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

[Tornado]

Honestly I believe GT5 should feel more realistic. Kazunori is a professional racecar driver. While making these games he drives with the wheel.

Every title has a load of drivers attached to it, pick one and you will find them. It doesn't prove anything one way or another, and the fact that Kaz races doesn't automatically make GT a better sim as was clearly implied. Quite frankly as far as a logical statement goes its nonsense, at best it adds to the development cycle, but it doesn't automatically make it better.

.

 

[BirelChris]

Me and my friends play a lot together.
He has an XBox and i have PS3, and you have guessed what games we play...
You can have way too much speed throug corners in Forza, where as GT5 allso has better sense off speed.
I think GT5 is superior.

 

[Tvensky]

Me and my friends play a lot together.
He has an XBox and i have PS3, and you have guessed what games we play...
You can have way too much speed throug corners in Forza, where as GT5 allso has better sense off speed.
I think GT5 is superior.

talking about faster.. it seems it is



nice video comparison! you can see major differences in steering through corners right away! anyways its better if you drive for yourself, but somehow just watching it I prefer GT.

 

[Scaff]

but you have to notice that FM part isnt crashing. He is driving and then something stupid occurs.

You mean apart from the car hitting the curb and the incident occurring after that?

Without knowing the suspension set-up and/or telemetry you have no idea what has happened, be it glitch, physics issue or actual incident.

This is the issue I have with just using a single piece of information and then claiming it tells you everything.

Honestly I believe GT5 should feel more realistic. Kazunori is a professional racecar driver. While making these games he drives with the wheel. Turn 10 is a team of car photographers that took their passion of cars and turned it into a simulation racing game. At least by my knowledge. Either way I believe Forza is more about having fun and not about hardcore simulation. Forza 1 used to be, but then they branched off and now they just want to please every kind of driver. Both games have a great deal of physics as we can see, but in the end if you have both you truly win.

Meet Gunnar Jeannette, you may not have heard of him however he's been racing in the ALMS for ten years and has competed at LeMans seven times (oh and was the youngest ever finisher).

As well as being a professional racing driver (a term I use specifically as Kaz is not) he's also a consultant for T10.

http://forzamotorsport.net/en-us/WIR_7-8/
http://www.gunnarjeannette.com/about-2

Given that his racing experience totally dwarfs that of Kaz's that must now mean you believe FMr4 to be the more realistic game.

Seriously is this the level of physics discussion going on now?

Me and my friends play a lot together.
He has an XBox and i have PS3, and you have guessed what games we play...
You can have way too much speed throug corners in Forza, where as GT5 allso has better sense off speed.
I think GT5 is superior.

talking about faster.. it seems it is



nice video comparison! you can see major differences in steering through corners right away! anyways its better if you drive for yourself, but somehow just watching it I prefer GT.

For the love of all that is holy will it please stop.

First off the 'ring in FM4 is not accurate, that is common knowledge, the corner profiles are out, which means that cornering speeds will be different. That is physics 101.

Lets find a corner with a know radius, find the cornering speed, calculate the lateral gs and see if the stack up AND then be can talk about accuracy.

Oh look I already have...

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=6111850#post6111850

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=6114243#post6114243

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=6120477#post6120477


See just how far out you can start getting if all you use is your eyes and nothing else.


Scaff

 

[88FoxBodyFan]

talking about faster.. it seems it is

The only thing this video proves is that the interior of the SLS looks better in GT5.

 

[TokoTurismo]

talking about faster.. it seems it is

The SLS AMG in GT5 also has tinted windows, which you can see in the video. Makes me smile.

 

[evilserpentman]

http://www.forzaplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=902

Apparently, the diff physics are broken when it comes to lift-off oversteer in Forza 4.

 

[Scaff]

http://www.forzaplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=902

Apparently, the diff physics are broken when it comes to lift-off oversteer in Forza 4.

You are aware that to be able to post here kind of means we can all read. In which case we can read that thread (and some will already have done so) and find that its actually concludes that lift-off oversteer is not as strong as it should be.

I do also find it interesting that you pick Wolfe to take issue with FM4, I've debated physics (across a range of titles) with him for years now and I'm sure me will not mind me poping this in here, because despite the issue he has with lift-off oversteer not being severe enough in FM4 he still says:

So why do I unequivocally believe FM4 is the superior game (and simulator) over GT5?

