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

[Scaff]

Aye, but isn't this thread about which of the two has the more realistic physics? In order to fully determine that, wouldn't it be recommended that you use a wheel since last time I checked, real cars aren't driven with controllers. Just food for thought, not trying to exclude controllers users. I can't really debate on this though as I've never played Forza, so I can't form an opinion until I do.

Real cars also have a wide range of steering assistance, from none to electronic to hydraulic. Throw in speed sensitive steering and differing turns lock to lock on top of that and to be honest most wheel and pedal set-ups are only getting that bit closer to each 'car' that a controller is. That's without starting on the different pedal throws, positions, bite points and pressure required.

The main reason why a physical link still exists between the steering system and the wheels is more to do with cost and legislation, alternatives pop up on concepts all the time and some have run on track.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/9126441/Honda-designs-car-without-steering-wheel.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...show-2012-the-car-with-no-steering-wheel.html


Don't get me wrong I would rather drive a sim with a wheel and pedal combo, but they are a step up from a controller, but its still not the real deal. Many here would baulk at the idea of a car with fly by wire steering, yet that's just what our pedal and wheels are.

The core physics don't change with a controller or a wheel, its just sensible to compare like with like and also to take into consideration the assistance the input device is providing, as even a wheel is not giving you the exact same range and level that the 'real' car we are driving a simulation of would.


Scaff

 

[TokoTurismo]

Lol amen, brotha! nothing beats RL! Ive got a few spare moments for this lunch break so why not dip into this one a bit..

I have no problem with joysticks at all. Take away the physicality, and racing physics come down to how well you can connect with what the vehicle should be doing, in union to the directed input of the device (steering mechanism/throttle/components)

Mentally, that all sums up to real life experience with tracks and cars, and how well someone understands the tire physics of the vehicle they're driving. In other words, it all goes back to mental state, and loose opinions of how one guy feels it should respond versus another guy. How so, you ask? Well, we can never really know if that Honda civic, running comfort sorts, are an accurate representation of the toyo proxy's he races with in real life? NO! And this is only one, of thousands of amalgamated possibilities unavailable to algorithm intelligence.

Don't, for one second, think that a "wheel fanboy" has much more, if any more of a clue than anyone else on this forum, when it comes to logic and reasoning with real world simulation. They may have more bits of information to direct their theoretical values I.e. bits in relation to rotational value (900 degrees typically), but all that opens up to is a broader spectrum of hypothetical calculation, therefore giving the user a heightened chance of error. This all goes to say that we understand the algorithm of said game to begin with. If I had to guess, I'd speculate these console games do not take full advantage of the wheel hardware most of us are using. Thus making our wheels only sloppy representations of the hard code, embedded into the physics model.

What's this all add up to? Interpretative opinion of experience, in relation to real life. I could have stated it there and left the rest at the door, but it'd be a shame if the next wheel superior came in and sharted anymore "facts" over these opinions. The only advantage one might argue a wheel user has over a precise controller user in these games, is fun factor..if that's your sort of seats of the pants kind of thing..and for me, it is.

Regards,

Tyler

I've always believed wheel users have more experience then controller users. And sorry for bringing up that annoying word called, "fanboy or fangirl." I didn't mean every single person who uses a wheel for racing games like sim racing. Just to those who, well I can't really explain it, it may come out the wrong way, and they'll might jump me for it.

I'm just relieved that you were the one who came and told me all about what you've wrote in your sentence. And I give a BIG +1, and my thanks to you. 👍 I won't be jumping into this thread no more. Take care.

 

[thelvynau]

Dont get me wrong I prefer using a wheel over a controller but you cant exclude controller users from this discussion because both games use them and its right physics dont change in the game according to which input method you prefer.

 

[TylerGiese]

That's a fair point, but even if you did do a controller vs controller comparison, could you really ultimately say which has the most realistic physics by mashing buttons and turning some sticks? Again, no offense to controller users, but until we start driving and racing real cars with controllers, then I think a wheel vs wheel comparison would yield much more accurate results. Again, just something to think about.

