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

[Garrett H]

GT5 is much better in my opinion because it is much more realistic because you have to actually USE THE BRAKES! I have played FM4 and I could take an oldsmobile 440 into a corner at 120 without using any brakes last time I checked those physics are flawed.GT5 might be harder at first if you are used to games like FM4 but after refining your skills it is a much more fun and rewarding game.

 

[C_Raccoon23]

GT5 is much better in my opinion because it is much more realistic because you have to actually USE THE BRAKES! I have played FM4 and I could take an oldsmobile 440 into a corner at 120 without using any brakes last time I checked those physics are flawed.GT5 might be harder at first if you are used to games like FM4 but after refining your skills it is a much more fun and rewarding game.

You must have Forza mixed up with NFS.

 

[Exorcet]

GT5 is much better in my opinion because it is much more realistic because you have to actually USE THE BRAKES! I have played FM4 and I could take an oldsmobile 440 into a corner at 120 without using any brakes last time I checked those physics are flawed.GT5 might be harder at first if you are used to games like FM4 but after refining your skills it is a much more fun and rewarding game.

So taking corners at 120 mph is physically impossible?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAzwsYlA7ms&t=110

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Early days yet (less than an hour) but overall experience is positive, one thing I will add is how much closer the GT6 demo and FM4 now feel in regard to tyre and suspension, so I guess those who complained about how FM4 feels may well hate it, but its now a lot closer to how cars should react.

I'll agree that they do feel much more similar than GT5 and FM4 did... but on that last thought, somehow I doubt those who were vocal about their dislike for FM4's physics will have issues with GT6's. If only I could put my finger on why...

GT5 is much better in my opinion because it is much more realistic because you have to actually USE THE BRAKES! I have played FM4 and I could take an oldsmobile 440 into a corner at 120 without using any brakes last time I checked those physics are flawed.GT5 might be harder at first if you are used to games like FM4 but after refining your skills it is a much more fun and rewarding game.

Weird. Oh well, since I can take an old Challenger around a turn at 140mph in GT5, I guess it's even more flawed!

 

[Wolfe]

I'll agree that they do feel much more similar than GT5 and FM4 did... but on that last thought, somehow I doubt those who were vocal about their dislike for FM4's physics will have issues with GT6's. If only I could put my finger on why...

You can, considering it's printed on the box.

 

[ReverenceSatans]

I have played FM4 and I could take an oldsmobile 440 into a corner at 120 without using any brakes last time I checked those physics are flawed.

Really?

What corner are you going through in a Oldmobile 440 at 120MPH?

 

[sparkytooth]

Really?

What corner are you going through in a Oldmobile 440 at 120MPH?

That's the million dollar question we're asking him.

 

[VBR]

I had a chance to try out Forza 4 for the first time a few days ago, a friend of mine invited me over to play lots of different sims on his Fanatec CSR/Wheel Stand Pro set up. Here are my first impressions.

The FFB was not very good imo. I really hate the way they've programed the FFB to react to oversteer & understeer, feels nothing like a real car on the limit. I didn't feel like I was driving a car either, but playing a game, an arcade game at that. However, it did make me appreciate how good the physics are in GT5 by comparison, especially after all the updates we got.

GT5 gets my vote. 👍

 

[Lock2Lock]

@VBR

That's what I experienced too. The wheel physics in FM just never seemed right. That's why when I had a huge ordeal with Microsoft, I didn't feel bad getting rid of everything for my Xbox.

To me the weight transfer is better calculated in GT5 than it is in FM. Even with the somewhat bad dead zone in GT5, it feels all that much better.

I am just the type of person that plays a driving simulator with a wheel, if the wheel physics don't come close, then I don't care to play it.

Don't get me wrong though, FM is a great game, but I just don't get that realism feeling in it.

 

[Scaff]

I had a chance to try out Forza 4 for the first time a few days ago, a friend of mine invited me over to play lots of different sims on his Fanatec CSR/Wheel Stand Pro set up. Here are my first impressions.

The FFB was not very good imo. I really hate the way they've programed the FFB to react to oversteer & understeer, feels nothing like a real car on the limit. I didn't feel like I was driving a car either, but playing a game, an arcade game at that. However, it did make me appreciate how good the physics are in GT5 by comparison, especially after all the updates we got.

GT5 gets my vote. 👍

@VBR

That's what I experienced too. The wheel physics in FM just never seemed right. That's why when I had a huge ordeal with Microsoft, I didn't feel bad getting rid of everything for my Xbox.

