Forza 4 VS GT5 (read the first post before you contribute)

[Scaff]

Why you said that? what are specific to certain people are how distracting are those issues, not the existence of the issues itself. Some tolerate better than others, same as the image quality that is ok to you in FM4 but distracting to others:

"...locked and v-synced 60fps. Its far less distracting to me that the variable frame rate and the screen tearing GT5 can suffer from."

A point I stand by, but it would appear that a slightly humorous reply has got you more than a little worked up.

I think that most of the nonsese that you accuse me every time I post is because you like tu put in my mouth your own word twisting what initially said. I have not read all my past replies from you but if you always fade your own explanations, regarding my words, with my initial meaning I understand some things better now.

My words?

No I'm quite happy to leave your own words to do that. Now I believe that you will struggle to make me the cause of the outstanding replies to these...

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8298519#post8298519

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8298563#post8298563


And most recently......

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8491398#post8491398

...a thread in which you opened by trying to imply that GT5 held a locked 60fps even with rain...

F1 is also a 30 fps game. Is unrealistic to expect the same effects at 60fps with GT5-6 graphics. Fact is that GT5 is the only car game in consoles with rain effects at 60fps and sometimes does things that even PC games are not doing like the real-time rain drop physics and volumetric rain clouds.

...getting rather irate when it was pointed out that was not the case, you then attempted to prove this point using a video without rain to show the progress PD had made on frame rates (which they have - when you don't have rain).

I don't need to put words in your mouth at all, nonsense finds its own way out already.


Also would you mind letting us know again how many hours you've logged on FM4 to speak with so much authority on it?

Or will you simply be not posting again for a while?

 

[ImaRobot]

Considering even the HUD in the FM4 part of the video had jagged edges on it and Zer0's history with using videos cherry picked to prove his point rather than actually being real examples of his point, I wouldn't be surprised if edge enhancement was turned on and/or the image sharpness was maxed for that channel and turned off on the GT5 channel. I can set it to do that for individual channels on my TV.

What I was thinking as well, because it in no way looks as bad as that person is trying to portray it as. My tv also lets me use different settings for each input I use.

 

[Tornado]

I still want to know what the actual point behind posting a video of a car with a glitched exhaust and claiming it was indicative of how GT5 sounds "in a real multichannel setup" was supposed to be if the responses to that were twisting words from the initial meaning.



Or the actual point behind saying one of the major idiosyncrasies of rear engined cars, which Porsche engineers have worked on sorting out for 50 years now, are simply a result of Scaff's personal interpretations of physics concepts.

 

[Scaff]

A slightly more balanced (and actually technical) look at AA in FM4

However, the iterative improvements Turn 10 has made to its engine are hugely impressive nonetheless. From a rendering perspective, the game still operates at native 720p, but the locked 2x multi-sample anti-aliasing of the previous Forza titles has been altered to allow for an improved 4x MSAA implementation which we think is tied into the game mode selected: time-trial gives better edge-smoothing, while the more processing intensive race modes seem to be using the same 2x solution.

While we would have loved a locked 4x in all game modes, the chances are that the processing cycles simply weren't there to spare. In single-player we've seen up to 12 cars being supported so far, while online moves that up to 16. There are also further modes available such as the Track Day, which dynamically generates new cars and allocates them around the track, effectively giving you an "unlimited" amount of rivals to pass. Whichever way you slice it, that's a substantial improvement over the eight cars supported in the last game.

There are no major surprises from Forza 4 in terms of the performance - Turn 10 has always targeted a locked 60 frames per second with v-sync engaged, and the new game is no exception to the rule. Below, in our first 60FPS streaming video, we demonstrate a selected montage of action from six different races. The idea here is to give the in-game engine a bit of a workout by switching between views, causing a few crashes and seeing if anything at all will cause that frame-rate to take a hit.

The performance profile is identical to Forza Motorsport 3. Remarkably, the engine does not drop a single frame during general gameplay and never loses v-sync, meaning that there is absolutely no tearing whatsoever. The only time 60FPS is ever compromised is when the player switches cameras: there's the small chance that you'll drop a frame - a singular frame, invisible to the human eye.

For Turn 10 to have achieved this level of fidelity in its graphics, physics and AI and for it to consistently meet that 16.66ms rendering budget is a milestone of engineering on the Xbox 360 platform. For it to be achieved with a significant boost in the amount of cars being simulated is phenomenal.

Source - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-tech-analysis-forza-motorsport-4

 

[Zer0]

My words?

