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

[Scaff]

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.

Quite agree.

While I certainly prefer FM4 (for the reasons outlined above) I still play GT5 (and have bought all the DLC).


Scaff

 

[TokoTurismo]

@PzR Slim Your right. I guess I was being a little to literal.

 

[Watt2159]

Which physics on GT are you guys saying is realistic?

Online or off?

Definitely offline, the online physics are made for skill balance between beginners and pros.

 

[GranTurismo916]

Gtplanet results: GT5-490 Votes FM4-65 Votes
Forzaplanet results: GT5-35 FM4-72

See a pattern?

On topic: I havent voted since I havent played both, but I've watched videos of FM4. It looks good, but I love GT5 too.

 

[Vaxxtx]

Gtplanet results: GT5-490 Votes FM4-65 Votes
Forzaplanet results: GT5-35 FM4-72

See a pattern?

On topic: I havent voted since I havent played both, but I've watched videos of FM4. It looks good, but I love GT5 too.

How many people do you think clicked a vote without even playing both?

I do applaud you for not voting without playing both. 👍

 

[Scaff]

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

You see you didn't post an opinion you posted a 'fact'...

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.

Lets take a closer look at that 'fact' shall we, first from the cockpit and then from the trackside in slow motion...




....certainly looks like a fair bit of wheelspin going on here.

Not quite a 'fact' is it.

Scaff

 

[zedfonsie]

Its quite simple, none of these games are the best. The best game is imaginary, if creators of major racing games (EA,PD,Turn 10) joined together and make the perfect simulator, it causes high profits ONCE, while a new game that isn't to its full potential will only JUST get improved. Giving companies better profits, and lets be honest all that companies want is money. I'm sure Mr.Kaz had tons of ideas to add to this game, but he has to save some of best, for last.

In my mind the perfect game is a combination of
R-factor physics
GT5 graphics
Forza 4 customization ability & and cars


We can only dream...

 

[TokoTurismo]

@zedfonsie I've dream of that aswell. I really want to see both GT and FM work to together as a team to provide an outstanding simulator. What a great imagination that'll be. But Sony and Microsoft, aww...

 

[sik180sx]

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.

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[/QUOTE]

Lateral g-forces have nothing to do with how a car handles,it is a good indication to much grip you have in a corner,two cars with the same lateral g will not handle the same,while i agree tyre wear is inaccurate in both titles,it is a little closer to real in gt5.
And polyphony had to have done a decent job with tyres,just cause its not as in depth as turn 10 doesn't mean its not good,the driving model in gt5 is good,very good as stated even by the reviewers (even the ones that scored forza higher)or almost anyone that plays it,for that to happen you would have to have a decent simulation in the tyre department.
But either way it should not really matter,cause i like playing gt5 and you like playing forza 4,and thats how it should be for anyone,just play the one you like.
This could all go on forever,it's the same for the pc sims,with the lfs vs r-factor vs iracing vs netkar pro debate.
These debates will never end,because one game will always have something the other one doesn't

 

[Vaxxtx]

Lateral g-forces have nothing to do with how a car handles,it is a good indication to much grip you have in a corner,two cars with the same lateral g will not handle the same,while i agree tyre wear is inaccurate in both titles,it is a little closer to real in gt5.
And polyphony had to have done a decent job with tyres,just cause its not as in depth as turn 10 doesn't mean its not good,the driving model in gt5 is good,very good as stated even by the reviewers (even the ones that scored forza higher)or almost anyone that plays it,for that to happen you would have to have a decent simulation in the tyre department.
But either way it should not really matter,cause i like playing gt5 and you like playing forza 4,and thats how it should be for anyone,just play the one you like.
This could all go on forever,it's the same for the pc sims,with the lfs vs r-factor vs iracing vs netkar pro debate.
These debates will never end,because one game will always have something the other one doesn't

Are you being serious? Nah, you are joking right? Right???

 

[sik180sx]

Are you being serious? Nah, you are joking right? Right???

Joking about what may i ask?

 

[TheeFrogmanlego]

Fact i drove for the first time in real life in a mini copper country man and it felt 100% like it did with my wheel =D * well the g force was the big difference the car pulls out and that's no Bueno when it comes to being calm* all i know is when i played forza 4 at my cousins house ALL the cars felt loose they liked to stick there tail out like in GT2!

