FM4 leaked footage trailer!! (not april fools)

[-=DV=-]

Edit: I would never choose a car like this over a supercar in a game, but with 500+ in the game there is space for both surely?
Which cars were left out to accommodate the Chevy Aveo in FM3? FM3 had all of the great modern super cars and more came via DLC.

Forza does have a very great and balanced car selection I would agree theres room for all if werent missing some staples like this.

Ford Falcon XR6 turbo
Ford Typhoon
Holden Maloo
Holden Torana
Ferrari 308
Mitsubishi Legnum
The original super snake
Toyota GT-Four ST165 (absolute Icon)
Toyota GT-Four ST185 (pinnacle of toyotas rallying, Toyota even released other cars badged to celebrate this car)
Toyota Caldina GTT
Toyota Aristo
Toyota JZZ30 Soarer
Toyota GZ20 Soarer
Toyota Seven
Toyota AW11 MR2


Thats just off the top of my head after not sleeping for nearly 48 hrs. There are alot more that atleast for me...are missed.
None of them supercars by todays standards, but Every single car there is infinately more interesting, exciting and fun than a toyota yaris, chev aveo or whatever underpowered appliance you could think of.

As I said, forzas car list is quite balanced and it doesnt feel like its missing alot. But it is missing some staples and every time I think "Id like to buy xxx and put some parts on it, see if it can put in the same times as say an f40" I then have to facepalm because while I cant drive XXX...I can drive a freaking yaris or aveo or some other piece of crap. Thats why I dont like it when people start saying they want more appliance type cars in it. I wouldnt care at all If the game wasnt still missing some really interesting cars. But do we want to give T10 the message that we want them to work on more appliance which in turn leads to neglecting alot of other cars that are more interesting and exciting.

 

[TorqueHappenS08]

...You want the Cruze? hopefully you mean the SS.

 

[LaBounti]

My vote goes to the Cruze Hatchback ......

 

[UncleBoB]

This has to be the most puffed up trailer I ever saw...

 

[Crispy]

^Lol, I have to agree.

I really hope that song is included in the game though.

 

[Bogie 19th]

My vote goes to the Cruze Hatchback ......

Heck yeah!

 

[Dan_]

I see no problem in racing Aveos, Yaris and Colts. Just because they are common everyday cars doesn't mean they aren't worth to be raced in game A or game B.

It's a matter of personal taste and honestly, I'd much rather have the original road going Cruze, than the BTCC lookalike, which in all fairness, isn't a real Cruze.

 

[Akira AC]

Hilarious

 

[CDailey]

I see no problem in racing Aveos, Yaris and Colts. Just because they are common everyday cars doesn't mean they aren't worth to be raced in game A or game B.

It's a matter of personal taste and honestly, I'd much rather have the original road going Cruze, than the BTCC lookalike, which in all fairness, isn't a real Cruze.

QFT. I'd much rather have more ordinary every day cars than a bunch of race cars. Don't get me wrong, I love all the exotics but I'd rather have more E, D, C and B class cars. I have way more fun tuning and racing slower cars than trying to man handle the faster cars around the track.

 

[Dopplegagger]

Nothing wrong with racing built up commuter cars and eccononboxes. Just allow me the choice to race both the road going version and the tube framed race car. Both are of my intrests.

 

[Bonefork]

The video on Amazon shows dirt and mud racing (real-life video, but prevalent themes in a tiny montage)...

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B003O6E986/?tag=gtplanet-20

 

[Simmpa]

Thank god I have the Porsche GT2 wheel, no way I´m going to wave my hands in the air. I still have no Xbox 360 but I´m defenetly going to buy one.

 

[-=DV=-]

Bonefork the dirt and mudracing you see is just clips from topgear usa. Try not to read too much into it

 

[Strata-R]

this trailer was leaked a long time ago. I saw it in February!

 

[espeed623]

this trailer was leaked a long time ago. I saw it in February!

Unless you've got some sort of legitimate internal connection to Turn 10 (which I highly doubt you do), I'm calling BS on this post of yours.

 

[Dave A]

Unless you've got some sort of legitimate internal connection to Turn 10 (which I highly doubt you do), I'm calling BS on this post of yours.

I think he means the one on Amazon, that was released on XBox Live ages ago.

 

[Shant J.]

All I want from Forza is more classics!

(Porsche 917 K, I'm looking at you.)

 

[Yui-san]

As much as I love Gran Turismo, Forza looks more "fun" to me. It's graphics and overall physics still suck, but the amount of diversity in the game makes it look truely interesting. And the ability to walk around any car, look at it from any angle, etc... looks truely amazing.

