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

[Exorcet]

A scripted physic does not mean that can not be interfered by the player at any time or interact by their inputs.

The suggestion was that all suspension motion was scripted. That's basically impossible. Some things can be scripted yes, like GT5's suspension motion over grass. But scripting all the suspension motion seen would be ridiculous.

 

[Zer0]

The suggestion was that all suspension motion was scripted. That's basically impossible. Some things can be scripted yes, like GT5's suspension motion over grass. But scripting all the suspension motion seen would be ridiculous.

Was not an old Forza problem that some things happens in the telemetry but not visually? I remember in FM3 a subject similar about body roll. That would explain how certain things are done visually. It's difficult to know exactly what could be scripted or not.

I don't think that the grass/sand bumps in GT5 are scripted, is just that the full grid physical surface is not modeled visually, that's the reason of the clipping on the tyres.

At the end:

 

[shved111]

GT5 physics sometimes very strange, especially in non-standard modes and conditions

 

[cuco33]

Like all the jumps on the ring in forza 4..

Grossly over exaggerated. You would have done slightly better by mentioning the dip on Bernese Alps track and even that is no where as bad as the air you can catch on Cape Ring.
It's not even a comparison really. Cape Ring's Mario Kart style jump is a laugh. Shame too because there are parts to the track that aren't bad up until you go airborne in either direction you approach it.

Yes I know, it's obvious that they are not playing a driving game, no way four FM4 players at the time. As I said was an example of a different type of casual gamer as seen in the previous vids. You put one great example of them with your lady.

By "correct settings" I was referring to kinect gameplay, pad or air wheel with all the assists available. Kinect being the more casual type possible.

And for the record all my previous posts mean about the skills needed to play and control the car not the track layout or I would added things like the FM4 bowling and soccer game to the list.

Then if it is so obvious why even post the gif of a family Kinect game being promoted if not trying to take the usual dig at MS or Forza series? Our definition of a casual gamer might differ but Sony's MOVE wheel is geared towards the same group that Kinect and MS's wireless double ended dildo is. You yourself even posted a video of a non gaming comedian and a kid, certainly not the core simmer. These are the same people that use SRF, RS tires and practice bump n run racing, autobrake, rewind, no damage, etc. It makes the game fun and accessible to them. They aren't the same people who would be digging into the tiny details of a physics engine in a racing sim like we discuss here.

Those racing modes are an evolution of what MS/T10 saw as being popular online in previous Forza games, like cat n mouse. They are also thanks to the partnership with Top Gear; ever seen the show?! PD could do well by adding casual modes like this since people already do it now online. It is a nice break from normal racing and something to grab the casual fans attention.

 

[shved111]

fm4 to me not much like the way the suspension damps very powerful blows. it should do the rebound.

 

[Exorcet]

I don't think that the grass/sand bumps in GT5 are scripted, is just that the full grid physical surface is not modeled visually, that's the reason of the clipping on the tyres.

Tire clipping isn't what I mean. I don't find a problem with that, it's an easy way to make it seem like the sand has depth. I don't expect them to model sand particles.

What I mean is the see-saw motion of the cars as they drive over grass. You can see it your video and the Lotus video. It's always the same no matter where you are or what you're doing, the car just bounces around in a very peculiar way. It's a scripted motion.

 

[Tornado]

This type of casual for example has no room in GT5 but could race, even win and have fun in FM4 with the right settings and without knowing the basics of a car handling.

As opposed to the detailed understanding of physics you got in GT4 and GT5 from doing almost all of the events in B-Spec? Or the knowledge of car handling that comes from spending all of your time using Photomode? Looking at museum cards? Watching things on GT TV? What physics knowledge do you get from Photomode, which has been treated as a hell of a lot bigger deal by PD than Top Gear Bowling has by Turn 10?



Both games have their own aspects for appealing to a wider audience. Neither one is any more "casual" then the other just because they do different things to reach that wider audience; nor does Forza adding things to their E3 presentation at Microsoft's request mean they are specifically targeting casual players anymore than PD is specifically targeting the same group by adding Move support.

 

[Zer0]

What I mean is the see-saw motion of the cars as they drive over grass. You can see it your video and the Lotus video. It's always the same no matter where you are or what you're doing, the car just bounces around in a very peculiar way. It's a scripted motion.

I don't mean a complex irregular surface but some simple waved surface that simulate the terrain. That waves affect physically the car suspension in many forms depending of the angle and entry speed. Only when you stop and start over the grass the car seems to move always the same, mainly because the linear speed (restricted) and posibly the simplicity of the mesh.

As opposed to the detailed understanding of physics you got in GT4 and GT5 from doing almost all of the events in B-Spec? Or the knowledge of car handling that comes from spending all of your time using Photomode? Looking at museum cards? Watching things on GT TV? What physics knowledge do you get from Photomode, which has been treated as a hell of a lot bigger deal by PD than Top Gear Bowling has by Turn 10?

