representative of the game's quality. Not perfectly, of course. But the average of a large amount of reviews sure is more of an indicator of a games quality than, say, a single person's opinion or sales figures.
I pointed out to you that if you want a "smart ass answer", then it's that you can't do averages with numbers on an ordinal scale. Which you simply can't.
Uh, what? You can't do averages for ordinal scales? Marks in school are basically an ordinal scale, and last time I checked, I do get averages for those. And rating games is hardly any different from that.
Me getting rated in the 10 subjects I'm currently attending at professional school and seeing how well I did in comparison to my class mates based on my average seems to work perfectly well - it even does so in the educational system, for example when you've got a numerus clausus to enroll at a university, but it isn't valid for games?
The only criticism that I would understand is that the averages aren't wieghed and, say, graphics, sound and everything else is valued the same. Which, however, is a moot point since you could factor those things differently and Forza would still be rated higher - as it received higher ratings in each individual category. At best, the difference between both would be smaller.
I think it's very clear I rate the genuine car "feel" of GT higher in my preferences than the online aspects of Forza.
Forza does a lot of things better than GT. But not the illusion of driving a real car. Because it was never meant to do that at all: it's an online game to such an extent, that without a gold membership you would miss 3/4 of the fun. I could never understand why people even bothered with FM in "offline" mode.
But, again, Forza is not the better car game. T10 need to understand that it's not enough stating their love for cars: it must show in the product. If they think "love" is putting stickers on cars, then it's a strange definition of the word.
So, being about cars invalidates everything the game does besides the track? I don't have to agree with that logic, right? Because I won't. Racing cars, for me, is as much about competiveness as it is about enjoying the driving feel. And, racing games, to me, are about that - racing. Not just about driving.
If all I wanted to do was cruise around, then yes, I would value GT5's better driving feel (as opposed to FM3, I'll reserve final judgment of FM4's driving feel until I actually drive a decent number of cars) higher than all the tools for competitive racing that FM3/4 give me.
To word this a little differently, Leaderboards and especially Rivals Mode are some of the key elements for me to prefer Forza. It's much more in line with the competitive spirit of racing than what GT5 offers.
Also, "loving cars" is about a lot of things. Putting stickers on them? Well, not necessarily, know. But I know a lot of people, both in the real world and in the virtual one, who like to express their love towards a given car in making it their own. Both visually and mechanically.
In GT5, I may have to look after my car and actually do the mantainance, but I do get more of a feel of ownership in FM3. My NA Miata, for example, is one of a kind. You're unlikely to find one that's an exact copy - there's little chance that another one will feature the exact same colour on the wheels or the body, have the exact same combination of body parts and wears the same, small decals that mine does. I'm able to make the car mine and that, in my opinion, does a lot more to express my 'love' towards cars than driving a generic car.
That's my take on 'loving cars', though.