Anyhow, they made small mistake...at 1:16, he says that Forza 4 has "over 80 manufactures, more than has ever been seen in the racing genre".... but Gran Turismo 5 has 99 manufactures.. -_-

 

[-=DV=-]

yui san most reviewers including ISR say that most of the sims have it that close phyisics wise that there isnt much difference at all. ISR even go as far to actually refer to forza's and gt's physics as the same. when they say things like "it doesnt have the same feel as forza and gt physics" or when they say things like "forza and gt basically feel the same, theres not much difference"...

In reality. The more advanced sims get, the less differences there are between the feel. and while there are minor differences. Forza and GT feel very similar once you have a wheel infront of you.

re: manufacturers. Tuning houses arent manufacturers...that simple. GT has a big habbit of taking tuning houses, and listing them as manufacturers. Im not sure howmany actual manufacturers GT has. I would be very surprised if forza has more tho.

edit:
I just went through this list: http://gran-turismo.wikia.com/wiki/Gran_Turismo_5_Car_List

And counted manufacturers excluding tuning houses and race teams. And came up with 77 manufacturers. Not sure if that list is complete though, It just doesnt seem it.

 

[Bonefork]

(TL;DR: Physics is mostly theory, and your game is using only a few of those theories and some gating logic to give you a 'believable' experience. Arguments on these forums about physics between games are tantamount to other gamers comparing Xbox vs. PS3 or PC vs. Mac; in other words, futile fanboy wars that focus on nascent concerns and personal preferences.):

The more advanced sims get, the less differences there are between the feel. and while there are minor differences. Forza and GT feel very similar once you have a wheel infront of you.

Respectfully disagree. This statement is a logical fallacy: by creating more complexity within these games they will inevitably be more and more different.

It's clear from these forums that most users can spot those differences already.

It's also clear from these forums that a lot of people are fooled into thinking that any of these "simulators" actually calculate the many complexities of physics when in truth even the best among them are just scraping the surface of a field of math with unknown depths.

Anyone who argues that one game has better physics than the other better have access to the source code (so they can compare those algorithms to published research papers) or just take their foot out of their mouth and realize they have no clue what they're talking about. It might "feel" more real to them, but perception has never been scientific evidence, even en masse ("Earth feels flat to us!"). Fact is, none of them do any one thing perfectly (or "right") and it will be a long time coming in the hardware world before they can.

 

[Zer0]

yui san most reviewers including ISR say that most of the sims have it that close phyisics wise that there isnt much difference at all. ISR even go as far to actually refer to forza's and gt's physics as the same. when they say things like "it doesnt have the same feel as forza and gt physics" or when they say things like "forza and gt basically feel the same, theres not much difference"...

In reality. The more advanced sims get, the less differences there are between the feel. and while there are minor differences. Forza and GT feel very similar once you have a wheel infront of you.

I don't know why some people have a blind trust with all what ISR says. They never made a serious handling comparison between the two games. It seems that they review some aspects by personal preferences and rarely spoke about facts, cars characteristics and how close to the real thing a car is recreated. Even if you look at their scores you could guess that Forza 3 was more realistic.

In the oposite side there are comprehensive handling reviews like the "Car and Driver" made by people used to play with cars instead of sims. They have no problem pointing at the driving faults and explaining the differences between the two games and real life. Big difference.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=4454586#post4454586

Anyway since there are no realistic low grip road tyres in Forza and there is a driving aid active all the time(even with wheel), driving the same car at the limit and recovering mistakes will always be more forgiving than GT5. That alone make both games far from being "the same". Anyone that have tried to share the Forza learned skills with GT5 have a proof of that.

 

[-=DV=-]

Respectfully disagree. This statement is a logical fallacy: by creating more complexity within these games they will inevitably be more and more different.

Within context, As more time, development and money is put into the work on the physics engines of these titles, the closer they are getting to what feels real and right to the developers. As what feels real and right is based on reality. Something that is the same for all devs, alot of the the different titles will naturally start coming closer and closer with the "feel" of the physics. While they may take different paths to reach that feel. my point is that as time goes on, as more titles are realeased and as competition grows between devs, what we are seeing physics wise is starting to become alot more consistant from one dev to the next compared to what it used to be.

My initial reaction to GT5's final build was "$%( me this feels alot like fm3, but a bit more refined and less forgiving. but alot of it felt very similar. Why? because both devs are getting closer and closer to their target and benchmark in feel. As both devs target and benchmark happens to be the same thing...well...its not rocket surgery to figure out wether they are going to get closer in feel or further apart.