He, just as many of us in here who prefer FM4 in terms of physics, is still more than capable of highlighting issues with FM4.


Now not only is this a subject that has been mentioned here already, but its also the case with GT5 and also a long way from your claim that its 'broken'.


Scaff

 

[hennessey86]

I play both with a Fanatec GT2 and I think they both have there strengths and weakness. In terms of feel I give it to Forza. I feel much more through the wheel. Suspension goes to GT5 and Tire physics go to Forza 4. Weight gets done pretty well in both games. Over all though I would give it to Forza because to me GT5 doesn't feel realistic due to the terrible tire physics and lack of feel.

 

[adeathnote]

Reading through this thread is kind of ridiculous... Physics are not right in either game. It comes down to an opinion of which one you think is better. Play what you like... Forza destroys GT5 IMO in the actual game content. GT5 kills forza in actual driving... i prefer driving. I'd play Forza if it didn't feel like i was driving on glass 75% of the time.

 

[Scaff]

Reading through this thread is kind of ridiculous... Physics are not right in either game.

And who exactly in this thread has claimed the physics are 100% accurate in either title?

Given that they are not that kind of makes it an ideal topic for discussion

It comes down to an opinion of which one you think is better. Play what you like... Forza destroys GT5 IMO in the actual game content. GT5 kills forza in actual driving... i prefer driving.

I prefer driving, however I don't agree that GT5 "kills forza in actual driving", the extremely basic tyre physics in GT5 alone ruin any hope of that for me.

I'd play Forza if it didn't feel like i was driving on glass 75% of the time.

Could you provide an example of this for us to try and recreate, because quite frankly I see it totally the other way.

The lack of grip progression in GT5 means you go from grip to loss with almost zero warning, its particularly evident on lower grade tyres. The Shelby Cobra SC demonstrates it well, I've been a passenger in one a few times on road and track and the sidewall height means that limit doesn't just 'appear' as it does in GT5 but is progressive. Yes the car will bite hard once you get to that limit and breach it, but they certainly don't go from grip to nothing.

That's exactly how the car feels in GT5 (grip to nothing), yet in FM4 we get progression up to that limit and then a car that bite after its broken.

Drive within the limits and this is what you have:



However step to far and this is what you get:



I just don't see or more importantly feel the 'glass' at all, and as such an example would be of great help.


Scaff

 

[Mac K]

Scaff it seems to me like you enjoy belittling those who either disagree with you or are simply voicing their opinions, I know you're a mod and all, but that doesn't make It right, just an observation...

 

[Scaff]

Scaff it seems to me like you enjoy belittling those who either disagree with you or are simply voicing their opinions, I know you're a mod and all, but that doesn't make It right, just an observation...

I've not belittled anyone, I have disagreed, given my reasons for disagreeing and asked for further detail and explanation.

Which mod or not I am free to do.

The closest I may have come to this is in expressing my frustration at those who simply post a blanket statement with no detail or supporting evidence, but its nothing that is unacceptable within the AUP.

If you disagree then please feel free to ask a member of the admin team to review my posts.


Scaff

 

[Tornado]

Scaff it seems to me like you enjoy belittling those who either disagree with you or are simply voicing their opinions

People make sweeping, at-times ridiculously incorrect generalizations; usually under the guise of them being facts. Scaff says in no uncertain terms that they are incorrect (which, considering people keep entering the thread and doing it, beating around the bush about it is rather impractical at this point), and backs the majority of them up with some sort of evidence proving why those statements aren't what they are presented as. And that somehow equals "belittling?"

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I just don't see or more importantly feel the 'glass' at all, and as such an example would be of great help.


Scaff

I'll field this one Scaff, if only because I'm a relative newcomer to the Forza series compared to you - (for those unaware: ) I only tried the first one a handful of times, put in a few days with FM3 a year ago, and then finally, about a week or two with FM3 before FM4's release (after which, I've played near-regularly).