My wheel setup aside -comparing the math of the two engines, I prefer the contact/rotational input of GT5 to FM4. Let me retract any discussion of the input device altogether (so we can leave that detracting side subject behind) and rest this solely on the realism I interpret from my input commands. You want to consider my thoughts only valid as using the "mashing buttons and sticks" controllers? That's for you to determine and fine with me.. I like to see past the mechanisms, for sake of this topic, and look objectively at "physics realism" in relation to how it makes me "feel" about real world possibility.

Walk outside, and look in to this conversation. You may say the wheel represents real world more accurately, but a fanatic/thrust,aster/Logitech device are only representative counterparts in their shape. Nothing about any received commands from these devices translates to analog mechanism of real world circumstance. I.e. that Logitech wheel isn't connected to a steering column, connected to rods...yadayada.

I respect these opinions, but, in moving forward, I see no discussion about what device being used as valid, when interpreting the math behind a physics engine. That's me anyhow, someone looking at the two engines as objectively as possible. I hope my opinion is now validated? Thanks all.

 

[Scaff]

I prefer the contact/rotational input of GT5 to FM4.

For me the lack of a strong tyre model in GT5, particularly with deformation not accounted for ruins this for me.

GT5 is still a strong sim, but the progression from grip to loss is just too abrupt, particularly with regard to the more road orientated tyres. The Cobra SC (I know I bang on about this car but it really does sum up so much) shows this so well. Slap some CS tyres on it in GT5 and the car is almost undriveable, you breath wrong on the throttle and its gone. Now I've had the pleasure of passengering in one on two separate occasions and simply put they are nothing like the car in GT5. The progression from grip to loss is quite gradual and communicated via the entire car, even from the passenger seat you can feel a lot of what is going on. Step over that limit however and they will bite hard.

GT5 does the bite hard bite (as does FM4) but what it misses is that communication up to the limit.

Give the car a go stock in both titles on the same track and let me know what you think.


Scaff

 

[cuco33]

I would not exclude pad users by any means in physics discussions but wheel users have the benefit of having FFB and a better sense of simulated realism, and to be honest having FFB is a big thing. Pad users do get a major 'bonus' by doing lock to lock significantly faster than what a wheel user can do, cuz afterall it's much faster to flick your thumb from left to right in about 1-2 inches then it is to full rotate a wheel. As I said before, I play both games with both methods of input. I am usually faster with a pad but it's much more fun and feels more realistic with a wheel. I still prefer FM4's physics over GT5, as in a few like for like examples I've tested out it feels easier (easier to drive, race, correct accidents or mishaps, easier to hammer through turns, etc) to drive in GT5, pad and wheel alike, than it does FM4.

 

[TylerGiese]

For me the lack of a strong tyre model in GT5, particularly with deformation not accounted for ruins this for me.

GT5 is still a strong sim, but the progression from grip to loss is just too abrupt, particularly with regard to the more road orientated tyres. The Cobra SC (I know I bang on about this car but it really does sum up so much) shows this so well. Slap some CS tyres on it in GT5 and the car is almost undriveable, you breath wrong on the throttle and its gone. Now I've had the pleasure of passengering in one on two separate occasions and simply put they are nothing like the car in GT5. The progression from grip to loss is quite gradual and communicated via the entire car, even from the passenger seat you can feel a lot of what is going on. Step over that limit however and they will bite hard.

GT5 does the bite hard bite (as does FM4) but what it misses is that communication up to the limit.

Give the car a go stock in both titles on the same track and let me know what you think.

Scaff

I really like the input! I will definitely have a go in the cobra when I get a chance. It's pretty cool share things like this, and this is why I always keep an open mind. Opinions are meant for changing. Well, that's my opinion too haha. Thanks for the time!