Zer0.While I have been able to replicate the results of the permanent aid tests on a controller. I have not been able to duplicate the results of the permanent aid tests ive seen on youtube using my 911 turbo S. Most people I have talked to both on here, and on fm forums have not been able to replicate it either. So as it stands at the moment. For me atleast, its just another video on youtube. The reason I stopped playing forza actually Is because I found it several times easier to put in consistantly fast laps with the controller than it was with the wheel due to the aid on the controller that for some reason despite howmuch a few people scream about it, Just doesnt seem to be there using the wheel. And I wasnt going to start playing on a controller just to be competative.

 

[t.o.]

Within context, As more time, development and money is put into the work on the physics engines of these titles, the closer they are getting to what feels real and right to the developers. As what feels real and right is based on reality. Something that is the same for all devs, alot of the the different titles will naturally start coming closer and closer with the "feel" of the physics. While they may take different paths to reach that feel. my point is that as time goes on, as more titles are realeased and as competition grows between devs, what we are seeing physics wise is starting to become alot more consistant from one dev to the next compared to what it used to be.

My initial reaction to GT5's final build was "$%( me this feels alot like fm3, but a bit more refined and less forgiving. but alot of it felt very similar. Why? because both devs are getting closer and closer to their target and benchmark in feel. As both devs target and benchmark happens to be the same thing...well...its not rocket surgery to figure out wether they are going to get closer in feel or further apart.


Zer0.While I have been able to replicate the results of the permanent aid tests on a controller. I have not been able to duplicate the results of the permanent aid tests ive seen on youtube using my 911 turbo S. Most people I have talked to both on here, and on fm forums have not been able to replicate it either. So as it stands at the moment. For me atleast, its just another video on youtube. The reason I stopped playing forza actually Is because I found it several times easier to put in consistantly fast laps with the controller than it was with the wheel due to the aid on the controller that for some reason despite howmuch a few people scream about it, Just doesnt seem to be there using the wheel. And I wasnt going to start playing on a controller just to be competative.

Maybe they need to split out the boards between wheels and controllers. I think that would be a really great solution.

And I do agree with what you're saying. I found GT5's physics to be a bit more forgiving than Prologue's. Leading me to believe that these engines are getting closer and closer to each other. As I've and many others have said, just because somethings harder doesn't make it more real.

 

[Akira AC]

So:

GT5+Active steering =FM3

Therefore:

GT5-Active steering =LFS


Compare LFS,GT5 and FM3 side by side,and you will see that FM3 is by far the most unrealistic,GT5 is the most rounded and LFS is the most accurate,FM3 has those assist to be easier to newcomers,the sad true about it is that the steering assist cannot be disabled,which makes the game more boring time after time when al cars have superb grip and control when they don't, don't believe me,play with the TVR tuscan and experience it by yourselves.

Besides,FM3 doesn't count with wind conditions,while both GT5 and LFS both make those calculation according with the shape of the car and environmental conditions.

 

[Bonefork]

[..]what feels real and right is based on reality. Something that is the same for all devs, alot of the the different titles will naturally start coming closer and closer with the "feel" of the physics.

Physics is far more complicated than what you feel. They might get the sense of speed, and some convincing tire-road interactions, or even damage, but try hitting a blockade at 200 mph in the X2010 and tell me the physics engine holds up to reality.

My point is that while they might pin down some convincing routines under supervised conditions, game engines are NOT based completely on real physics models; and consequently, they all fall apart when something unexpected occurs. At this point in tech and human history, that's as good as it gets. We don't have the scientists and computing power to do the things akiraacecombat imagines:

Besides,FM3 doesn't count with wind conditions,while both GT5 and LFS both make those calculation according with the shape of the car and environmental conditions.

Please show me one ounce of evidence that the polygonal shape of a car has a dynamic effect within the game towards resistance and handling.

I'll buy you dinner and eat my own hat if you can find anything substantial to prove this wild idea.

.
.

Further reading on car physics for game engines:
http://www.asawicki.info/Mirror/Car Physics for Games/Car Physics for Games.html

 

[Akira AC]

I'll buy you dinner and eat my own hat if you can find anything substantial to prove your wild ideas.

I can't say for sure, but it's far more likely that each car simply has a few parameters (i.e. "RollProbability", "BrakingStability", "AccelerationStability", etc.) that are simply factored into the equations that determine the next coordinates of any given car when the gas is applied. These values are likely altered when modifying the cars just like HP and any other stat.

Software that accurately measured barometric pressure on polygonal models at varying speeds would cost a hell of a lot more than $60.

