Forza 4 vs GT5 physics (read the first post before contributing)

[Lazy Liquid]

Yes, however, you would be amazed at the number of people posting over at FP that do not even own a copy of FM4

And the oposite too...

 

[BWX]

Yes, however, you would be amazed at the number of people posting over at FP that do not even own a copy of FM4

Yeah, it's obviously not a scientific poll in any way, shape, or form.

 

[PzR Slim]

I'll agree with that, Forza has put effort into launching; with the drag racing component and all.

However, it does really feel like it polishes tiny pieces of an otherwise dull, dirty rock. It has good parts, but the overall experience is a bit inconsistent, hence my main gripe, they've modelled a lot of unique features to a basic platform.

GT5 is more like a dull gemstone, it has no real standout feature to the physics, but they work, and it makes sense.
Picking up a DS3 and playing GT5 is a lot easier to me than picking up an Xbox controller and playing Forza.

GT5 is intuiative, it is the easy-to-pick-up but difficult-to-master racer, whereas Forza only really has it's big physics features for the really hardcore, and they're most likely not going to be impressed by the platform it's connected to.

Of course, this is all opinion, remember that. Nothing is perfect.

Couldn't disagree more and by the way your talking about gemstones I'm not sure you fully understand all of this yourself. That alongside only playing the games with a pad and I'm not sure you are in the best position to comment to be honest.

And the oposite too...

I would think the vast majority of people here own or have owned a copy of GT5. I own three, to go with my three PS3's for an awesome triple screen setup.

 

[PzR Slim]

oops DP, apologies.

 

[BWX]

Okay, I just hopped on to GT5 with the shelby cobra. I don't have a video, but GT5 definitely did not react with the oversteer that was present in Forza.
In GT5, the car had wheel spin but was still able to maintain a straight line (even if you turned a little bit while the wheels were spinning freely, the car did not start a burnout unless you turned the wheel a significant amount).

Maybe that's the 2 degrees positive toe put into the rear wheels be default (or whatever it is)? Wonder what happens if you fix that. PD put that in for stability is my guess. edit.. have ABS on?

 

[PzR Slim]

Maybe that's the 2 degrees positive toe put into the rear wheels be default (or whatever it is)? Wonder what happens if you fix that. PD put that in for stability is my guess.

Why not try it out?

 

[BWX]

Why not try it out?

Probably will.

 

[evilserpentman]

Couldn't disagree more and by the way your talking about gemstones I'm not sure you fully understand all of this yourself. That alongside only playing the games with a pad and I'm not sure you are in the best position to comment to be honest.

I've played both with a wheel, I own GT5, so I may be bias, however, I'm not saying GT5 is a perfect representation of the real world, I just said it makes sense.

In plain English for you then, Forza; good features, more detail, not exactly consistent.
GT5; lacking features, easy to understand, a little inconsistent but more managable.

So, one may have more features to get excited about, but I don't think the core engine is as robust.

 

[PzR Slim]

I've played both with a wheel, I own GT5, so I may be bias, however, I'm not saying GT5 is a perfect representation of the real world, I just said it makes sense.

In plain English for you then, Forza; good features, more detail, not exactly consistent.
GT5; lacking features, easy to understand, a little inconsistent but more managable.

So, one may have more features to get excited about, but I don't think the core engine is as robust.

So FM has more features and detail to the physics model than GT5 yet GT5 has the better model?

I see you edited the part about me not having offered my opinion, which was a wise move considering I've given a couple of examples already. However, I'll add another, the front tyres, with a ffb wheel the feel of what the front tyres are doing in FM4 is far superior when compared to GT5. You really can find the grip very easily and it makes driving fwd drives cars in FM4 a real skill and very rewarding. I just don't get that same feel in GT5. And I put that all down to the modelling of the tyres. Tyre modelling just seems fudged to me in GT5 to make it work. Hence such similar results with the same tyres but vastly different cars.

 

[evilserpentman]

So FM has more features and detail to the physics model than GT5 yet GT5 has the better model?

I see you edited the part about me not having offered my opinion, which was a wise move considering I've given a couple of examples already. However, I'll add another, the front tyres, with a ffb wheel the feel of what the front tyres are doing in FM4 is far superior when compared to GT5. You really can find the grip very easily and it makes driving fwd drives cars in FM4 a real skill and very rewarding. I just don't get that same feel in GT5. And I put that all down to the modelling of the tyres. Tyre modelling just seems fudged to me in GT5 to make it work. Hence such similar results with the same tyres but vastly different cars.