 

[GTMail]

Gtplanet results: GT5-490 Votes FM4-65 Votes
Forzaplanet results: GT5-35 FM4-72

See a pattern?

On topic: I havent voted since I havent played both, but I've watched videos of FM4. It looks good, but I love GT5 too.

Do you know how many members are on Forzaplanet? Compare that to GTPlanet's members and you'll know why you got those results.

 

[thelvynau]

I agree that one game has something the other does thats another good reason I like both

 

[Scaff]

Lateral g-forces have nothing to do with how a car handles,it is a good indication to much grip you have in a corner,two cars with the same lateral g will not handle the same,

I didn't say that lateral-g was an indicator of how well a car handles, so please do not miss-quote me.

However, on the same tyre compound, a Cooper S and a Corvette should not have the same lateral-g figures. If you believe otherwise, please explain how this would occur, taking into account the differing static and dynamic contact patch sizes and shapes, differing load transfers rates, suspension travel and dynamics, etc.

while i agree tyre wear is inaccurate in both titles,it is a little closer to real in gt5.

Really, because I think they are both so far off that to make a statement that one is closer to reality than the other is pointless.

And polyphony had to have done a decent job with tyres,just cause its not as in depth as turn 10 doesn't mean its not good,the driving model in gt5 is good,very good as stated even by the reviewers (even the ones that scored forza higher)or almost anyone that plays it,for that to happen you would have to have a decent simulation in the tyre department.

Now first I have not said that PD have done a bad job with the physics, rather that T10 have done a better job. Quite different statements, and that's twice now that you have misquoited me, do not do it again.

Now to the point at hand. I disagree with you, GT5 has managed to put together a descent physics package despite the basic tyre modelling.

But either way it should not really matter,cause i like playing gt5 and you like playing forza 4,and thats how it should be for anyone,just play the one you like.

Here is the difference. I play both, and I can quite clearly explain why, despite a previous GT bias (and a major one) I think FM4 is a better sim and why PD dropped the ball with GT5. Can you do the same, or are you basing your opinion on in depth experience with just one?

This could all go on forever,it's the same for the pc sims,with the lfs vs r-factor vs iracing vs netkar pro debate.
These debates will never end,because one game will always have something the other one doesn't

That's the nature of debate, without that very point these boards would be a bit dull.

Fact i drove for the first time in real life in a mini copper country man and it felt 100% like it did with my wheel =D * well the g force was the big difference the car pulls out and that's no Bueno when it comes to being calm*

I've driven hundreds of different cars on tracks and proving grounds in my years in the motor industry and no sim (on any platform) has ever "felt 100%", even when you take g-force out of the equation.

However I feel (notice opinion - not unsubstantiated fact) that FM4 gets closer to how real world tyres, suspension and load transfer works.

all i know is when i played forza 4 at my cousins house ALL the cars felt loose they liked to stick there tail out like in GT2!

That's strange, because earlier we had someone claiming that you couldn't get any car unstuck in a slow corner, not even an LMP1. That was easily disproved, lets see what we can do with this one.

First an off the shelf clip....



.. my Integra in a crash initiated by massive understeer with an attempt to correct with a lift. Now if all the cars were loose and wanted to stick their tails out that would not have happened (and the lift to correct would have resulted in massive oversteer. Don't worry, you will also get a video of pure understeer as well.

The two posts I have mentioned (all FM4 does is stick the rear of a car out / cars can't get unstuck in FM4) do annoy me I have to say. Why do some members feel the need to make massively biased and clearly inaccurate claims about a title?

What is it about GT that makes you so dismissive of the chance that other titles may do something better? To the point that we get such wild claims made that are so easy to show to be false.

I can easily state that my history with the GT series will stand with the best of them, every title (including all sub-releases) bought from new, 10k+ posts here at GTP over 9 years, hundreds of hours invested in each and every GT title (including GT5). More than many can claim.

Yet I'm capable (and always have been) of looking at what other titles have done and saying 'that's damn good you know'; in the past GT has however always offered a better balanced package for me. Some titles have come close (Enthusia), some bettered it in specific areas (Richard Burns Rally); however its not been until FM4 that a better package, particularly in the area of physics and tuning has been around.