//further reading//

They do wind conditions simulations since GT4,have you played GT5 with the rain effects turned on,and have played LFS with variations of aerodynamics settings,the engine cannot calculate stuff over the shape of an object(oh wait,source engine does,now you own me dinner,and I hope you wearing a cowboy hat),in the case of GT5 is about counters and accumulators,and all sorts of differential equations,GT5's engine probably cannot determinate stats over aerodynamic shapes,but it does have indexes that can be scripted over objects,and the differential equations introduced to the engine determinates some conditions like roll over and so on.

Both GT5 and LFS have basis to perform such calculations,by the other hand FM doesn't,that's the point that I'm trying to make.(game engine complexity,which have evolved quite a lot since 2003)

 

[Bonefork]

Both GT5 and LFS have basis to perform such calculations,by the other hand FM doesn't,that's the point that I'm trying to make.(game engine complexity,which have evolved quite a lot since 2003)

Proof, please... I've read of no such revelations, and would be delighted to be proven wrong.

I think GT5 paints a pretty picture when they show the X2010 unveil and there's visible wind whipping around it, and I find it hard to believe those calculations are real-time, never mind active while racing.

..meanwhile people are driving through walls on the 'Ring and SS7.

 

[Akira AC]

Proof, please... I've read of no such revelations.

I think GT5 paints a pretty picture when they show the X2010 unveil and there's visible wind whipping around it, and I find it hard to believe there's much more to it.

>Tyre grip on 10% on wet
>Tyre grip on 20% on wet
>Tyre grip on gravel terrain
>Tyre grip on tarmac terrain

The wind effects are only mere visual,while the above calculations cannot be done into FM3 when they are active on LFS and GT5,why,because doesn't have the basic calculations in its engine to do them.

Enough prof now?

 

[Zer0]

Zer0.While I have been able to replicate the results of the permanent aid tests on a controller. I have not been able to duplicate the results of the permanent aid tests ive seen on youtube using my 911 turbo S. Most people I have talked to both on here, and on fm forums have not been able to replicate it either. So as it stands at the moment. For me atleast, its just another video on youtube. The reason I stopped playing forza actually Is because I found it several times easier to put in consistantly fast laps with the controller than it was with the wheel due to the aid on the controller that for some reason despite howmuch a few people scream about it, Just doesnt seem to be there using the wheel. And I wasnt going to start playing on a controller just to be competative.

Forza has more active aids in the wheel:



All them together are what make the handling soft and forgiving compared to GT5, the infamous "floating effect". Controller is even worst yes. Really there's no need to search for any specific except playing the game with no aids and a wheel to notice the differences in skills needed to keep the cars on the track. Dan Greenawalt has confirmed that existed permanent driving aids in FM3 and has promissed a more realistic mode in FM4 with no assists. I don't know why some keep denying all that facts, the differences in control is night and day. Just compare a 911 like Ruf in GT5 vs a similar Porsche 911 in FM3, all stock, road tyres and with no aids.

Maybe they need to split out the boards between wheels and controllers. I think that would be a really great solution.

And I do agree with what you're saying. I found GT5's physics to be a bit more forgiving than Prologue's. Leading me to believe that these engines are getting closer and closer to each other. As I've and many others have said, just because somethings harder doesn't make it more real.

And if something is easier doesn't make it more real. There's a point when the things become realistic and like in real life some cars are harder to drive than others. You don't need to be a racing pilot to expect certain things to happen like easy loss of traction or control with tricky to drive or powerful RL cars in certain situations and configurations.

For example a R8 with no aids in RL is suposed to be hard to drive but very easy in stock form with aids. I can't find the vid but someone noticed the differences between the FM3 recreation:
http://forums.forzamotorsport.net/forums/thread/3993442.aspx

 

[-=DV=-]

Once again zero, I have not been able to replicate ANY of these permanant aid intrusions ive seen on youtube with supposed 911 wheels on fm3 with mine. Most people i know havnt. So once again. Until it happens to me, Its just another youtube video.

Re: difficulty of control. I dont know why people get so hung up on "harder is more realistic" Its simply not. Look I spend more time on the track on track days ect than I do actually playing either GT5 or Forza.Im not trying to tout that over anybody here, Im stating that as MY personal experience that I am using to compare the two. While forza is over forgiving. GT is also over punishing. In the past forza has been even more forgiving than it is now, and GT has been even more punishing than it is now. Truth is. reality is somewhere inbetween the 2...and as I said, they are both moving closer to that as they advance with each generation of the game.