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

[Tornado]

The Forza 'Ring is also something like a mile and a half longer than the one in GT5, so...

 

[BigViperNumber1]

You have a requirement to fulfill.

This has been covered numerous times in this very thread; lap times mean very little with regards to "realism". Even less so on the Nurburgring, where lap times can vary by whole seconds even on consecutive laps at the real track due to its length.

So, no.

You have a point I suppose

 

[Exorcet]

The Forza 'Ring is also something like a mile and a half longer than the one in GT5, so...

Yeah, it's a big issue between the two games. Not just Nurburgring, but most of the tracks the two games share were different to the point that learning them in GT was detrimental in my lap times when I initially switched over. Indy road course in Forza still destroys me.

Another reason to not look only at lap times when making the comparison. Driving dynamics are what determine if the physics are right or not.

 

[ReverenceSatans]

The Forza 'Ring is also something like a mile and a half longer than the one in GT5, so...

But extremely close lap times have been shown for FM4 vs Real Life so FM4 must be totally accurate too!

Yea, lap times really don't mean anything because of many many different factors ranging from track accuracy, driver, conditions, circumstances etc etc etc.

 

[shved111]

what do you think about the difference, technical rating cars, gt, and fm? maybe this is related to physics? and the speed of the track?
here are some examples:
F40 , gt5-527 fm4-614
M5 е60 GT5- 513 FM4-509
Zonda R gt5-651 fm-872
Cobra 427 S/C gt5-517 fm4 -503
8C Competizione gt5-507 fm3-562
TT Coupe 3.2 quattro '03 gt5-427 fm4-421
135i Coupe '07 gt5-463 fm4-454
M3 Coupe '07 gt5- 495 fm4-508
Veyron 16.4 '09 gt5-634 fm4-758
Camaro SS '10 gt5-505 fm4-482

 

[Exorcet]

They are using completely different scales, and very very likely completely different equations. I don't see the point of comparing PI to PP.

 

[shved111]

They are using completely different scales, and very very likely completely different equations. I don't see the point of comparing PI to PP.

may depend on the tires by default

 

[Samus]

As Exorcet says they're both fictional measurements of performance with completely different scales, comparing them is utterly pointless.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

The fact GT's PP rating is only changed by a handful of mods should be a clue...

Regardless, as others have said, comparing the two rating systems is pointless. They're both just to give an idea about comparable cars, a rough ballpark at that, nothing more.

 

[Scaff]

may depend on the tires by default

PP doesn't factor tyres in at all now (it did for a while - during one of the many revisions to it) PI does.

 

[Kake Bake]

Maybe the point isn't that the PP and PI systems ought to be compared to each other primarily, but rather that the relationships that they represent between the performance indexes of the cars should be compared.

For example, take the highest and lowest indexed cars from both lists (Veyron and TT, respectively) and calculate a performance ratio between them (divide low by high), then compare those two ratios together.

That way, a more logical comparison can be drawn between how the games represent the cars in relation to one another.

To those concerned, the GT PP ratio is 0.6735, and the Forza PI is 0.5554.

 

[Exorcet]

What do those ratios tell us? If we're only going by that piece of information, PP and PI could be the same for all we know.

 

[Kake Bake]

they tell us which GTP members have calculators

 

[davidmanoy]

Show me the 86 in Fuji GT5 vs Real

 

[davidmanoy]

Maybe the point isn't that the PP and PI systems ought to be compared to each other primarily, but rather that the relationships that they represent between the performance indexes of the cars should be compared.

For example, take the highest and lowest indexed cars from both lists (Veyron and TT, respectively) and calculate a performance ratio between them (divide low by high), then compare those two ratios together.

That way, a more logical comparison can be drawn between how the games represent the cars in relation to one another.

To those concerned, the GT PP ratio is 0.6735, and the Forza PI is 0.5554.

What happens if has higher ratio?

 

[Kake Bake]

What happens if has higher ratio?

A higher ratio indicates a narrower performance gap as represented by the proprietary indices in either game.