No I'm quite happy to leave your own words to do that. Now I believe that you will struggle to make me the cause of the outstanding replies to these...

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8298519#post8298519

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8298563#post8298563


And most recently......

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8491398#post8491398

...a thread in which you opened by trying to imply that GT5 held a locked 60fps even with rain...

Thanks for the link:

Here is and attempt to compare the sound in both games in a real multichannel environment, not a good one but preferable than the typical direct sound recordings.

Vs

Oh and I've just noticed one rather important thing about this video, which you have claimed is an example of how great GT5 is in 5.1 'audiophile' sound.

See the differences? that is a perfect example of what I was talking in my previuos post. You alter the reality and end thinking that I said what you said, often exagerated and distorted to your own arguments benefict.

The rest was anecdotical to the discussion. I don't remember exactly but I think that I was discussing how an equalized mixing(throught 1, 2 or 5.1 speakers) would bring to life all the muted details that get lost in a direct captured video, often seen in YT or put as an example of how dull are the GT5 sounds. The X-530 example just prove how the same sound is perceived "on air" versus the direct videos in yt, and how a re-mix over the actual sounds can improve the result. I think that you get stucked insisting of discuss the word "audiophile" that was just meant as an example of better quality sound, same as better image quality discussed early.

And again, see the differences?

...a thread in which you opened by trying to imply that GT5 held a locked 60fps even with rain...

Vs

First the framerate was not as bad as that.

Regarding this:

Except GT5 does not maintain a locked 60fps with rain, rather rain is one of the things that will see that frame rate drop, in the example in the link it never hits 60fps and can drop as low as 30fps. That's without a cockpit view and the rain effects that come with it hitting the performance harder still.

I can stay here correcting your "my non-senses" all the day but I have not the time near don't feel like it. I was not supposed to stay now here in front of the screen writting but hey, just for you.

Oh and Scaff, you are the one that stated that almost never plays GT5(at least up to the latest updates) and for long times you just booted to test barely the changes and go back to Forza games. That doesn't stop you to discuss to others that play GT5 daily and know every bit that have changed between time to time or have more experience in the game.

================================================

A slightly more balanced (and actually technical) look at AA in FM4


Source - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-tech-analysis-forza-motorsport-4

There is another:

The negative LOD bias we've seen on Turn 10's Forza titles - where ultra-high detail road textures create a moiré-like pattern in the relatively limited 720p resolution available - is also gone with what looks like a more traditional bilinear texture-filtering algorithm in place. The immense level of detail isn't quite there, but the shimmering artifacts we saw in Forza 4 are simply not an issue here.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-forza-horizon

At full screen and 720p

 

[Scaff]

Thanks for the link:

Vs

See the differences? that is a perfect example of what I was talking in my previuos post. You alter the reality and end thinking that I said what you said, often exagerated and distorted to your own arguments benefict.

You clearly stated it was an example of a real multichannel set-up.

Its not. That is not a point for opinion or conjecture. Its is not a system capable of producing true (i.e. real) multichannel output from a PS3. The second part of your statement (the part you put in bold) is irreverent if the first part (that you chose to not highlight) is false. None of which changes the reality that anyone with a good AV system knows that while it helps GT5's audio, it also helps FM4's audio, which makes it a moot point in that regard. Oh and your made-up 'audiophile quality sound' is still just that, a meaningless term you are using to try and justify a point you can't substantiate.

And again, see the differences?

Yes a comment you made after your implied 60fps was corrected. Which does nothing that change the statement you made originally. I also fine it very unlikely that you would have clarified that on your own, why else would you go to great lengths to point out that GT5 is the only console title that can do rain and 60fps! A claim that GT5 can not maintain.

Oh and Scaff, you are the one that stated that almost never plays GT5(at least up to the latest updates) and for long times you just booted to test barely the changes and go back to Forza games. That doesn't stop you to discuss to others that play GT5 daily and know every bit that have changed between time to time or have more experience in the game.

The difference is that anytime I want to do so I can, and what a way to actually avoid answering the question (but no real surprise from you).

However one thing I can assure you (and anyone on my PSN list can validate) is that in the last few weeks I've most likely spent more time on GT5 that you have on FM4 in total. As I chose to restart GT5 with a clean save around three weeks ago.

What's your time spent on FM4 again?

There is another:

Another what?

Did I ever deny that AA issues exist with Forza?