You don't get what I'm trying to say, which I haven't offered straight-forwardly admittedly.

GT5 has a more robust, predictable engine to me. It isn't flashy, but it feels natural to me.

Turn10 put a lot of detail into their engine, but the fact is I don't feel it is as robust and consistent overall, the fact I can floor-it in LMP1 cars at low speed corners and get no wheelspin seems a bit interesting.

That was all I was saying, no need to get into an arguement. It's my opinion, you have yours.

 

[sik180sx]

I tried out the shelby test,and i do own both,but i still gotta give it to gt5(even though its low speed physics are flawed)i do like forza,the problem is it got dry very quickly.
The problem is with its core physics,every car feels the same,if you make them the same weight,power,weight distribution, tyre compound and width a honda civic will feel like a camaro.
That is definately not the case with gt5 all 1000 cars are unique,even if the share the same properties.
Sure gt5 doesn't replicate "real life" tyres,but they still do a great job with grip loss,slip angles and tyre loading.
In forza i think it took around 25 minutes of top gear donuts to wear my tyres out,in gt5 around three minutes.
I must add that i do have a fanatec 911 turbo s + csp,and i cant explain why but gt5 just feels more right,and i know feel is subjective to whoever is feeling it,but when so many people are saying the same things,it really makes you wonder..

 

[Spagetti69]

If I hit a kerb and real life physics dictate that a car should roll, in Forza it does.

In GT it depends if I'm online or offline.
So real world physics are curbed somewhat online in GT.

Why have two physics engines for Online and off?
Which one is better?

Cheers.

 

[PzR Slim]

I tried out the shelby test,and i do own both,but i still gotta give it to gt5(even though its low speed physics are flawed)i do like forza,the problem is it got dry very quickly.
The problem is with its core physics,every car feels the same,if you make them the same weight,power,weight distribution, tyre compound and width a honda civic will feel like a camaro.
That is definately not the case with gt5 all 1000 cars are unique,even if the share the same properties.
Sure gt5 doesn't replicate "real life" tyres,but they still do a great job with grip loss,slip angles and tyre loading.
In forza i think it took around 25 minutes of top gear donuts to wear my tyres out,in gt5 around three minutes.
I must add that i do have a fanatec 911 turbo s + csp,and i cant explain why but gt5 just feels more right,and i know feel is subjective to whoever is feeling it,but when so many people are saying the same things,it really makes you wonder..

I just don't agree with this. And here's why.

http://www.evo.co.uk/forza4/article3.php

Just how accurately can Forza 4 replicate the character and handling traits of a car like the Subaru WRX STi?

It's actually a struggle to begin playing Forza Motorsport 4. Not on account of any menu-based confusion, but because the digital rendering sof the cars that populate the introductory screens, as the game loads, are so spellbinding in their crispness and accuracy that you lose yourself for a few minutes and stare as the camera pansaround the steroidal front arches of the latest Subaru WRX STi. Surely it's an HD video? You sit, mesmerised by the quality.

Forza 4 closes the tangible differences between real and digital to a point at which the naked eye struggles to decipher what is metal and what is rendered. Perhaps even more impressive is the fact that the same attention to accuracy present in the obsessive details of these renderings - the way the light swoops and pings from the WRX's mixture of soft shapes and sudden geometric outcrops - is also present in the driving dynamics of the cars themselves. Choose an WRX STi, and you are delivered not only that car's accurate form, but precisely the way it drives as well.

Really? I mean can you really glean any meaningful similarities between a computer game and a car with 297bhp? Given that all F1 teams now consider the simulator to be the most important development tool during the F1 season, it would seem that we need to keep an open mind on the subject. And an open wallet. The WRX STi, on a Welsh B-road, likes a drink. These latest 2.5-litreboxermotorsarequitedifferent in character to the McRae-era versions. Equal length intakes make them much smoother, less burbly and lumpy. Of course some of the character has been lost, but the upside is gratifying mechanical smoothness and a very particular sound: one that is uncannily replicated in the game.

Not being entirely sure how to conduct a test between something belonging to the material world and something which doesn't, I have settled on a simple plan. Accurately define how the, er, real WRX drives - what its basic characteristics are interms of power delivery and chassis response, and also what specific control inputs those behaviours require from the driver. Then go back to Forza 4 and seeif the same inputs generate the same response from the vehicle. Which isn't real. But which looks more real than the real thing. Think I might need a re-boot myself once this is finished.