This:

And for the record all my previous posts mean about the skills needed to play and control the car not the track layout or I would added things like the FM4 bowling and soccer game to the list.

And if it was not clear enought I mean the driving part.

 

[shved111]

Your picture "Gif" looks very impressivea pity that in gt5 no slow motion camera shooting.

I think after the update 2.08 gt5 suspension can battle with suspension fm4

 

[Exorcet]

I don't mean a complex irregular surface but some simple waved surface that simulate the terrain. That waves affect physically the car suspension in many forms depending of the angle and entry speed. Only when you stop and start over the grass the car seems to move always the same, mainly because the linear speed (restricted) and posibly the simplicity of the mesh.

There is some rough surface under the grass, you can see it because of the forced traction control that comes on when you go off track. It does not line up with the wavy suspension motion though, and you will always get that suspension motion no matter what direction you're going which wouldn't happen if it was because of underlying surface.

 

[Zer0]

There is some rough surface under the grass, you can see it because of the forced traction control that comes on when you go off track. It does not line up with the wavy suspension motion though, and you will always get that suspension motion no matter what direction you're going which wouldn't happen if it was because of underlying surface.

I don't know what you mean with the no line up.

Under the rendered grass surface (basically a plane) there is a not visible physically mesh representing the bumps that make the real contact with the tyres.

Seems something like this:

As I said a simple mesh. That would explain the similar suspension motion that you get.

Your picture "Gif" looks very impressivea pity that in gt5 no slow motion camera shooting.

I think after the update 2.08 gt5 suspension can battle with suspension fm4

It's a vid from 2011.

 

[Exorcet]

I don't know what you mean with the no line up.

Under the rendered grass surface (basically a plane) there is a not visible physically mesh representing the bumps that make the real contact with the tyres.

Seems something like this:

As I said a simple mesh. That would explain the similar suspension motion that you get.

But if that was the cause, the suspension motion would depend on how you were traveling through the grass. You can see in the image that the troughs line up, which could allow a car in the correct direction to travel through the mesh without bouncing.

They'd probably be more visible when the car was stopped too.

 

[shved111]

It's a vid from 2011.

I wonder how it looks now

 

[machschnel]

And if it was not clear enought I mean the driving part.

So who is Skid Recovery Force appealing to if not casuals?

 

[shved111]

i like gt5 becuse it way harder to tune and win raaces

with outages, Assistants driving race in fm4, turns into hell, it's much more difficult than in gt5 physics.

The complexity of passing gt5 can be associated only with the complexity of the race (endurance race, the super complicated gold license etc) but this is not a game physics.

By the way, how do you think it's downforce, aerodynamics, in fm4, or coincidence?

 

[Exorcet]

Yes, that looks like downforce. GT5 does the same thing. However I think once you depart from normal straight line driving, Forza's aero modeling is superior.

Forza also has a more realistic draft, though I still haven't examined it very closely.

 

[shved111]

Yes, that looks like downforce. GT5 does the same thing. However I think once you depart from normal straight line driving, Forza's aero modeling is superior.

Forza also has a more realistic draft, though I still haven't examined it very closely.

By the way classic Ford GT40 at a speed of about 200 kmh, the front wheels start to come off the road, the car is almost out of control at a speed of over 200 kmh and the front half of the car is lifted.

The car rides only in straight lines, and almost does not respond to steering.I read that in the 2000s people from Ford, tested, museum GT40, in modern wind tunnel, and said that drivers in the 60's, were fearless heroes.
Because at the speed of 200 kmh acted huge, air lift forces

 

[Spagetti69]

OT but interesting nonetheless.

Lambo Miura concept has its fuel tank in the front. As the fuel is depleted front end grip gets dangerously low.

Sorry for that OT.

 

[Zer0]

But if that was the cause, the suspension motion would depend on how you were traveling through the grass. You can see in the image that the troughs line up, which could allow a car in the correct direction to travel through the mesh without bouncing.

They'd probably be more visible when the car was stopped too.

There is no way to travel over that surface without bouncing.

In the game the suspension motion it changes depending of your position in the grass, if not you would not see any wavy effect.

I wonder how it looks now

So who is Skid Recovery Force appealing to if not casuals?

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8036584#post8036584
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8036725#post8036725

 

[Exorcet]

There is no way to travel over that surface without bouncing.

OK, with the lines it's clear.

In the game the suspension motion it changes depending of your position in the grass, if not you would not see any wavy effect.

Suspension motion changing with position doesn't say much. It changing with orientation to the grass does. Or initial position in the grass. Also, like I said before the activation of the off track traction control doesn't seem to be in sync with the suspension motion if I recall.