 

[Exorcet]

A higher ratio indicates a narrower performance gap as represented by the proprietary indices in either game.

Or they are exactly the same with scale factor.

 

[GT BOSS]

The Physics engine in Forza 4 is the same one used in Gran Turismo 3 whereas the one in Gran Turismo 5 is upgraded so technically it's better. My opinion on Forza is that it annoys me as it feels like a car racing game that was made by people who couldn't care less about what happens in real life. Some proof that Gran Turismo is better in physics terms is tests that were done with a Volkswagen Golf Mk V GTI on both Forza and Gran Tursimo and also in real life. They all had the same setting s in terms of traction controls, ABS and tyres etc. the track used was the Laguna Seca and it lapped in real life in 1:40. It lapped on Forza in 1:36 and on Gran Turismo in 1:39. The same driver was used on both gran Turismo and Forza. Clearly Gran Turismo is closer to real life in terms of Lap times and so answering your question in terms of which has more realistic physics and the answer is definitely Gran Tursimo 5.

 

[tribolik]

The Physics engine in Forza 4 is the same one used in Gran Turismo 3 whereas the one in Gran Turismo 5 is upgraded so technically it's better. Forza annoys me though as it feels like a car racing game that was made by people who couldn't care less about what happens in real life. More proof that Gran Turismo is better in physics terms is tests that were done with a Volkswagen Golf Mk V GTI on both Forza and Gran Tursimo and also in real life. They all had the same setting s in terms of traction controls, ABS and tyres etc. the track used was the Laguna Seca and it lapped in real life in 1:40. It lapped on Forza in 1:36 and on Gran Turismo in 1:39. The same driver was used on both gran Turismo and Forza. Clearly Gran Turismo is closer to real life in terms of Lap times and so answering your question in terms of which has more realistic physics and the answer is definitely Gran Tursimo 5.

Gran Tursimo it is

 

[GT BOSS]

Gran Tursimo it is

I'm just stating facts and I had one opinion which I stated was an opinion.

 

[Scaff]

The Physics engine in Forza 4 is the same one used in Gran Turismo 3......

No its not and I strongly suggest you don't make up nonsense like this again.

whereas the one in Gran Turismo 5 is upgraded so technically it's better.

Yet is still fails to simulate a number of things that Forza does. So it does less but is better because?

Forza annoys me though as it feels like a car racing game that was made by people who couldn't care less about what happens in real life.

Care to provide an example (that's not the nonsense that is lap-times)?

More proof that Gran Turismo is better in physics terms is tests that were done with a Volkswagen Golf Mk V GTI on both Forza and Gran Tursimo and also in real life. They all had the same setting s in terms of traction controls, ABS and tyres etc. the track used was the Laguna Seca and it lapped in real life in 1:40. It lapped on Forza in 1:36 and on Gran Turismo in 1:39. The same driver was used on both gran Turismo and Forza. Clearly Gran Turismo is closer to real life in terms of Lap times and so answering your question in terms of which has more realistic physics and the answer is definitely Gran Tursimo 5.

Had you bothered to read this thread rather than simply posting without thought you would see the numerous discussions that clearly show how useless lap times are as a measure of reality with regard to simulations. However in a nutshell it boils down to the fact that I can get a laptime that's close to reality is PGR4 (a pure arcade title), does that now make that a realistic sim?.

Here's the standing challenge we have in this thread, take a Shelby Cobra in GT5 and do a full throttle launch from a standing start, don;t touch the steering as you launch and then come back and let me know three things:

1. What it does in GT5
2. What it would do in reality
3. What the difference is and why it exists.

I'm just stating facts and I had one opinion which I stated was an opinion.

Your opinion is based upon incorrect information and your facts are nothing of the sort

 

[GT BOSS]

No its not and I strongly suggest you don't make up nonsense like this again.

Yet is still fails to simulate a number of things that Forza does. So it does less but is better because?

Care to provide an example (that's not the nonsense that is lap-times)?