-Tyler

 

[hennessey86]

My apologies, my no pad thing was aimed more at the GT5 players who play GT5 with a wheel and then go over to Forza and try it with a pad and say GT5 has the better physics. I used to be a pad user myself and yes you can judge the physics to a certain extent.

 

[C_Raccoon23]

My apologies, my no pad thing was aimed more at the GT5 players who play GT5 with a wheel and then go over to Forza and try it with a pad and say GT5 has the better physics. I used to be a pad user myself and yes you can judge the physics to a certain extent.

Same goes for my post earlier.

 

[thelvynau]

Ill have to get my old logitech momo wheel out of mothballs see if it runs on gt5 I doubt it would work on xbox though.

Having this discussion about wheels and controllers makes me want to start gt5 again with my old wheel see how I go.

 

[King1982]

One of the best fm vs gt videos

 

[Mac K]

One of the best fm vs gt videos

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

Nice to see a video about someone who can appreciate and criticize both fairly, he has some great points.

 

[ItsHim]

One of the best fm vs gt videos

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

A bloke talking 40 minutes about DLC is not really my cup of tea.

Anyway just punched a nice hole in GTs physics engine, and it's (still) prone to glitching.

For the current TT on Deep Forrest I ran it with the Audi set up with maximum rear height and lowered front (the settings are still mixed up, though visually it looks the right way round). To iron out the over steer the ARBs were set to max in the front and minimum at the rear.

And joy of joys the end result is not only drive able, which I really doubt it should be, but also rewards the driver with enormous amounts of slip. There's of course some fiddling done with the other settings, too, but the main point is the rude height and ARB stuff to make this thing go round corners fast.

Now I will try to set up a car how I feel it would be true to RL, and see how close I can come to my time with proper driving. Though I doubt I can match the 1:19.5 I've done today.

Shame, really, but what's the point of an advanced physics engine if you can punch holes in it so easily. Also makes me wonder how new the engine is really. They seem to have carried over a lot from GT4.

I should have expected this, but right now not a happy bunny :/

 

[King1982]

A bloke talking 40 minutes about DLC is not really my cup of tea.

Anyway just punched a nice hole in GTs physics engine, and it's (still) prone to glitching.

For the current TT on Deep Forrest I ran it with the Audi set up with maximum rear height and lowered front (the settings are still mixed up, though visually it looks the right way round). To iron out the over steer the ARBs were set to max in the front and minimum at the rear.

And joy of joys the end result is not only drive able, which I really doubt it should be, but also rewards the driver with enormous amounts of slip. There's of course some fiddling done with the other settings, too, but the main point is the rude height and ARB stuff to make this thing go round corners fast.

Now I will try to set up a car how I feel it would be true to RL, and see how close I can come to my time with proper driving. Though I doubt I can match the 1:19.5 I've done today.

Shame, really, but what's the point of an advanced physics engine if you can punch holes in it so easily. Also makes me wonder how new the engine is really. They seem to have carried over a lot from GT4.

I should have expected this, but right now not a happy bunny :/

 

[Mac K]

Great video, gotta hand it to Turn 10..

 

[Spagetti69]

Great video, gotta hand it to Turn 10..

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6j6oYOUfb0&feature=g-all-u&context=G25971e1FAAAAAAAABAA">YouTube Link</a>

What's the vid about mac? It's been removed.

 

[Mac K]

What's the vid about mac? It's been removed.

Post edited, they removed it and re-uploaded it for some reason..

 

[Tvensky]

this guy is so baked! 👍

Miauuu...

"shut up cat Im in a middle of my stuff" hilarious!

PS. Forza has some very good features that I would love to see in GT series, didnt know about them so much, all I did is some physics test at my friends house!

 

[Samus]

Great video, gotta hand it to Turn 10..

First words out of Dan's mouth:

"Tyres are key to making a great simulator"

Totally agree, take note PD.

 

[Spagetti69]

Is that a new video? Nice to hear info from the staff.

 

[Samus]

Is that a new video? Nice to hear info from the staff.