Yet we continue to get those who treat GT as if it can do no wrong, I've been accused of disrespecting GT and defiling it, so I will now commit heresy.


GT is not sacrosanct.

It needs to stand and fall on its own merits, in the same way any title does. Those who believe otherwise I would implore to actually spend some time with other titles (FM4, Race Pro, hell go and dig out Enthusia and RBR) and then judge them against not GT, but the real world, because that's the real benchmark.


Scaff

 

[thelvynau]

I didn't say that lateral-g was an indicator of how well a car handles, so please do not miss-quote me.

However, on the same tyre compound, a Cooper S and a Corvette should not have the same lateral-g figures. If you believe otherwise, please explain how this would occur, taking into account the differing static and dynamic contact patch sizes and shapes, differing load transfers rates, suspension travel and dynamics, etc.

Really, because I think they are both so far off that to make a statement that one is closer to reality than the other is pointless.

Now first I have not said that PD have done a bad job with the physics, rather that T10 have done a better job. Quite different statements, and that's twice now that you have misquoited me, do not do it again.

Now to the point at hand. I disagree with you, GT5 has managed to put together a descent physics package despite the basic tyre modelling.

Here is the difference. I play both, and I can quite clearly explain why, despite a previous GT bias (and a major one) I think FM4 is a better sim and why PD dropped the ball with GT5. Can you do the same, or are you basing your opinion on in depth experience with just one?

That's the nature of debate, without that very point these boards would be a bit dull.

I've driven hundreds of different cars on tracks and proving grounds in my years in the motor industry and no sim (on any platform) has ever "felt 100%", even when you take g-force out of the equation.

However I feel (notice opinion - not unsubstantiated fact) that FM4 gets closer to how real world tyres, suspension and load transfer works.

That's strange, because earlier we had someone claiming that you couldn't get any car unstuck in a slow corner, not even an LMP1. That was easily disproved, lets see what we can do with this one.

First an off the shelf clip....

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y91Z9pUpVM4">YouTube Link</a>

.. my Integra in a crash initiated by massive understeer with an attempt to correct with a lift. Now if all the cars were loose and wanted to stick their tails out that would not have happened (and the lift to correct would have resulted in massive oversteer. Don't worry, you will also get a video of pure understeer as well.

The two posts I have mentioned (all FM4 does is stick the rear of a car out / cars can't get unstuck in FM4) do annoy me I have to say. Why do some members feel the need to make massively biased and clearly inaccurate claims about a title?

What is it about GT that makes you so dismissive of the chance that other titles may do something better? To the point that we get such wild claims made that are so easy to show to be false.

I can easily state that my history with the GT series will stand with the best of them, every title (including all sub-releases) bought from new, 10k+ posts here at GTP over 9 years, hundreds of hours invested in each and every GT title (including GT5). More than many can claim.

Yet I'm capable (and always have been) of looking at what other titles have done and saying 'that's damn good you know'; in the past GT has however always offered a better balanced package for me. Some titles have come close (Enthusia), some bettered it in specific areas (Richard Burns Rally); however its not been until FM4 that a better package, particularly in the area of physics and tuning has been around.

Yet we continue to get those who treat GT as if it can do no wrong, I've been accused of disrespecting GT and defiling it, so I will now commit heresy.

GT is not sacrosanct.

It needs to stand and fall on its own merits, in the same way any title does. Those who believe otherwise I would implore to actually spend some time with other titles (FM4, Race Pro, hell go and dig out Enthusia and RBR) and then judge them against not GT, but the real world, because that's the real benchmark.

Scaff

Hi scaff just a question going by the last part of your post do you feel that gt5 is maintained life due to long time fans of the series? Or has it stood on its own merits and not the success of previous titles.

 

[Scaff]

Hi scaff just a question going by the last part of your post do you feel that gt5 is maintained life due to long time fans of the series? Or has it stood on its own merits and not the success of previous titles.

I massively admire the mark that PD attempted to pull off with GT5, however I do personally feel that its sold as well as it did mainly off the back of previous games in the series and a lack of serious competitors on the PS3.

I firmly believe that had GT5 been the very first GT or had been released by anyone else and was asked to stand alone its reception and sales would have been quite different.