I think, for many people coming to FM4 from the GT series, the first impression of "glassy" road surfaces is due to the much less immediate turn-in response in FM4 compared to GT5, in combination with the more punishing physics repercussions in Forza with regards to overcooking corner entry speed. In GT5, turn-in is much more immediate (playing back-to-back, IMHO, I'm always thrown off by the feeling of much less vehicle weight in GT5), and it's easier to bleed off excess speed, at least salvaging a turn. For those not initiated with FM4's different attributes in these two respects, it can feel like all the cars are indeed driving on "glass"... that's how I would've described my very first impressions. Now however, familiarity has me completely comfortable with the feeling (and I largely chalk it up to FM4's very direct focus on tire physics), importantly feeling similar to what I've experienced over-driving the tire limits of real life cars, while GT5 cars, comparatively, feel like marshmallow cars (with the lack of weight) hooked up with a hyperactive, super quick-ratio steering wheel. For lack of better imagery

I won't lay claim to which is more accurate, as my knowledge of the real life physics in these situations pales in comparison, but I will say this; FM4 forces users to re-evaluate their corner entry methods, both the lines and (especially) speeds, more so than GT5, for me. The margin for error is larger in the latter, for better or for worse.

 

[thechosenwonton]

Scaff it seems to me like you enjoy belittling those who either disagree with you or are simply voicing their opinions, I know you're a mod and all, but that doesn't make It right, just an observation...

Right there with you Mac K - this thread has gone off to become "The Scaff Show" - lets lock it up shall we? Obviously if you disagree with Scaff on the physics modeling between the two games, you're incorrect.

So, I'll likely get banned for this post, but it needs to be said:

I've played both games, and whats been said about tire modeling is correct - but lets be clear here - FFB is what makes or breaks the driving experience - so if your talking about driving with a controller, I can't be bothered with that discussion - there's a reason drivers talk about "feel"; if you don't have it, you don't have confidence, and the driving suffers. The FFB engine in Forza 4 is far behind GT5, about as far as GT5 is from iRacing. No Scaff, I'm not Googling the articles for you to back up what I've said, as others do agree. No, I'm not digging out specific car examples. It is a blanket statement across both games, and MY OPINION ON THE MATTER. Others ALSO agree with me. Shocker.

So Scaff, ban me if you must, but the only reason others haven't been all up in your grill about being combative and confrontational on this topic is PURELY because your a mod.

Good day, sir.

 

[evilserpentman]

You are aware that to be able to post here kind of means we can all read. In which case we can read that thread (and some will already have done so) and find that its actually concludes that lift-off oversteer is not as strong as it should be.

I do also find it interesting that you pick Wolfe to take issue with FM4, I've debated physics (across a range of titles) with him for years now and I'm sure me will not mind me poping this in here, because despite the issue he has with lift-off oversteer not being severe enough in FM4 he still says:



He, just as many of us in here who prefer FM4 in terms of physics, is still more than capable of highlighting issues with FM4.


Now not only is this a subject that has been mentioned here already, but its also the case with GT5 and also a long way from your claim that its 'broken'.


Scaff

I was just offering another viewpoint. Not mine, hence I said 'apparently', meaning that I didn't necessarily agree or believe what was said, I was just linking to a thread about that topic on the sister board.
Now, maybe my usage of the term 'broken' was a bit incorrect given this certain context, but I didn't expect to be taken so literally and hence, didn't carefully process every single word and style I could have used in this certain context.

I believed that article would've been useful into furthering our thread here, that is all my ambitions were.

You are aware that I would be assuming people can read due to the fact they've signed up to an internet forum, yes?

 

[another_jakhole]

I was just offering another viewpoint. Not mine, hence I said 'apparently', meaning that I didn't necessarily agree or believe what was said, I was just linking to a thread about that topic on the sister board.
Now, maybe my usage of the term 'broken' was a bit incorrect given this certain context, but I didn't expect to be taken so literally and hence, didn't carefully process every single word and style I could have used in this certain context.

I believed that article would've been useful into furthering our thread here, that is all my ambitions were.

You are aware that I would be assuming people can read due to the fact they've signed up to an internet forum, yes?

IIIIIT happens all of the time, and I mean ALL of the time.

 

[fld200]

Last I had checked, they were both still games, so be quiet and enjoy them for what they are.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

*sigh*

Right there with you Mac K - this thread has gone off to become "The Scaff Show" - lets lock it up shall we? Obviously if you disagree with Scaff on the physics modeling between the two games, you're incorrect.

Nevermind the fact you seem to think you are the deciding voice on a thread's closure - there is a difference between people voicing their opinions, and stating these opinions as facts. This is a discussion about the physics engine, and yet people have (repeatedly) brought up Kaz's race-driver moonlighting as a supposedly valid point in GT5's favour, as just one example.