Yes on both counts. That's another thing, this is another video is a long line of community interactions from T10. They have the weekly blogs going on and have uploaded several videos like that one throughout development of each game. Again, something for PD to take note of.

 

[Deadpool]

For me, F4 (and all of the Forza's) have this weird "floaty" sensation. They don't stick to the road properly at all. Another thing, in F4 when you use the over car view you can see the car stays flat at all times even over bumps, but in GT5 you can see the suspension actively working.

Yes it's nice to use Pirelli for tire information, but tires are only one part of many regarding a physics engine. If you get the tires right but everything else wrong..... what's the point? On top of that, for all we know PD got proper tire modeling as well...... they just don't advertise it like T10. Maybe they should.

I've always found the grip level in Forza to be unrealistic. It's too easy to get oversteer, and too easy to control it. Snap oversteer is almost never a problem for me in Forza, while in GT5 I have to be very precise with my counter steer...... you know..... like in a real car.

 

[Samus]

On top of that, for all we know PD got proper tire modeling as well...... they just don't advertise it like T10. Maybe they should.

They don't. It's been proven on many levels how basic the tyre model of GT5 is from lack of tyre pressure adjustments to the more serious problem that lateral grip is simply a fixed number for each tyre type, irrespective of the car it's on or the dimensions of it.

 

[Deadpool]

They don't. It's been proven on many levels how basic the tyre model of GT5 is from lack of tyre pressure adjustments to the more serious problem that lateral grip is simply a fixed number for each tyre type, irrespective of the car it's on or the dimensions of it.

I haven't seen this, granted I don't spend much time on this board. Tyre pressure adjustments wouldn't mean that they didn't do a proper tire model though, just means it's limited to a set pressure. How do we know about the lateral grip, without getting into the code, how would we prove it?

Assuming they made it a very basic tyre model, it's still clear that their suspension model is vastly superior to that of F4. Which is why the cars in GT5 feel planted and you can feel the suspension working. With Forza they just "float" over the surface as if there were no interaction with the suspension.

 

[Samus]

I'll have to find the thread, someone tested it using a makeshift skidpan.

Here you go: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=160821&highlight=skidpan+tyres

I'm sure others have done similar research and concluded the same.

 

[Terronium-12]

For me, F4 (and all of the Forza's) have this weird "floaty" sensation. They don't stick to the road properly at all. Another thing, in F4 when you use the over car view you can see the car stays flat at all times even over bumps, but in GT5 you can see the suspension actively working.

I won't address the "floaty sensation" comment, but what I will address the car having no apparent movement in the third-person view; simply put: yes, it does.

Yes it's nice to use Pirelli for tire information, but tires are only one part of many regarding a physics engine. If you get the tires right but everything else wrong..... what's the point? On top of that, for all we know PD got proper tire modeling as well...... they just don't advertise it like T10. Maybe they should.

Except they didn't and you can already judge as much by going no further than full-throttle launches - absolutely no torque steer to be seen.

I've always found the grip level in Forza to be unrealistic. It's too easy to get oversteer, and too easy to control it. Snap oversteer is almost never a problem for me in Forza, while in GT5 I have to be very precise with my counter steer...... you know..... like in a real car.

You do know both games are notorious for lowering the grip levels on all cars, right? I still don't understand why people equate impossible recovery to realism.

 

[hennessey86]

I've always found the grip level in Forza to be unrealistic. It's too easy to get oversteer, and too easy to control it. Snap oversteer is almost never a problem for me in Forza, while in GT5 I have to be very precise with my counter steer...... you know..... like in a real car.

hmmmmmm are you using 900 degrees and simulation steering????

 

[Deadpool]

I won't address the "floaty sensation" comment, but what I will address the car having no apparent movement in the third-person view; simply put: yes, it does.

Why not address the "floaty" sensation..... it's there. And with the no apparent movement it's miniscule at best. Take it around the Ring and the chassis movement is barely there. I could post endless videos showing this along with the "floaty" physics engine.