The issue I mainly have with the manner in which GT5 has been received by many is that Sony and PD will just look at the sales figures and not actually learn from what has not gone well with GT5. I want GT5 to be a blip and PD to return to what we know they are capable of in the future. However should they and a large number of fans remain so blinkered to the competition then I honestly am concerned for the future of the series.


Scaff

 

[thelvynau]

I had been thinking about that last night how would gt5 rate if there wasnt a established fan base.

Thanks for your answer Scaff I had drawn a similar conclusion

as for physics nothing much is going to change my mind that forza is closer to what we want in physics

Without going through technical terms (which I didnt understand) I still think it feels closer to the mark than gt5

 

[PzR Slim]

Well I said I would test out these claims that it was impossible to generate oversteer just with throttle input in FM4, so I have. I tried four different cars, Mazda MX5, Merc C32, Ferrari 458 and an Audi R15. All at the first corner of TTTG East circuit reverse. I chose this circuit as the start line is very close to the first corner. All cars where in 2nd gear and I approached the corner at well below the speed that each car could take the corner in, I turned is as normal and floored the throttle. The Audi clip is from on board because the spin was instant and the start of it was not picked up be the TV view.






The moral of the story is, don't believe everything you read. And don't promote here say until you have tried it yourself.

 

[sik180sx]

I didn't say that lateral-g was an indicator of how well a car handles, so please do not miss-quote me.

However, on the same tyre compound, a Cooper S and a Corvette should not have the same lateral-g figures. If you believe otherwise, please explain how this would occur, taking into account the differing static and dynamic contact patch sizes and shapes, differing load transfers rates, suspension travel and dynamics, etc.

Really, because I think they are both so far off that to make a statement that one is closer to reality than the other is pointless.

Now first I have not said that PD have done a bad job with the physics, rather that T10 have done a better job. Quite different statements, and that's twice now that you have misquoited me, do not do it again.

Now to the point at hand. I disagree with you, GT5 has managed to put together a descent physics package despite the basic tyre modelling.

Here is the difference. I play both, and I can quite clearly explain why, despite a previous GT bias (and a major one) I think FM4 is a better sim and why PD dropped the ball with GT5. Can you do the same, or are you basing your opinion on in depth experience with just one?

That's the nature of debate, without that very point these boards would be a bit dull.

I've driven hundreds of different cars on tracks and proving grounds in my years in the motor industry and no sim (on any platform) has ever "felt 100%", even when you take g-force out of the equation.

However I feel (notice opinion - not unsubstantiated fact) that FM4 gets closer to how real world tyres, suspension and load transfer works.

That's strange, because earlier we had someone claiming that you couldn't get any car unstuck in a slow corner, not even an LMP1. That was easily disproved, lets see what we can do with this one.

First an off the shelf clip....

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y91Z9pUpVM4">YouTube Link</a>

.. my Integra in a crash initiated by massive understeer with an attempt to correct with a lift. Now if all the cars were loose and wanted to stick their tails out that would not have happened (and the lift to correct would have resulted in massive oversteer. Don't worry, you will also get a video of pure understeer as well.

The two posts I have mentioned (all FM4 does is stick the rear of a car out / cars can't get unstuck in FM4) do annoy me I have to say. Why do some members feel the need to make massively biased and clearly inaccurate claims about a title?

What is it about GT that makes you so dismissive of the chance that other titles may do something better? To the point that we get such wild claims made that are so easy to show to be false.

I can easily state that my history with the GT series will stand with the best of them, every title (including all sub-releases) bought from new, 10k+ posts here at GTP over 9 years, hundreds of hours invested in each and every GT title (including GT5). More than many can claim.

Yet I'm capable (and always have been) of looking at what other titles have done and saying 'that's damn good you know'; in the past GT has however always offered a better balanced package for me. Some titles have come close (Enthusia), some bettered it in specific areas (Richard Burns Rally); however its not been until FM4 that a better package, particularly in the area of physics and tuning has been around.

Yet we continue to get those who treat GT as if it can do no wrong, I've been accused of disrespecting GT and defiling it, so I will now commit heresy.

GT is not sacrosanct.

It needs to stand and fall on its own merits, in the same way any title does. Those who believe otherwise I would implore to actually spend some time with other titles (FM4, Race Pro, hell go and dig out Enthusia and RBR) and then judge them against not GT, but the real world, because that's the real benchmark.