Shift 2 had numerous drivers' involved in its development - actual race drivers, too - does that make it a better simulation? Absolutely not. It's also very unlikely Kaz has as much of a hand in the direct workings of the physics engine as he did in previous installments - he is after all, a busy man.

So, I'll likely get banned for this post, but it needs to be said:

Nothing here states "having differing opinions to a member of staff" as an offence.

I've played both games, and whats been said about tire modeling is correct - but lets be clear here - FFB is what makes or breaks the driving experience - so if your talking about driving with a controller, I can't be bothered with that discussion - there's a reason drivers talk about "feel"; if you don't have it, you don't have confidence, and the driving suffers. The FFB engine in Forza 4 is far behind GT5, about as far as GT5 is from iRacing. No Scaff, I'm not Googling the articles for you to back up what I've said, as others do agree. No, I'm not digging out specific car examples. It is a blanket statement across both games, and MY OPINION ON THE MATTER. Others ALSO agree with me. Shocker.

Others also disagree. Hence this discussion. So, as you say, let's be clear here - GT5 is hailed as the best simulator on consoles on release, largely thanks to its physics engine, but now what really makes (or breaks) it is the FFB?

So Scaff, ban me if you must, but the only reason others haven't been all up in your grill about being combative and confrontational on this topic is PURELY because your a mod.

Good day, sir.

I'm not sure how long you've been reading up on these sorts of topics (the FM vs GT ones in general, or physics discussions with regards to GT and its competitors), but the reason some of us strive for so much empirical data regarding these things is that the vast majority of these discussions are utterly bereft of it. Sure, a lot of the pro-GT talk can be chalked up to this being, after all, a GT website, but the amount of people who will make baseless claims without so much as even playing Forza is depressing. Flip that idea on its head - imagine a new user (or even an experienced one) dropping in to mention their complete disapproval of GT's physics compared to... again, let's say Shift 2, despite never playing GT. It would be laughable.

In your situation, you've played both, and that's great - but a lot of people haven't. It's much easier to come to conclusions without having to do the research to back them up. When people make these claims, in any game, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for some evidence to support it. Heck, a quick browse over the last few pages lists criticisms levelled at Forza to be that it has both too much grip, and too little.

I can understand some diehard's opinions - I was skeptical of Forza for a long time. But I took a plunge, and I'm incredibly happy with it; I've grown out of the stage of thinking I have to choose one. These are games, they require no loyalty.

There is nothing wrong with people preferring GT5 (or Forza, or S2, or anything else), of course - nobody has said that, as preferences are inevitable. But tire physics, those can be given real weight, and show direct ties to the real world (as well as differences, since as mentioned, no sim is perfect). On the other hand, a single video, with no corroborating information about it, does not somehow "prove" a game is less realistic than another. There's an old infamous video of a car riding on top of another car around one of GT5's ovals, as just one example.

 

[ch3ng]

Both physics are Not Real and have their advantage and disadvantage.

It depends what you prefer

 

[thelvynau]

Both physics are Not Real and have their advantage and disadvantage.

It depends what you prefer

Now thats a very diplomatic and neutral response.

 

[Scaff]

Right there with you Mac K - this thread has gone off to become "The Scaff Show" - lets lock it up shall we? Obviously if you disagree with Scaff on the physics modeling between the two games, you're incorrect.

Has it really?

Anyone is free to disagree with me and if its stated as an opinion then I have no issue with that (nor could I - its an opinion), I am however as free as any member to then discuss that opinion.

Present it as fact however and yes I will expect you to back it up with something tangible, fail to do so and I reserve the right to dismiss it. Prove me wrong on a point and I am more than happy to admit so, something my entire posting history illustrates.

So, I'll likely get banned for this post, but it needs to be said:

Have I threatened to ban you or anyone else for hold an opinion counter to mine?

I've played both games, and whats been said about tire modeling is correct - but lets be clear here - FFB is what makes or breaks the driving experience - so if your talking about driving with a controller, I can't be bothered with that discussion - there's a reason drivers talk about "feel"; if you don't have it, you don't have confidence, and the driving suffers. The FFB engine in Forza 4 is far behind GT5, about as far as GT5 is from iRacing. No Scaff, I'm not Googling the articles for you to back up what I've said, as others do agree. No, I'm not digging out specific car examples. It is a blanket statement across both games, and MY OPINION ON THE MATTER. Others ALSO agree with me. Shocker.