The WRX is a front-engined, four- wheel-drive saloon car according, in the most part, to the traditional fast-Scooby script. The car has masses of mechanical grip, but it does want to understeer at all speeds. The only exception here on the latest version is that the car is more responsive to big throttle inputs early in a turn, and will throw more torque to the rear wheel than before. In short, it's a WRX that feels a bit like a Mitsubishi Evo. Unusually for a turbo flat-four, it's much happier to rev than expected, but it still suffers that frustrating torque-hole below 2500rpm. You have to keep it spinning above 3500 to feel even remotely bullish - the way nearly 300bhp should make you feel - and then between 4500 and 6000rpm the thing really flies. Relaxing, it is not.

It encourages a pretty brutal driving style - pushing into a turn with as much speed as the tyre grip will allow, then punching the throttle to take advantage of th ecar's new-found propensity to at least try to oversteer. The result is a kind of four-wheel drift as you exit a turn,but one you rarely have to correct with any steering lock.

Foolishly, back at Microsoft HQ , playing Forza 4, I don't give the WRX enough revs off the line and, just like the version that requires petrol, it bogs down. I should be celebrating this perfect demonstration of the simulator's art, but am instead livid at having been dusted by the entire grid. Chasing the fast-disappearing backsides of my competitors, and a little distracted by the level of detail in the background scenery (is that a wooden hut up there?) on the Alps Circuit, I pile into Turn 1 way too fast. In true WRX style, the front axle refuses to hit the apex, so I slow the car as fast as possible and then attempt to turn again. We don't crash; but we do learn that the circle-of-friction is rigorously obeyed on Forza 4: a hard-braking tyre cannot change direction at the same time.

The distractions continue: light pings from the snowy hills around the Impreza as it warbles up through each gear. Watch the rev-counter needle and in 2nd and 3rd gears it moves a little quicker between 4500rpm and 6000rpm, just like the street car. Into a tight second-gear turn, the entry speed is more reasonable, the car sweeps in, flat-on-the-gas and the understeer disappears and you enjoy that samefleetingsensationof allfourwheels dragging, not pushing, but hauling you from the apex.

It's hard not to get carried away with this cod-reality; it's infectious because its accuracy panders to the need in allof us to explore areas of dynamics otherwise denied by factors such as cost and lack of skill. Or wanting to stay alive. By way of example: we all know a Scooby deliberately tormented with a trailing throttle will pull big drifts, and you will be glad to hear that the same is true in the parallel universe of the Alps Circuit on Forza 4.

The only difference is that you will not attract the attention of the law, or enrich the owner of your local body-shop. Is it accurate? Yes, dangerously so.

http://www.evo.co.uk/forza4/article2.php

Realism has reached new levels in Forza Motorsport 4, but is the virtual M5 actually like driving the real thing?

No one likes a smart-arse, but it is immensely satisfying to sit in front of a near-finished version of the exceedingly clever Forza Motorsport 4 and, finally, to spot a mistake. For ten minutes I'd been gawping at the new BMW M5 on a 60in plasma screen. It was the best view I'd yet had of the new supersaloon because a knackered foot meant I couldn't see it in the raw at the Frankfurt motor show the previous week. The rendering was perfect, and as Freddy the videographer's detailed (and indecipherable) explanation of the 3D modelling engine used to create such a spookily accurate unreality wafted around the room, all I could think was 'I'm going to spot the mistake, and enjoy telling them.'

The offending mistake didn't come through the visuals, because they are, it has to be said, annoyingly perfect: instead it came in the noise. As I waited on the start-line, blipping the throttle to try and launch BMW's 552bhp monster with maximum efficiency, I thought: 'This car doesn't sound right. They've mixed a Veyron and an Impreza together. I've driven a development M5, and it didn't sound like this.'

Smug interventions are best delivered after the event, so I intended to send the Microsoft team a cheeky note the following week, after I had confirmed my findings. Because the day after driving the M5 in Forza 4 in Reading, I was driving the real thing in Spain. This allowed me to clear my mind of self-important announcements, and settle-in and enjoy the Nürburgring Grand Prix Circuit in a new M5. If you had told me that my first experience of BMW M's latest attempt to catapault five people at the horizon would be through a wireless controller, an Xbox 360 and a big telly, I would have replied with a single, raised digit.