Scaff

I play both plus rfactor,lfs and actually have some decent times on fm4(to my surprise,my gamertag is,or was sik180 tR ,xbox got red ring of death)i was like you but with forza,loving every installment.
But now i have gt5 and it is just better for me,why?maybe because it is something different.
Forza to me has offered nothing new in its 4 games and that might be why i gave up on it so easily,as i stated earlier,i had made level 150 and owned every car in the game,the problem was(for me-my opinion)every car felt the same.I never once said forza is inferior,i feel it has offered an advanced tyre model on a basic physics package.
Also you wern't misquoted,i was simply retorting to your argument about the lateral g-forces when i said each car would handle the same with identical set-ups,and i have not said anything,anywhere about you saying pd have done a bad job,so please do not put words into my mouth.

 

[PzR Slim]

I play both plus rfactor,lfs and actually have some decent times on fm4(to my surprise,my gamertag is,or was sik180 tR ,xbox got red ring of death)i was like you but with forza,loving every installment.
But now i have gt5 and it is just better for me,why?maybe because it is something different.
Forza to me has offered nothing new in its 4 games and that might be why i gave up on it so easily,as i stated earlier,i had made level 150 and owned every car in the game,the problem was(for me-my opinion)every car felt the same.I never once said forza is inferior,i feel it has offered an advanced tyre model on a basic physics package.
Also you wern't misquoted,i was simply retorting to your argument about the lateral g-forces when i said each car would handle the same with identical set-ups,and i have not said anything,anywhere about you saying pd have done a bad job,so please do not put words into my mouth.

Every car felt the same? I'm sorry but you are lying. We have a number of videos on this page, one shows a front wheel drive car understeering into a wall on application of the throttle and many others show rwd cars swapping ends on application of the throttle. I spent a good hour and a half with my mates online last night driving random cars all night. We raced 458's around Fujimi and they, as you would expect, were a handful with lots of opposite lock required out of the slow corners. We then, for a bit of a laugh, had a quick three race comp in Audi RS2 Avant's, what a difference the 4wd made, too early on the throttle or through corners were there was no big weight transfer and it was an understeery mess. However wait until the weight transfer was in the sweet spot, bury the throttle all four tyres gripped and acted in unison and you were catapulted along the track or get the back end out of shape through a bit too much weight transfer and it needed lots of opposite lock to sort it out. They were a blast to drive and felt completely different to the 458's.

You might prefer GT5 and that is your prerogative and opinion and you are entitled to it. However, don't just make up stuff about the 'other game' to back that up.

 

[sik180sx]

Every car felt the same? I'm sorry but you are lying. We have a number of videos on this page, one shows a front wheel drive car understeering into a wall on application of the throttle and many others show rwd cars swapping ends on application of the throttle. I spent a good hour and a half with my mates online last night driving random cars all night. We raced 458's around Fujimi and they, as you would expect, were a handful with lots of opposite lock required out of the slow corners. We then, for a bit of a laugh, had a quick three race comp in Audi RS2 Avant's, what a difference the 4wd made, too early on the throttle or through corners were there was no big weight transfer and it was an understeery mess. However wait until the weight transfer was in the sweet spot, bury the throttle all four tyres gripped and acted in unison and you were catapulted along the track or get the back end out of shape through a bit too much weight transfer and it needed lots of opposite lock to sort it out. They were a blast to drive and felt completely different to the 458's.

You might prefer GT5 and that is your prerogative and opinion and you are entitled to it. However, don't just make up stuff about the 'other game' to back that up.

Mate if you read my post,i said it was my opinion that the cars handle the same,i never stated it is fact,so how about you get your facts facts straight before accusing me of lying.

 

[Scaff]

I play both plus rfactor,lfs and actually have some decent times on fm4(to my surprise,my gamertag is,or was sik180 tR ,xbox got red ring of death)i was like you but with forza,loving every installment.
But now i have gt5 and it is just better for me,why?maybe because it is something different.

What different and please keep in mind this is a physics thread.