To me the weight transfer is better calculated in GT5 than it is in FM. Even with the somewhat bad dead zone in GT5, it feels all that much better.

I am just the type of person that plays a driving simulator with a wheel, if the wheel physics don't come close, then I don't care to play it.

Don't get me wrong though, FM is a great game, but I just don't get that realism feeling in it.

The force feedback is both titles has a lot wrong with it, in particular GTs odd habit of using it for primary ride (which is just wrong), and I can't agree that GT does a better job of load transfer at all (particularly given the lack of lift-off oversteer in FWD cars).

However the moment you throw the 'arcade' word in, I have to say that you loose a lot of credibility in terms of this discussion. If FM4's model is arcade then I hate to think what an honest term for GT5s would e given the amount its physics engine gets wrong (in particular tyre and suspension models that are a way behind FM4s).

 

[Lock2Lock]

The force feedback is both titles has a lot wrong with it, in particular GTs odd habit of using it for primary ride (which is just wrong), and I can't agree that GT does a better job of load transfer at all (particularly given the lack of lift-off oversteer in FWD cars).

However the moment you throw the 'arcade' word in, I have to say that you loose a lot of credibility in terms of this discussion. If FM4's model is arcade then I hate to think what an honest term for GT5s would e given the amount its physics engine gets wrong (in particular tyre and suspension models that are a way behind FM4s).

I agree with you Scaff. Neither one of the games need to be called "arcade". They both have their flaws. Both games have a lot of them.

Honesty though, the wheel feeling far as what the car is doing is felt more on GT5 than FM4.

I get your point about the weight transfer being felt in the wheel. I actually like this, if I had something like a D-Box motion setup I probably would be saying the same as you. Since this isn't the case I like it that way. This is why I say that.


Also the lift-off over-steer part, yes we all know. Don't know why you mentioned it though.

 

[Wolfe]

You guys weren't evaluating the physics; you were evaluating the force feedback and wheel control. Your comments aren't invalid, but they might as well go in the general FM4/GT5 thread.

This is the trouble when people claim you can only understand a game's physics by playing it with a wheel -- the implementation of FFB and even the quality of the wheel are potential barriers between you and the physics engine. I didn't like my experience with FM4 and a (cheap MS) wheel either, but that doesn't affect the things the game gets right or wrong. With a controller, establishing each game's strengths/flaws is more straightforward.

The point is what the car does, rather than the feedback it provides in the wheel.

 

[Lock2Lock]

@Wolfe

Agree with you. It's just my opinion that a driving simulator should be mostly evaluated on wheel physics. Just my opinion, I just don't see a controller being simulation if you catch my drift. I am not a elitist or anything it's just how I consider a simulation game to be played.

I just hate the issues with the controller physics alone, which have more issues than anything on GT5. Just highly un-realistic.

 

[Scaff]

Also the lift-off over-steer part, yes we all know. Don't know why you mentioned it though.

I mentioned it because you stated load transfer as an advantage GT has over FM, yet FM's physics model includes lift-off oversteer and GT's doesn't.

Given that load transfer is the principal factor behind lift-off oversteer I would have thought my reason for mentioning it would have been quite obvious.

 

[Lock2Lock]

I mentioned it because you stated load transfer as an advantage GT has over FM, yet FM's physics model includes lift-off oversteer and GT's doesn't.

Given that load transfer is the principal factor behind lift-off oversteer I would have thought my reason for mentioning it would have been quite obvious.

Ah ok.

Well like you said before, that's in the suspension and tire model. I was talking about the overall feeling in the of what the car is doing in the wheel. Didn't say it was perfect, but it is better in my opinion.

I guess you miss-understood my post, it's no big deal. I know why you are quick to jump on posts that look like that though.

 

[Scaff]

Ah ok.

Well like you said before, that's in the suspension and tire model. I was talking about the overall feeling in the of what the car is doing in the wheel. Didn't say it was perfect, but it is better in my opinion.

I guess you miss-understood my post, it's no big deal. I know why you are quick to jump on posts that look like that though.

I'm not sure I did misunderstand your post at all, I may have used the (slightly more accurate) term 'load transfer' rather than 'weight transfer', which has an effect on the suspension and tyre model, but is not an integral part of it.

While most of your post was discussing FFB, you clearly mentioned weight/load transfer and I can't agree that GT5 gets that right at all.