I have an unhealthy knowledge of the new, short Nürburgring circuit. To the point that I can recall the surrounding features and topography with an accuracy that would convince my racing teammates that I prefer sightseeing to motor racing. Virtual reality mimics real life in new ways on Forza 4: I'm so busy gushing about the crispness of the writing on the famous BMW over-track banner that reads 'Freude am Fahren' to anyone who will listen, that I miss the green light and lose five seconds. Drat.

The M5 has traction issues on Forza 4: with ESP and traction-control disabled, its rendered 552bhp - perhaps unsurprisingly - makes mincemeat of the rear tyres. Oversteer, meanwhile, is never more than a flick-of-the-thumb- away. The track modelling - in particular areas with tricky negative cambers - are accurately represented. Where local knowledge tells you the M5 will run wide, the M5 runs wide. I take this knowledge with me to Spain. As you'll have read, the new M5 does things other cars cannot. It isn't perfect, but then that is part of its charm. Many of those faults come as a result of the car's weight. On the circuit, in the flesh, it feels big and heavy, just as it does on Forza 4 - if you don't believe me, play the game and you'll know exactly what I mean.

What's more, try and complete three laps of a fast circuit without melting the brakes on the material object and your research will lead you to the same conclusion as me: Forza 4 has the M5's brakes down to a tee.

And the noise? My notebook details the following on the subject of the M5's vocal qualities: 'Sounds like a Veyron crossed with an Impreza.' Seems BMW hadn't finalised the noise characteristics when I drove that prototype in March. Forza 4 was right; I was wrong. Very glad I never sent that smug email.

And finally from our dear old Scaff himself. Firstly here is his CV.

I've worked in the motor industry for most of my adult life (a good two decades) and have logged hundreds of hours on track and proving grounds, so I guess I would meet your criteria. I have also taught driving skills and vehicle dynamics as well as managed the product launch for around a dozen different cars.

He has this to say.

The tyre modelling alone is superior to GT5's and as a result the loading of grip, slip limits and breakaway is much, much more accurate. Load transfer and how differing suspension types manage said transfer is more realistically done.

These are all people with a vast knowledge of cars and their characteristics and dynamics. They talk about FM4 in very glowing terms. Can you give us some idea of your experience of vehicle dynamics?

 

[TrackpadUser]

Just because tire deformation isn't graphically shown in GT5, doesn't mean it isn't calculated into the physics model. I don't think anyone can prove it either way.

But that skidding reaction (or lack there of) you described in F4 is exactly the same reason I don't like rFactor's physics on the PC. It has the exact same problem.

Still, I haven't played Forza, although I have played LFS which is known for having excellent tire physics.

The cars in GT5 always feel like they have quite rigid tires, even if you go with let say the Ram, which has massive sidewalls.

In LFS, if you use pretty much any car, you can feel and see tire deformation.

Same is for the traction break physics of the tires. In GT5 all the tires break traction quite sudently, like slicks do.

But GT5 still has an excellent feel.

 

[thelvynau]

I have played forza 4 and im not sure which is better I find I enjoy the physics with both games

 

[PzR Slim]

Still, I haven't played Forza, although I have played LFS which is known for having excellent tire physics.

The cars in GT5 always feel like they have quite rigid tires, even if you go with let say the Ram, which has massive sidewalls.

In LFS, if you use pretty much any car, you can feel and see tire deformation.

Same is for the traction break physics of the tires. In GT5 all the tires break traction quite sudently, like slicks do.

But GT5 still has an excellent feel.

Totally agree with this. The tyres in FM4 feel way more progressive than the on/off tyres in GT5. It's something Ben Collins (the old Stig) pointed out in the pCARS forum recently (he's testing and reporting back to the devs). He said that far too many games do not have a progressive loss of grip, you either have it or you don't. And that just doesn't tally with his experience in the real world.

 

[Scaff]

You don't get what I'm trying to say, which I haven't offered straight-forwardly admittedly.

GT5 has a more robust, predictable engine to me. It isn't flashy, but it feels natural to me.

I find GT to feel quite unnatural, particularly in regard to load transfer and grip progression. I've never driven a car on track that offers as little grip progression as the tyres in GT5.

Turn10 put a lot of detail into their engine, but the fact is I don't feel it is as robust and consistent overall, the fact I can floor-it in LMP1 cars at low speed corners and get no wheelspin seems a bit interesting.

I would seriously like to see a video of this, because to be honest I don't believe it, particularly as I've experienced it many times myself.

While not an LMP1, this is what happens if you try that with the Cobra.



Now if you would be so kind as to let me know what LMP1 and corner produces zero wheelspin I would be more than happy to test and provide a video for all.