Those images above are making me want to update GT5, maybe I'll give it a go this weekend.

 

[cuco33]

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8036584#post8036584
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8036725#post8036725

This proves what exactly? Again, who is SRF geared towards? Who is the Mario Kart jump on Cape Ring meant for? Certainly not the hardcore sim fans nor most who discuss the intricacies of these games' physics engines.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8036584#post8036584
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8036725#post8036725

Since you're referencing it again, I have to ask (again): what does an animated gif of people playing something that isn't FM4 have to do with the physics discussion?

Both games offer less-extreme options to appeal to casual gamers, period. I recognize your bias is really forcing you to rationalize these "levels" of casualness, that somehow GT5 is less geared towards it than FM4, but they both offer dumbed-down options and features to appeal to wider audiences, in slightly different ways.

The issue with the off-track physics of GT5 is a complicated one, and it's been covered a few times in this thread. I too find the reactions from the car not entirely convincing; the auto-TCS being a personal annoyance since release day. FM4's sticky grass is hardly the best comparison, either; I understand the reasoning behind it with regards to online racing, but it should have been made a user-controllable option, and it sadly has just changed online punters' approaches; instead of cutting corners, they'll just try to push you into the sticky patches. 👎

 

[Exorcet]

Both games offer less-extreme options to appeal to casual gamers, period. I recognize your bias is really forcing you to rationalize these "levels" of casualness, that somehow GT5 is less geared towards it than FM4, but they both offer dumbed-down options and features to appeal to wider audiences, in slightly different ways.

I would also add that the bottom end of the physics don't matter in the slightest as far as this thread goes. Only the most realistic settings matter.

I completely agree that Forza sticky grass is just as bad, if not worse than whatever GT5 may be doing.

 

[machschnel]

I'd say not having a tire model would be pretty casual......

 

[shved111]

I believe that the second after driving physics, an important property autosimulator road cars, is a simulation of the real nature of the car, each model.

In this capacity fm4 far ahead.Fm4 reproduces the subtle nuances, the atmosphere of each model, her soul message of each model laid automaker.For those who likes to do tuning and increase the power, it will remain invisible, it is only for stock cars, but it is very interesting and experience.In gt5 there is none in gt5 is much less pronounced

 

[Zer0]

Since you're referencing it again, I have to ask (again): what does an animated gif of people playing something that isn't FM4 have to do with the physics discussion?

Both games offer less-extreme options to appeal to casual gamers, period. I recognize your bias is really forcing you to rationalize these "levels" of casualness, that somehow GT5 is less geared towards it than FM4, but they both offer dumbed-down options and features to appeal to wider audiences, in slightly different ways.

Is this anymore a physics discussion? I try to get more on topic and even a mod wants to get off topic.

Would you call this also a "bias"?
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=7775107&highlight=modelling#post7775107
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=7786731#post7786731
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8028701#post8028701

Or the claim that GT5 has not a tyre model? this is my favourite.

Here we are all a little biased for or against something about GT (or other games) but facts are facts. I'm only saying that there is a new level of low casual (implying a big new market never exploited before) that was born with the Wii and that MS and Sony have been trying to catch with new periferical and games since then. FM4 has that casual integration much more pronounced than GT5 and that is a fact. GT for Kids does not exist in GT5 but "exist" in FM4. There is no way to compare the kinect playing to anything that can offer GT5 even with SRF, racing soft tyres, all aids, etc handling and skills-wise. Again all that aside of the hardcore simulated part that nobody is discussing in this subject. More clear now?

The gif was the first I found of that new type of casual market. You have examples of that people playing specifically FM4 in my previous vids. I can make animated gifs from them if that will end this discussion.

Offtrack physics are a lot closer to other top sims or real life accidents in GT5 than FM4, except rollovers. There are not perfect but I don't see the complication.

 

[thelvynau]

Is this anymore a physics discussion? I try to get more on topic and even a mod wants to get off topic.

Would you call this also a "bias"?
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=7775107&highlight=modelling#post7775107
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=7786731#post7786731
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8028701#post8028701

Or the claim that GT5 has not a tyre model? this is my favourite.

Here we are all a little biased for or against something about GT (or other games) but facts are facts. I'm only saying that there is a new level of low casual (implying a big new market never exploited before) that was born with the Wii and that MS and Sony have been trying to catch with new periferical and games since then. FM4 has that casual integration much more pronounced than GT5 and that is a fact. GT for Kids does not exist in GT5 but "exist" in FM4. There is no way to compare the kinect playing to anything that can offer GT5 even with SRF, racing soft tyres, all aids, etc handling and skills-wise. Again all that aside of the hardcore simulated part that nobody is discussing in this subject. More clear now?