Forza to me has offered nothing new in its 4 games and that might be why i gave up on it so easily,as i stated earlier,i had made level 150 and owned every car in the game,the problem was(for me-my opinion)every car felt the same.I never once said forza is inferior,i feel it has offered an advanced tyre model on a basic physics package.

Please provide example of what cars feel the same and why they shouldn't, and then expand on that with how FM4 advanced tyre model and basic physics (in your opinion) causes the differences with reality.

Also you wern't misquoted,i was simply retorting to your argument about the lateral g-forces when i said each car would handle the same with identical set-ups,and i have not said anything,anywhere about you saying pd have done a bad job,so please do not put words into my mouth.

You assigned two positions to me (that I believed lateral-g related to handling and that GT5 was bad) that I did not make. I have not done the same.

However you seem to want to simply be able to post up your opinion without counter, and to be honest that's unlikely to happen. So please answer the questions I have asked.

all i know is when i played forza 4 at my cousins house ALL the cars felt loose they liked to stick there tail out like in GT2!

Yep this CR-Z EX is just massively tail happy here....



...no, wait. That's understeer on the throttle out of a corner (as opposed to the oversteer on the throttle the Cobra displays).

I've said this once and I will say it again, I have no issue with anyone having a preference or an opinion on something, but do keep in mind that making totally ridiculous claims (such as no car will wheelspin out of a slow corner or all cars want to oversteer) without the ability to back them up is not a good idea.


Scaff

 

[PzR Slim]

Mate if you read my post,i said it was my opinion that the cars handle the same,i never stated it is fact,so how about you get your facts facts straight before accusing me of lying.

Well if you are going to follow that line of reasoning it is there for all to see that your opinion, whilst you are still entitled to it, is absolutely worthless. I have no idea why anybody would paint themselves in such bad terms just to defend one game against another.

 

[Scaff]

Mate if you read my post,i said it was my opinion that the cars handle the same,i never stated it is fact,so how about you get your facts facts straight before accusing me of lying.

Then please back that opinion up with some examples and explanations, because its not currently supported by the video evidence in this thread alone.

The Cobra and CR-Z clips alone show that..






...these corners were taken in near identical ways, brake into corner, turn in on steady throttle and full throttle (which in both cases is too much) before the apex. The end results are quite clearly different and if every car handled the same that would not be the case.

Scaff

 

[evilserpentman]

Mate if you read my post,i said it was my opinion that the cars handle the same,i never stated it is fact,so how about you get your facts facts straight before accusing me of lying.

Oh don't worry, I think that's his way of saying he disagrees...

Now Scaff has put up a lot of good points, but, I still maintain that it's too inconsistent across the board, in my opinion.

 

[PzR Slim]

Oh don't worry, I think that's his misguided way of saying he disagrees...

Now Scaff has put up a lot of good points, but, I still maintain that it's too inconsistent across the board, in my opinion.

It's not only that I disagree it's the fact that the evidence provided disagrees. Do you really think his experience of FM4 is that all the cars handle the same?

And let's have your evidence of these inconsistencies then. If you are going to make these claims back them up like Scaff and I have.

 

[evilserpentman]

It's not only that I disagree it's the fact that the evidence provided disagrees. Do you really think his experience of FM4 is that all the cars handle the same?

It's his perspective, it may not be agreed with, but ya know...

I disagree with that to be honest, but, I do understand why some would say that is the case.
The handling of some cars are simliar, and not everyone has the time to get a large sample of cars with different characteristics.

 

[Scaff]

Oh don't worry, I think that's his way of saying he disagrees...

Now Scaff has put up a lot of good points, but, I still maintain that it's too inconsistent across the board, in my opinion.

Then please support your opinions with some examples that we can all test.

What I would most like you to explain is this 'fact'

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.

Which is quite clearly not true.


Scaff

 

[PzR Slim]

It's his perspective, it may not be agreed with, but ya know...

I disagree with that to be honest, but, I do understand why some would say that is the case.

How could anybody possible say that if they had played the game or even looked at the video evidence here? I don't for a second mind if someone has a different opinion to me if they have evidence to back up that opinion but all of the evidence provided here totally refutes his claim. It makes him look like he is either lying or hasn't got a clue what he is talking about. Either way he has zero credibility in this discussion.

And again can you provide specific examples or evidence of the inconsistencies within FM4 that make you think the GT5 physics model is better?