The problem is with its core physics,every car feels the same,if you make them the same weight,power,weight distribution, tyre compound and width a honda civic will feel like a camaro.
That is definately not the case with gt5 all 1000 cars are unique,even if the share the same properties.

I'm sorry but that is just total nonsense, even making all those values the same, the Civic will not feel like a Camero at all.

What is however true (and has been shown here at GTP) is that on the same tyres a Cooper S will produce the same lateral-g as a 'vette.

Sure gt5 doesn't replicate "real life" tyres,but they still do a great job with grip loss,slip angles and tyre loading.
In forza i think it took around 25 minutes of top gear donuts to wear my tyres out,in gt5 around three minutes.
I must add that i do have a fanatec 911 turbo s + csp,and i cant explain why but gt5 just feels more right,and i know feel is subjective to whoever is feeling it,but when so many people are saying the same things,it really makes you wonder..

Tyre wear on both titles is inaccurate, and while feel is of course subjective, I certainly can't agree that GT5 does a good job with tyre modelling at all.

The lack of deformation (and despite what was claimed by another member earlier GT5 doesn't model this in an serious manner if at all), pressure, width adjustment, etc. leaves it lagging behind FM4 in this area for me.


Scaff

 

[PzR Slim]

While not an LMP1, this is what happens if you try that with the Cobra.

Thanks for that Scaff, was going to go home tonight and try this with a range of rwd cars myself. I see this banded about by lots of people and it's just not my experience. Will report back with other cars later tonight.

 

[Scaff]

Thanks for that Scaff, was going to go home tonight and try this with a range of rwd cars myself. I see this banded about by lots of people and it's just not my experience. Will report back with other cars later tonight.

Add in that the video also show how FM4 deals with load transfer, suspension loading and tyre deformation as well and I think it sums a lot of things up quite well.


I also think its important to establish that my preference of FM4 is not something based on any bias against the GT series, as I have said before (and feel is worth repeating):

You know what Slip said about bias and GT history, you can apply that to me.

Go back and review my posting history and tell me that I don't historically have a massive GT bias (download my GT tuning guides and when you have read them consider how long it took to test all of that and write it - that's a fraction of my time with GT4, let alone the full series), when you have done so ask why I now have a FM4 bias (and note the 4 its important).

Could it possible be that after hundreds of hours invested in the GT series over more than a decade I simply decided on a whim to say 'screw it I'll just like Forza for a laugh", or possible that I found in FM4 what the GT series is now missing?

I can even tell you what the final straw was in it for me (and its not the tyre model - which as someone who has spent many, many hours working with real world tyre data is strange), its the tuning. I love vehicle dynamics with a passion, every single part of it from the basics to the physics behind it, I loved teaching it, I still keep up to date with SAE and Racecar Engineering publications. I loved that while not perfect I could, in GT1 to 4 apply the basic fundamentals of tuning to cars and they would act roughly as they should do. Along came GT5 and the first thing I find is that for months I can't change gear ratios, only the final drive!!! Then I start tuning cars and all of a sudden real world theory isn't working as it should, and not by a small way, ride height does things it shouldn't, spring and damper rates have gone mad. Don't believe me, take a look at the tuning sub-forums here and see the volume of posts on it. Even more strange are the number of people who are happy to accept it.

I prefer FM4 to GT5 simply because in the areas that matter to me its a better sim, to be blunt the standards vs Premiums has never bothered me, the crappy menus are just a part of GT for me, the car wash, the oil change. None of these bother me at all. However when the tuning starts to get lost then I start to wonder, and when something else comes along that does allow me to tune (and in a way that reflects the real world), has a pretty good tyre model, with a solid frame rate then its going to appeal.

My choice is an informed one, one based on what appeals to me, so yes a bias exists, but I can explain and track the changes in mine and I think that gives me a degree of informed and balanced credibility. Can you say the same?


Scaff

Scaff

 

[evilserpentman]

Well, this has quickly turned into a fanboy arguement, I'm out.

 

[BWX]

I just don't agree with this. And here's whyhttp://www.evo.co.uk/forza4/article2.php

Here's why I think that artical means precisely zilch.

evo guy says: ''Oversteer, meanwhile, is never more than a flick-of-the-thumb- away.''

So the guy is making all these physics observations... with a freaking controller!? LOL- He lost all credibility right there for me, at least when it comes to his opinions on physics of a driving sim. Me thinks he doth protest too much when trying to convey his desire to find fault with the game. It sounded like a paid advertisement. Just telling it like it is.