 

[KinLM]

I'm not sure I did misunderstand your post at all, I may have used the (slightly more accurate) term 'load transfer' rather than 'weight transfer', which has an effect on the suspension and tyre model, but is not an integral part of it.

While most of your post was discussing FFB, you clearly mentioned weight/load transfer and I can't agree that GT5 gets that right at all.

Fifth Gear would disagree.

http://youtu.be/K2Yme2skSMs

Sorry if that link doesn't work. It should though.

 

[Lock2Lock]

I'm not sure I did misunderstand your post at all, I may have used the (slightly more accurate) term 'load transfer' rather than 'weight transfer', which has an effect on the suspension and tyre model, but is not an integral part of it.

While most of your post was discussing FFB, you clearly mentioned weight/load transfer and I can't agree that GT5 gets that right at all.

You did man.

We both have discussed this many times before. Overall it just feels better.

Mainly like others have said, the weight of the car being factored in makes for a more realistic feeling. Even though weight transfer in a real car doesn't have this (at least not nearly as drastic). That being the way it is gives a better feeling of motion. Get what I am on about? We have talked about this before man. I have said the same thing many times 👍.

 

[Wolfe]

Fifth Gear would disagree.

Mainly like others have said, the weight of the car being factored in makes for a more realistic feeling. Even though weight transfer in a real car doesn't have this (at least not nearly as drastic). That being the way it is gives a better feeling of motion.

Tiff said there was more suspension dive (and regarding controllability with the Ferrari, I think FM4 does lack some "bite" in its tire model), and it's true that the cars in GT5 lean, squat, dive, and wiggle more on their suspensions. FM4 is rather stiff and lifeless by comparison (something Horizon improved upon).

However, if that motion doesn't contribute properly to the behavior of the car as it rounds a corner, it's kind of a meaningless visual cue. It may add immersion in one respect, but if you pay attention to how the car ultimately tracks through a corner based on the inputs you give it, GT5 just isn't as accurate as FM4. I guess that's why Lock2Lock was confused when Scaff brought up lift-off oversteer -- L2L was talking about feedback, while Scaff was talking about handling.

The difference is while GT5 may be more obvious in showing weight transfer, FM4 actually utilizes it more effectively.

 

[Scaff]

Tiff said there was more suspension dive (and regarding controllability with the Ferrari, I think FM4 does lack some "bite" in its tire model), and it's true that the cars in GT5 lean, squat, dive, and wiggle more on their suspensions. FM4 is rather stiff and lifeless by comparison (something Horizon improved upon).

However, if that motion doesn't contribute properly to the behavior of the car as it rounds a corner, it's kind of a meaningless visual cue. It may add immersion in one respect, but if you pay attention to how the car ultimately tracks through a corner based on the inputs you give it, GT5 just isn't as accurate as FM4. I guess that's why Lock2Lock was confused when Scaff brought up lift-off oversteer -- L2L was talking about feedback, while Scaff was talking about handling.

The difference is while GT5 may be more obvious in showing weight transfer, FM4 actually utilizes it more effectively.

This

 

[VBR]

The force feedback is both titles has a lot wrong with it, in particular GTs odd habit of using it for primary ride (which is just wrong), and I can't agree that GT does a better job of load transfer at all (particularly given the lack of lift-off oversteer in FWD cars).

However the moment you throw the 'arcade' word in, I have to say that you loose a lot of credibility in terms of this discussion. If FM4's model is arcade then I hate to think what an honest term for GT5s would e given the amount its physics engine gets wrong (in particular tyre and suspension models that are a way behind FM4s).

After driving a Clio Cup car & a Caterham 7 Superlight at a track day at Palmersport at the Bedford Autodrome, I can safely say that the closest thing in terms of realistic feel through the wheel is GT5 Prologue. GT5 comes a close second, whereas Forza doesn't even come close in my experience.

Sure, no sim feels entirely realistic, GT5 included. The main difference I found in driving real cars on the limit was the heaviness in the wheels (no power steering), my arms were aching for days afterwards! Also, I had to turn the wheel more in the real cars to get the same amount of steering lock compared to GT5. GT5 Prologue was a great tutor for my track day, as soon as I set of in the Clio Cup car I felt right at home & like I'd done it hundreds of times before.