The physics model in F4 just is not realistic at all.

Except they didn't and you can already judge as much by going no further than full-throttle launches - absolutely no torque steer to be seen.

The torque steer is there, it's just very light. F4 is too aggressive though with it's torque steer.

You do know both games are notorious for lowering the grip levels on all cars, right? I still don't understand why people equate impossible recovery to realism.

When did I say impossible to recover? I said "difficult" to recover, which is how it is in the real world at 100mph+. With GT5 I can recover most slides, but I have to be very precise with my counter steer, if I over correct at high speed the car will snap..... just like in real life. With F4, I can easily get cars into slides at high speed and there is no drama at all, way too simple to correct, VERY forgiving. Go take a 911 and get sideways at 100+ and let me know how it turns out for you.

hmmmmmm are you using 900 degrees and simulation steering????

Yes.

 

[Scaff]

For me, F4 (and all of the Forza's) have this weird "floaty" sensation. They don't stick to the road properly at all. Another thing, in F4 when you use the over car view you can see the car stays flat at all times even over bumps, but in GT5 you can see the suspension actively working.

Assuming they made it a very basic tyre model, it's still clear that their suspension model is vastly superior to that of F4. Which is why the cars in GT5 feel planted and you can feel the suspension working. With Forza they just "float" over the surface as if there were no interaction with the suspension.

Why not address the "floaty" sensation..... it's there. And with the no apparent movement it's miniscule at best. Take it around the Ring and the chassis movement is barely there. I could post endless videos showing this along with the "floaty" physics engine.

The physics model in F4 just is not realistic at all.

How much time have you spent with FM4? The flat cornering, which was a trait of FM to FM3 is most certainly not in FM4 at all. Take a look at the following:




Would you explain exactly what is not working in regard to the suspension and how they could be described as flat cornering?

If either title has an issue with incorrect suspension movement now its GT5 (not my video):

Yes it's nice to use Pirelli for tire information, but tires are only one part of many regarding a physics engine. If you get the tires right but everything else wrong..... what's the point? On top of that, for all we know PD got proper tire modeling as well...... they just don't advertise it like T10. Maybe they should.

Are you able to supply even a single source to back up the claim that PD have proper tyre modelling, because current all evidence points to the exact opposite.

I've always found the grip level in Forza to be unrealistic. It's too easy to get oversteer, and too easy to control it. Snap oversteer is almost never a problem for me in Forza, while in GT5 I have to be very precise with my counter steer...... you know..... like in a real car.

No the countersteer in GT5 is not like a real car, neither are exactly like a real car in that regard at all, however FM4 (and the 4 is important) gets a lot closer.

When did I say impossible to recover? I said "difficult" to recover, which is how it is in the real world at 100mph+. With GT5 I can recover most slides, but I have to be very precise with my counter steer, if I over correct at high speed the car will snap..... just like in real life. With F4, I can easily get cars into slides at high speed and there is no drama at all, way too simple to correct, VERY forgiving. Go take a 911 and get sideways at 100+ and let me know how it turns out for you.

I totally disagree in regard to FM4 and highspeed correction, a small degree of yaw you can correct, but once it goes past a small degree your lost even at lower speeds.

The torque steer is there, it's just very light. F4 is too aggressive though with it's torque steer.

All testing to date shows zero torque steer from a standing start in GT5, if your able to demonstrate it I would be very interested.



Scaff

 

[Deadpool]

I'll have to find the thread, someone tested it using a makeshift skidpan.

Here you go: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=160821&highlight=skidpan+tyres

I'm sure others have done similar research and concluded the same.

I found one issue with the OP. He used tire racks info and the ratings for the tires, to make his determination. Just because two tires have the same tread wear/rating, does not make them equal, many times you have a different brand which is much better than the other. So it's hard to make a proper analysis from that. Like I said, without getting into the code, it's hard to know exactly what they did, or where they took short cuts.