FFB makes or breaks it for you, shocker not every one agrees with that.

I've driven plenty of road cars (hello Audi) and a number of track and race cars that have bugger all steering feel, does that makes them 'less REAL' and GT5 better than them?

What it doesn’t do is draw you deep into the driving experience. There’s little feedback and – as with other members of the A4 clan – the steering suffers from a strangely artificial weight that makes it difficult to invest full trust in it.

Source - http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/280504/driven_audi_s4_avant.html

Its also strange that when you look at Fanatec wheels GT5 doesn't make use of all the motors available, yet FM4 does, as a result offering both more and more accurate feedback. You can also come across plenty of arcade racing tittles with good solid feedback, that doesn't make them more accurate in terms of physics.

Now its that last point that is the vital one here, physics, that is after all what the subject of this discussion is.

So Scaff, ban me if you must, but the only reason others haven't been all up in your grill about being combative and confrontational on this topic is PURELY because your a mod.

Good day, sir.

Once again have I threatened to ban you or anyone else for hold an opinion counter to mine?

No - what I have expected is for those who present claims as fact to actually be willing to discuss it in detail, not drop in a half-baked opinion with no grounding in reality and then expect it simply to be accepted as fact.

Someone says they prefer the way cars drive and handle in GT over FM and I have no issue with that, I personally find the opposite to be true, but its an opinion.

However when we get a video posted up and claims made that FM4 wrong because the cars are cornering 'too' fast or always understeer or always oversteer, etc; then I would expect those stating the fact to be at the very least willing to discuss it. I would also expect those involved to understand that any 'fact' of that nature needs to be tested against reality and not GT5 as well, GT5 is not the benchmark (nor is FM4), the real world is.

What I also find strange is that the second I politely ask for example that illustrate the claims people are making is when toys start coming out of prams.


Scaff

 

[Barn One]

I have until now avoided this thread as to posting but...
The irony in here absolutely puts a smile on my face.

As a diehard defender that Enthusia was far and away better than GT4 ever could have been "driving wise", it's funny as hell seeing all these exact same posters that would use Scaff as their goto guy for the defense of Gran Turismo's poorly modeled physics engine.

Now all of a sudden he's jumped ship and these exact same posters rage on him constantly because he dared to mention GT's biggest console rival as being "better".

Thanks for this thread as it certainly put a smile on my face.

 

[Scaff]

I have until now avoided this thread as to posting but...
The irony in here absolutely puts a smile on my face.

As a diehard defender that Enthusia was far and away better than GT4 ever could have been "driving wise", it's funny as hell seeing all these exact same posters that would use Scaff as their goto guy for the defense of Gran Turismo's poorly modeled physics engine.

Now all of a sudden he's jumped ship and these exact same posters rage on him constantly because he dared to mention GT's biggest console rival as being "better".

Thanks for this thread as it certainly put a smile on my face.

Your not the only one.

What I find amusing the most is the automatic assumption (and this is occurring today as it did with GT4 vs Enthusia) that I am 100% in one camp or the other.

Just a few pages back I made this post, the last time I was accused of 'ruling' the thread:

If you consider it a waste of time discussing it, then I do have to question why you keep posting in it?

In regard to the assumption that I present myself as the "end all authority on physics", you may want to read a little closer as I have suggested no such thing. I have however taught both vehicle dynamics and driver education within the motor industry, so you building analogy falls a little on its face at that point. I do have both the background and experience to analysis to a reasonable degree some of the blatant nonsense that gets presented as fact at times (by both sides). If I'd spent my time in the motor industry just as a partsman you might have a point, however over a decade of it has been spent directly training dealership staff, with over six of those years with product and driver skills.

Now if you have nothing to contribute to the discussion in a meaningful way then don't post here, but if you continue to simply post how pointless you feel it is, then you comments will be treated as spam. You may not find it of interest, but plenty do and plenty exists within both titles to warrant discussion.

Would you like some lists to get started?