I'm not here to argue, just to offer my opinion & read the opinions of others on the subject. And this is my opinion; Forza 0 - GT5 1. 👍

 

[Exorcet]

After driving a Clio Cup car & a Caterham 7 Superlight at a track day at Palmersport at the Bedford Autodrome, I can safely say that the closest thing in terms of realistic feel through the wheel is GT5 Prologue. GT5 comes a close second, whereas Forza doesn't even come close in my experience.

Sure, no sim feels entirely realistic, GT5 included. The main difference I found in driving real cars on the limit was the heaviness in the wheels (no power steering), my arms were aching for days afterwards! Also, I had to turn the wheel more in the real cars to get the same amount of steering lock compared to GT5. GT5 Prologue was a great tutor for my track day, as soon as I set of in the Clio Cup car I felt right at home & like I'd done it hundreds of times before.

I'm not here to argue, just to offer my opinion & read the opinions of others on the subject. And this is my opinion; Forza 0 - GT5 1. 👍

Well you may not be here to argue, but the thread is (argue in the good way of course, no one is attacking anyone else). But I'm with Scaff. Forza can't be arcade if GT is not. I haven't tried Forza with a wheel so I can't say anything on FFB. I have driven a track car without power steering and yes it was a lot of work, but it also felt a lot more like driving in Forza than in GT, especially the grip.

Maybe GT is better at recreating steering feel (I don't know) but actually modeling how the car moves, Forza is a clear winner I think.

 

[VBR]

Maybe GT is better at recreating steering feel (I don't know) but actually modeling how the car moves, Forza is a clear winner I think.

My post was about how the physics feel through a wheel, not how they look in replays. Feelings & opinions are subjective after all, hence all the different ones in this thread. That said however, I think the poll speaks volumes.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

After driving a Clio Cup car & a Caterham 7 Superlight at a track day at Palmersport at the Bedford Autodrome, I can safely say that the closest thing in terms of realistic feel through the wheel is GT5 Prologue. GT5 comes a close second, whereas Forza doesn't even come close in my experience.

Sure, no sim feels entirely realistic, GT5 included. The main difference I found in driving real cars on the limit was the heaviness in the wheels (no power steering), my arms were aching for days afterwards! Also, I had to turn the wheel more in the real cars to get the same amount of steering lock compared to GT5. GT5 Prologue was a great tutor for my track day, as soon as I set of in the Clio Cup car I felt right at home & like I'd done it hundreds of times before.

I'm not here to argue, just to offer my opinion & read the opinions of others on the subject. And this is my opinion; Forza 0 - GT5 1. 👍

The bolded part : This is mainly due to all cars in GT5 comes with default 40 degrees front wheel turning lock. Most cars have less than 35 degrees, race cars or track tuned cars often have 20 to 30 degrees, while for drifting, 45 to 70 degrees are used.

All of my hybrids have custom steering degrees - most are 27, a member here Johnnypenso tested my cars with 27 degrees, he didn't really like the extra turning effort of the steering wheel to navigate certain corners, which of course reflect more to the real life , he requested 35 degrees, a sweet spot for his G27

I am not sure about FM4 in regards with each car front wheel steering degrees lock, if they are all set according to the real car, then it should be more accurate giving feedback and steering accuracy.

I have to do research now for my favorite cars, to set the proper steering lock degrees on my GT5 cars 27 to 32 degrees seems to be the sweet spot for street and race cars, from so many cars I've tuned and built. NASCAR is best with 13 to 22 degrees for oval racing and 15 to 25 for road racing. Drift tuned cars are from 48 to 70 degrees.

 

[Tornado]

My post was about how the physics feel through a wheel, not how they look in replays. Feelings & opinions are subjective after all, hence all the different ones in this thread. That said however, I think the poll speaks volumes.

The poll is literally as meaningless as physically possible; because it's only function in this thread is that it basically allows you to make a claim without actually supporting it with anything whatsoever.

 

[Exorcet]

My post was about how the physics feel through a wheel, not how they look in replays. Feelings & opinions are subjective after all, hence all the different ones in this thread. That said however, I think the poll speaks volumes.

Fair enough.

How the cars move isn't just about replays though. It's the core of a simulation. This is why I prefer Forza over GT.

 

[VBR]

The poll is literally as meaningless as physically possible; because it's only function in this thread is that it basically allows you to make a claim without actually supporting it with anything whatsoever.

I guess I have more trust than you in the integrity of the GT Planet members who voted to follow the requirement in the original post.

However, this is a GT forum so bias could have coloured the results somewhat. I would be interested to see the results of a similar poll on a Forza forum. Anyone got a link?