Had you bothered to read this thread rather than simply posting without thought you would see the numerous discussions that clearly show how useless lap times are as a measure of reality with regard to simulations. However in a nutshell it boils down to the fact that I can get a laptime that's close to reality is PGR4 (a pure arcade title), does that now make that a realistic sim?.

Here's the standing challenge we have in this thread, take a Shelby Cobra in GT5 and do a full throttle launch from a standing start, don;t touch the steering as you launch and then come back and let me know three things:


[*]What it does in GT5
[*]What it would do in reality
[*]What the difference is and why it exists.

Everything i have said is factually correct and Therefore the one who's incorrect here is you my friend so I suggest you look up your facts before you correct someone else's.
Everything you have said is based upon the fact that you like Forza and have an Xbox 360 whereas I have both and play them equally so I am a trusted source and my facts are all correct since I wouldn't be typing them if they were wrong.

 

[Scaff]

Everything iv said is factually correct and Therefore the one who's incorrect here is you my friend so I suggest you look up your facts before you correct someone else's.

Not how it works, the one who is making the claim (you), carries the burden of proof. As such you are the one required to prove that FM4 has the same physics engine as GT5 (which you will not be able to do - they were developed by different companies and have had no cross over in staff at all).

Please feel free to also provide links to the Laguna Seca test as well (as is your burden as the one making the claim), and then we will discuss exactly why lap times are worthless (be sure to explain exactly how they matched the tyres with the real ones in both titles).

Oh and please do carry out the test I mentioned as well, your feedback should prove interesting.

Oh and for the record (if your profile DoB is correct) I've been playing GT since before you were born, have every release in both series and have carried out hundreds of hours of testing in both (to go with a rather large amount of time doing the same in reality). Please feel free to download the tuning guides for GT in my signature and tell me I haven't put he time into understanding it.

 

[Exorcet]

Everything i have said is factually correct and Therefore the one who's incorrect here is you my friend so I suggest you look up your facts before you correct someone else's.

All you have is an enormous error, some random unproven might-be-facts, and tons of incorrect conclusions.

 

[GT BOSS]

Not how it works, the one who is making the claim (you), carries the burden of proof. As such you are the one required to prove that FM4 has the same physics engine as GT5 (which you will not be able to do - they were developed by different companies and have had no cross over in staff at all).

Please feel free to also provide links to the Laguna Seca test as well (as is your burden as the one making the claim), and then we will discuss exactly why lap times are worthless (be sure to explain exactly how they matched the tyres with the real ones in both titles).

Oh and please do carry out the test I mentioned as well, your feedback should prove interesting.

What your saying I said is not what I said at all so I before commenting on my facts, could you actually read them.

 

[GT BOSS]

All you have is an enormous error, some random unproven might-be-facts, and tons of incorrect conclusions.

As I said. If it was incorrect I would not be typing it.

 

[Scaff]

What your saying I said is not what I said at all so I before commenting on my facts, could you actually read them.

I've read them, I made a typo (GT5 rather than GT3), now please provide a link to back that up, while keeping in mind the following part of the AUP:

You will not knowingly post any material that is false, misleading, or inaccurate.

You made the claim, either support it or correct it.

 

[Exorcet]

As I said. If it was incorrect I would not be typing it.

And the same logic would apply to my post. And now we have a problem, except that you have the burden of proof. Though it's pretty evident what's right even without a source. I don't see anything similar between GT3 and FM4.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Eh, forget the burden of proof; a previously banned member shouldn't have to worry about it, and since these are the insane theories of someone who hasn't been able to understand the AUP the first dozen times he's agreed to it, it's unlikely he'll get them now.

Buh-bye, Viper.

 

[sparkytooth]

Everything i have said is factually correct and Therefore the one who's incorrect here is you my friend so I suggest you look up your facts before you correct someone else's.
Everything you have said is based upon the fact that you like Forza and have an Xbox 360 whereas I have both and play them equally so I am a trusted source and my facts are all correct since I wouldn't be typing them if they were wrong.

Willy Wonka: "Tell me more about how you are a factually correct and trusted source on racing "Simulator" physics because you supposedly own both consoles".