GT5 Physics Issues

• Tyre and suspension modelling very, very basic
• Lateral g managed by a simple increment factor when changing tyres
• Absence of any torque effect to front or rear wheels from a standing start (possible issues with suspension and tyre model)
• Suspension tuning counter to real world logic
• Lift off oversteer almost non-existent

FM4 Physics Issues

• Lift off oversteer not correctly modeled in terms of severity (in particular for short wheelbase models
• Stability issues with braking need considerable work
• Lateral Inertia on countersteer too light (makes correction a little to easy)
• Grip levels off for some cars
• Track temp does not have a significant enough effect on the tyre/track Mu value
• Suspension modelling still needs work

And that's just off the top of my head. Now I freely admit that I feel FM4 (and I do mean just 4) is ahead of GT5 and at times by a good margin (tyres). As such the often quoted "GT/FM is the only sim" or my favourite "Forza is just arcade" need addressing and I will continue to do so, regardless of if you feel I should or if you believe I am qualified to do so.

It would seem that a lot of people would rather take issue with the person than discuss the claims they are making, something that is an AUP issue.

The same occured with GT4, many assumed that because I had carried out so much GT4 testing and written huge posts around it that I was always going to blindly defend it, it came as quite a shock to them when I was more than happy to point out the issues with it. More so when I posted what I liked about Enthusia. Hell I can still remember almost being accused of being a GT traitor when I made these videos to illustrate what Enthusia did well that GT4 didn't.


The first video illustrates that Enthusia was modeling suspension travel correctly, something that GT5 still doesn't do and FM4 doesn't do well enough. Its also part of the reason why GT5 disappointed so much, PD managed to hire one of the lead physics programmers from Enthusia for GT5, yet almost nothing of the work put into Enthusia has carried across.

Enthusia still has a lot that GT and to a lesser degree FM could learn from, and its a title I still regularly play to this day. Hell this 'Forza Fanboy' still owns every version of GT (including all the prologues and concept release).


Scaff

 

[thechosenwonton]

*sigh*



Nevermind the fact you seem to think you are the deciding voice on a thread's closure - there is a difference between people voicing their opinions, and stating these opinions as facts. This is a discussion about the physics engine, and yet people have (repeatedly) brought up Kaz's race-driver moonlighting as a supposedly valid point in GT5's favour, as just one example.

Fair enough, don't lock it. This will be the last time I read this thread, it's just bugging me that we know what Scaff's opinion on the matter is, and anyone who posts otherwise is immediately provided a rebuttal, and asked for videos, specific examples, etc, etc, etc... if its their opinion, its their opinion. We get it. You don't agree. Fine. Move on, you aren't any more correct than the next man (providing they've actually played FM4).

Shift 2 had numerous drivers' involved in its development - actual race drivers, too - does that make it a better simulation? Absolutely not. It's also very unlikely Kaz has as much of a hand in the direct workings of the physics engine as he did in previous installments - he is after all, a busy man.

Shift 2 has no bearing in this discussion. It has 'video game' physics, and an even worse FFB engine. I foolishly purchased this title in hope that it would be a good sim, and it just wasn't. Graphics looked good, that was about it. I think I played it for about an hour, haven't touched it since.

Others also disagree. Hence this discussion. So, as you say, let's be clear here - GT5 is hailed as the best simulator on consoles on release, largely thanks to its physics engine, but now what really makes (or breaks) it is the FFB?

Yeah, pretty much. That is what makes every driving sim - lets say you have the most realistic physics model that software can provide - but no FFB engine - who would play that game? GT2, LFS, and iRacing all have really good physics, but what really makes them engaging is your ability to feel what the car is doing - there is a reason people (like me) drop $1000 or more into their wheel setup, because we need that tactile sensation to be more engaged, more involved in what the car is doing - physics might make the handling more realistic, but without the FFB, they're nothing. It could be argued that you could have crappy physics, but a stellar FFB engine and have a decent driving game. You can't have that reversed, it won't be satisfying. Not implying the FM4 has a crappy FFB engine, it just isn't as good as GT5 - In my OPINION.

In your situation, you've played both, and that's great - but a lot of people haven't. It's much easier to come to conclusions without having to do the research to back them up. When people make these claims, in any game, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for some evidence to support it. Heck, a quick browse over the last few pages lists criticisms levelled at Forza to be that it has both too much grip, and too little.

I can understand some diehard's opinions - I was skeptical of Forza for a long time. But I took a plunge, and I'm incredibly happy with it; I've grown out of the stage of thinking I have to choose one. These are games, they require no loyalty.