 

[Scaff]

After driving a Clio Cup car & a Caterham 7 Superlight at a track day at Palmersport at the Bedford Autodrome, I can safely say that the closest thing in terms of realistic feel through the wheel is GT5 Prologue. GT5 comes a close second, whereas Forza doesn't even come close in my experience.

Sure, no sim feels entirely realistic, GT5 included. The main difference I found in driving real cars on the limit was the heaviness in the wheels (no power steering), my arms were aching for days afterwards! Also, I had to turn the wheel more in the real cars to get the same amount of steering lock compared to GT5. GT5 Prologue was a great tutor for my track day, as soon as I set of in the Clio Cup car I felt right at home & like I'd done it hundreds of times before.

I'm not here to argue, just to offer my opinion & read the opinions of others on the subject. And this is my opinion; Forza 0 - GT5 1. 👍

I've driven both of those and pretty much most road cars that have been sold in the UK for the past few decades (I work in the motor industry) and would have to say that I disagree.

However lets take those two and physics in general as examples.

Load transfer is wrong in GT5 for both, in the case of the Clio to such a degree its not funny. The Clio will allow lift-off oversteer to be generated easily and the car can then be balanced when you get back on the throttle with ease, no Clio is GT5 will generate lift-off oversteer full stop. As for the Caterham (aside from the gearing being totally wrong in GT5) the suspension and the tyre model make it a poor replica of the real thing and GT5's issue with low weight cars and how that is used to model grip levels at the wheel mean that the car simply doesn't communicate the level of grip at the tyre in a correct manner at all. Caterham's have wonderfully communicative grip transition, yet in GT5 is practically digital.

I guess I have more trust than you in the integrity of the GT Planet members who voted to follow the requirement in the original post.

However, this is a GT forum so bias could have coloured the results somewhat. I would be interested to see the results of a similar poll on a Forza forum. Anyone got a link?

Bias most certainly does colour the results, particularly given that very few of those who voted actually are able to provide anything in the form of evidence to back it up.

as for a Forza version of that poll....

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=275742

...from when Forza Planet was a separate site.

 

[Wolfe]

No offense to you VBR, but I find it strange to consider a game's physics almost entirely by the feedback it gives you, rather than what the car is actually doing. At the very least -- why not both?

How the car behaves isn't something limited to watching replays. Maybe you're thinking of the suspension lean/squat/dive/wiggle we were talking about before; it's more than that. It's about available grip at each corner in a million possible scenarios, the way that grip transitions through varying levels of slip, the effects of wheelspin from each driven wheel, the effects of braking and weight-shifting...the way the car rotates and reacts to any of this stuff, and more.

GT5 may feel better on the wheel than any other game you've tried, but the way you actually go around a corner can be rather inaccurate. Sure, you'll still go in and come out the other side, but the handling balance isn't right, as Scaff has said. Playing with that balance and probing the limits of a car in a variety of situations are how you evaluate the physics of a game -- what you feel in the wheel is sort of a separate thing.

By contrast, maybe FM4 doesn't provide very good feedback through the wheel, and I would agree it's a bit stiff/sterile visually as well (in terms of suspension motion). But again, considering how you actually go around a corner, and the handling balance you get out of it, FM4 is closer to the real thing.

 

[Zer0]

By contrast, maybe FM4 doesn't provide very good feedback through the wheel, and I would agree it's a bit stiff/sterile visually as well (in terms of suspension motion). But again, considering how you actually go around a corner, and the handling balance you get out of it, FM4 is closer to the real thing.

Polyphony clearly worked on this particular problem with GT5, although the result seems awfully exaggerated and "canned." Maybe they've improved it with patches since I've played the game, but you'd get the same violent swinging in MR/MAWD/RR cars, no matter how you drive or what car it is.

That's me. For what it's worth, I think GT5 was a step forward, and I'm curious about GT6's new physics. I'll certainly be giving it a rental or two like I did GT5.

Confused.

Your facts are based on a short play period in GT5 Spec 1?

Something is fishy with moment of inertia and angular momentum in FM4, and in my opinion, Simulation steering on a gamepad elucidates these fundamental problems. Normal steering makes FM4/Horizon feel more realistic to me, because the cars have more "weight" and you can't flip-flop-whip them around like a five-ounce dusting broom.

I've never used a 911 GT3 or RSR,

More confused.

Your words/facts are meant for a FM4 played with a controller on normal (assisted) steering? you played the rented GT5 also with a controller?