The gif was the first I found of that new type of casual market. You have examples of that people playing specifically FM4 in my previous vids. I can make animated gifs from them if that will end this discussion.

Offtrack physics are a lot closer to other top sims or real life accidents in GT5 than FM4, except rollovers. There are not perfect but I don't see the complication.

Care to elaborate as to why the physics are better in GT5?

the fact that Forza caters to all levels of gamers isn't what i would call hard evidence also are you saying the tyre model in GT5 is better?

 

[Zer0]

Care to elaborate as to why the physics are better in GT5?

the fact that Forza caters to all levels of gamers isn't what i would call hard evidence also are you saying the tyre model in GT5 is better?

Again nobody is saying that the low level of gamers options affect to how good can be the hardcore simulation.

About the tyre model I'm not saying "better than", I'm just saying that there is it. It's affected by the heat, by the wearing, by the weather, by the different track grip surfaces and used to generate according the tyre marks and the smoke. Even has a real time telemetry indicator.

About the off track physics, FM3 I know...

 

[Scaff]

Is this anymore a physics discussion? I try to get more on topic and even a mod wants to get off topic.

No the member of staff questioned why you were once again replying to an off-topic post and also using he same misleading gif.

Or the claim that GT5 has not a tyre model? this is my favourite.

Then how about you actually address the point?

His comment is of course utterly daft, GT5 most certainly has a tyre model, it just contains a number of significant flaws the most clear and well documented of which is the use of grip multipliers and the apart lack of tyre width being used within the model.

I take it that you are of course happy to discuss the GT5 tyre model, so please let us know what you think its strengths and weakness' are?

Here we are all a little biased for or against something about GT (or other games) but facts are facts. I'm only saying that there is a new level of low casual (implying a big new market never exploited before) that was born with the Wii and that MS and Sony have been trying to catch with new periferical and games since then. FM4 has that casual integration much more pronounced than GT5 and that is a fact. GT for Kids does not exist in GT5 but "exist" in FM4. There is no way to compare the kinect playing to anything that can offer GT5 even with SRF, racing soft tyres, all aids, etc handling and skills-wise. Again all that aside of the hardcore simulated part that nobody is discussing in this subject. More clear now?

Perfectly clear (even if I don't 100% agree with your analysis), now tell me why that would make FM4 any more or less of a sim?

The gif was the first I found of that new type of casual market. You have examples of that people playing specifically FM4 in my previous vids. I can make animated gifs from them if that will end this discussion.

Just stop re-posting it and actually address the point rather than simply waving the same stick around and actually explain why your waving it (see me question above).

Offtrack physics are a lot closer to other top sims or real life accidents in GT5 than FM4, except rollovers. There are not perfect but I don't see the complication.

Please explain exactly why you believe the are a lot closer and define 'a lot'.

About the off track physics, FM3 I know...

Now aside from the fact that its FM3 its certainly doesn't offer much in the way of an explanation from you.

First person to spot the two rather obvious issues with the video gets an internet cookie.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Is this anymore a physics discussion? I try to get more on topic and even a mod wants to get off topic.

Would you call this also a "bias"?
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=7775107&highlight=modelling#post7775107
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=7786731#post7786731
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8028701#post8028701

You brought up the ridiculous talk of the casual ends of the games. And no, I wouldn't: none of those posters have the exact same attitude about a single game each and every post.

Or the claim that GT5 has not a tyre model? this is my favourite.

Oh, that is wrong. GT5 does have a tire model. It's just woefully simplistic and bad compared to FM4's, from all measurable evidence.

Here we are all a little biased for or against something about GT (or other games) but facts are facts. I'm only saying that there is a new level of low casual (implying a big new market never exploited before) that was born with the Wii and that MS and Sony have been trying to catch with new periferical and games since then. FM4 has that casual integration much more pronounced than GT5 and that is a fact. GT for Kids does not exist in GT5 but "exist" in FM4. There is no way to compare the kinect playing to anything that can offer GT5 even with SRF, racing soft tyres, all aids, etc handling and skills-wise. Again all that aside of the hardcore simulated part that nobody is discussing in this subject. More clear now?

To say nothing of the Move wheel.

The gif was the first I found of that new type of casual market. You have examples of that people playing specifically FM4 in my previous vids. I can make animated gifs from them if that will end this discussion.

Not needed.

Offtrack physics are a lot closer to other top sims or real life accidents in GT5 than FM4, except rollovers. There are not perfect but I don't see the complication.

Both games, quite frankly, are pretty bad in the off-track department, other than the occasional instance in either when the car's bizarre attitude randomly replicates a real life video one finds online. Then it becomes the battle of YouTube videos: it's already happened in this thread

I'd like to see that particular area explored more in both series, if I'm being honest.