There is nothing wrong with people preferring GT5 (or Forza, or S2, or anything else), of course - nobody has said that, as preferences are inevitable. But tire physics, those can be given real weight, and show direct ties to the real world (as well as differences, since as mentioned, no sim is perfect). On the other hand, a single video, with no corroborating information about it, does not somehow "prove" a game is less realistic than another. There's an old infamous video of a car riding on top of another car around one of GT5's ovals, as just one example.

I'm not trying to "prove" anything. But it seems every single time someone (who's played both games, mind you) says an opinion contrary to Scaff's, he is asking for exactly that - prove him wrong. Over and over again. We already know his opinion, he's stated it numerous times - there is no PROVING one game is better than the other, but he seems to be attempting to accomplish just that - he is attempting to prove everyone who disagrees with him wrong, and that is my problem.

FWIW, I think FM4 is a more complete game. It isn't crap. The car customization alone makes it worth the price of admission (for me, it was buying an Xbox 360 purely for this game, so that's what I'm saying here). The tracks are great, and I for one do NOT think the cars drive like their on glass. The tire modeling is better. But weight transfer and FFB are two HUGE parts to racing simulation, and in this regard, GT5 does both things better - IN MY OPINION. And you'll not convince me otherwise.

 

[Tornado]

I'm not trying to "prove" anything. But it seems every single time someone (who's played both games, mind you) says an opinion contrary to Scaff's, he is asking for exactly that - prove him wrong.

This would be true if the majority of the time the people who weren't doing it under the guise of their opinions being facts without bothering to actually defend them.



And no, what you are positing is not what has been happening. "Back up your assertion" is not the same thing as "prove me wrong."

Over and over again. We already know his opinion, he's stated it numerous times

So when some new members enter a thread and comment on it, no one who has already posted in it is allowed to post again.


And if you aren't saying that, what are you saying?

there is no PROVING one game is better than the other, but he seems to be attempting to accomplish just that

Pay attention more is just about all I can say.

he is attempting to prove everyone who disagrees with him wrong, and that is my problem.

I was always under the impression that discussion was the point of message boards. Hm.

But weight transfer and FFB are two HUGE parts to racing simulation, and in this regard, GT5 does both things better - IN MY OPINION. And you'll not convince me otherwise.

So basically:

"It's my opinion, so it can't be wrong, so I don't have to be bothered to support it when someone questions it and you are in the wrong for questioning it in the first place."

 

[thechosenwonton]

Question it all you like, just don't try to convince me otherwise, over and over again. Or ask me for specific examples, it's a blanket statement across both games. And no, my opinion cannot be wrong, TO ME. That's my point. If I thought my opinion was wrong, it wouldn't be my opinion anymore - maybe you drive different than me? Maybe you have a different wheel, maybe your looking for something that I'm not? Fine, your opinion is equally correct - to YOU. You don't have to agree with me, obviously - you seemed to have replied awfully fast to my post, you sure you payed attention to what I actually said?

Also, to the others, if you haven't played both games, why are you posting in this thread, other than to ask questions? This is one case where your opinion is immediately invalid, because you have nothing to base it on, whereas others who have played both games, do.

 

[sik180sx]

Question it all you like, just don't try to convince me otherwise, over and over again. Or ask me for specific examples, it's a blanket statement across both games. And no, my opinion cannot be wrong, TO ME. That's my point. If I thought my opinion was wrong, it wouldn't be my opinion anymore - maybe you drive different than me? Maybe you have a different wheel, maybe your looking for something that I'm not? Fine, your opinion is equally correct - to YOU. You don't have to agree with me, obviously - you seemed to have replied awfully fast to my post, you sure you payed attention to what I actually said?

Also, to the others, if you haven't played both games, why are you posting in this thread, other than to ask questions? This is one case where your opinion is immediately invalid, because you have nothing to base it on, whereas others who have played both games, do.

Just go back and check my posts for an example of the same thing.

 

[Spagetti69]

This will be the last time I read this thread

Er ok.

As for FFB I don't play GT anymore but I do have a question on it. Does it still rock the wheel back and fore whilst on a straight, or is it fixed now?

Also OT I find the Forzas physics to be better. If not just for the fact that it uses a single physics engine for online and offline.
How can a game with separate physics be considered better?