Anyway....

 

[PzR Slim]

Well, this has quickly turned into a fanboy arguement, I'm out.

That's right, I give you lots of examples of why I think FM4 physics are right and you come up with no meaningful examples of why GT5 physics are right and now you claim it's just a fanboy argument. Seems to me you have nothing meaningful to say so have resorted to that. As I've already stated I own three copies of GT5, including a signature edition, to go with three PS3's for epic triple screen GT5. I grew up playing the GT series from the very first game. I'm probably a bigger GT fan than you. If you have nothing meaningful to add to the discussion then don't but don't come up with some pathetic excuse as to why you won't (can't).

 

[evilserpentman]

And here you are, flopping it out.
I just stated an opinion, and you've called me wrong the whole time and now are resorting to silly measures to prove superiority.

Most of us, myself included, have grown up owning all the GT's.
Big deal.
You seem to defile the game a lot for such a huge fan.

 

[Tornado]

Well, this has quickly turned into a fanboy arguement, I'm out.

So it is okay when people throw out unsubstantiated statements of questionable accuracy, but it becomes a fanboy argument when people actually attempt to debate those statements?

 

[thelvynau]

I might do some testing with both games tomorrow so I can offer an opinion

 

[PzR Slim]

And here you are, flopping it out.
I just stated an opinion, and you've called me wrong the whole time and now are resorting to silly measures to prove superiority.

Most of us, myself included, have grown up owning all the GT's.
Big deal.
You seem to defile the game a lot for such a huge fan.

I've not just called you wrong, I've provided reasons as to why I think you are wrong and to back up my opinion. That's what a debate is.

If resorting to trying to discuss facts and back up claims with well though out reasons is 'resorting to silly measures' then lock me up I'm guilty.

I pick fault with the game for the very reason I am fan. I expected perfection from GT5, when ever anybody waxed lyrical about FM3 I used to sit with a smug satisfaction thinking 'you just wait until GT5 hits.', that didn't happen. I wanted GT5 to be perfection but it's not. As a fan of the series should I just be a good little boy and accept GT5 even though I'm not impressed by it or should I stand up and say 'this is not good enough PD'. Whose the better fan for the well being of the series?

 

[Scaff]

Well, this has quickly turned into a fanboy arguement, I'm out.

No, you stated a point of fact that I disagree with. All I then asked for was an example of this fact to test for myself.

And here you are, flopping it out.
I just stated an opinion, and you've called me wrong the whole time and now are resorting to silly measures to prove superiority.

Most of us, myself included, have grown up owning all the GT's.
Big deal.
You seem to defile the game a lot for such a huge fan.

You may want to re-read my post about bias before making claims of this nature.

I do however love the bit about 'defiling' GT, why should GT need to be protected in this way, surely it should be able to stand on its own against tests with reality?


Scaff

 

[TokoTurismo]

I knew I shouldn't have commented on this thread. Great.... Should have kept my sentence to myself. -_-'

 

[thelvynau]

That is a good point if gt5 was the perfect simulation then it would be able to stand on its own merits

I love the gt series always have but after reading alot of posts and finding out for myself I have found it does fall short in expectations and lack of evolving with the times.

But ill still play it not because its perfect but because it will keep me entertained

Edit: I own forza 4 as well and I find the physics to my liking.

 

[PzR Slim]

I knew I shouldn't have commented on this thread. Great.... Should have kept my sentence to myself. -_-'

Why? You have an opinion, we are all entitled to those. No one is right and no one is wrong but everyone in this thread can't expect their opinions not to come under scrutiny. What's the point in even debating the topic if we just all state our opinions and that's the end of it. As long as no one gets silly, abusive or breaks the terms of the AUP then there is nothing to worry about. There is so much misinformation banded about about both games that sometimes you have to step in and say 'that's just not true'.

That is a good point if gt5 was the perfect simulation then it would be able to stand on its own merits

I love the gt series always have but after reading alot of posts and finding out for myself I have found it does fall short in expectations and lack of evolving with the times.

But ill still play it not because its perfect but because it will keep me entertained

Edit: I own forza 4 as well and I find the physics to my liking.

This is pretty much how I feel. I still love GT5, take something like an SLS around the ring with weather and changing time and it really is a sublime experience with my triple screens. Probably top 5 gaming moments for me. However that doesn't mean I worship it like a God, it has it's failings and I think FM4 does some things better than it, physics being one of them. That doesn't stop me from racing in a weekly GT league or appreciating GT5.