That would be a no, and the key difference here. You repeatedly ignore issues (implying things GT5 can't actually achieve) forcing them to be pointed out again and again.

 

[Tornado]

I still want to know what the actual point behind posting a video of a car with a glitched exhaust and claiming it was indicative of how GT5 sounds "in a real multichannel setup" was supposed to be if the responses to that were twisting words from the initial meaning.



Or the actual point behind saying one of the major idiosyncrasies of rear engined cars, which Porsche engineers have worked on sorting out for 50 years now, are simply a result of Scaff's personal interpretations of physics concepts.

So, nothing then? Not even a mention; or an indignant claim of being "picked on"? I legitimately would like to know what the "intended" meaning was for at least the first link if it wasn't that; but it seems it will once again go ignored.


What a surprise.

Oh and Scaff, you are the one that stated that almost never plays GT5(at least up to the latest updates) and for long times you just booted to test barely the changes and go back to Forza games. That doesn't stop you to discuss to others that play GT5 daily and know every bit that have changed between time to time or have more experience in the game.

And you're the one who has repeatedly used videos of Forza games other than FM4 to prove points about FM4, even physics issues; then defended the practice when called on it.

 

[ImaRobot]

So, nothing then? Not even a mention; or an indignant claim of being "picked on"? I legitimately would like to know what the "intended" meaning was for at least the first link if it wasn't that; but it seems it will once again go ignored.


What a surprise.

I know your hopeful for an explanation from him.. But come one its been three months, I thinks past point to assume that you'll ever get one

On a side note, I'm sick of editing my iPhones automatic corrections, so just deal with it I guess

 

[Saidur_Ali]

Or the actual point behind saying one of the major idiosyncrasies of rear engined cars, which Porsche engineers have worked on sorting out for 50 years now, are simply a result of Scaff's personal interpretations of physics concepts.

Well it is Scaff's personal interpretations of physics concepts and it is quite flawed in the case you linked. It should be quite easy to understand why; you don't even have to be a vehicle dynamics expert to figure that one out so I will see if someone can figure out why. You don't even need to know anything about GT5, just reality is enough to know why and should be quite obvious.

 

[Tornado]

How about you enlighten us instead. It's so obvious, so you shouldn't have any trouble; and Zer0 certainly doesn't seem to want to explain it.

 

[Scaff]

Well it is Scaff's personal interpretations of physics concepts and it is quite flawed in the case you linked. It should be quite easy to understand why; you don't even have to be a vehicle dynamics expert to figure that one out so I will see if someone can figure out why. You don't even need to know anything about GT5, just reality is enough to know why and should be quite obvious.

Actually its not my personal interpretation of the physics involved, a rear engine car under acceleration will initially understeer while cornering, that's not a personal interpretation of anything.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=7188635

Its based on the fundamental basics of vehicle dynamics, including load transfer and the amount of grip created by the mU value and load on the tyres (front vs the rear) and the slip angles (a product of overall vehicle yaw and individual tyre yaw).

I've cited numerous sources for this one (including Porsche themselves - but what would they know), provided my own experience (which of course is worthless in the face of your zero experience) and explained exactly how the physics underlying it all works.

To counter this you have provided nothing at all.

So make your next post a detailed explanation of exactly how the physics involved work, detailing what forces are at work to illustrate how a RR car will not understeer when cornering under acceleration. Oh and please be sure to cite the sources you use.

Please note that I am asking you to do nothing more than I have already done.

 

[Lock2Lock]

Scaff, you are talking about how the CTR Yellowbird should under steer on initiation to the corner right? And not with the throttle wide open right?

 

[Scaff]

Scaff, you are talking about how the CTR Yellowbird should under steer on initiation to the corner right? And not with the throttle wide open right?

I'm talking about all RR cars behaviour on a steady increase of throttle. What I'm after from SA is not a link to conjecture but a detailed breakdown of why that component handling trait should not be understeer, and with many RR cars out will remain the dominant trait even on a wide open throttle.

 

[Speedster911]

It's more that it's possible to have a good fight with FM AI. Yeah, sometimes (an annoying high percentage of the time) they'll do something retarded and crash you out.

But if you give them a bit of room like you would a real racer, it's possible to get a decent, competitive race out of them. About half the time, I feel. The rest of the time I feel like I'm forced to smash them before they smash me.

GT on the otherhand is just slow and steady all the time. All you get is chase the rabbit, and it's impossible to go wheel to wheel for more than about two corners.

So yeah, they both have issues. GT is predictable and not annoying, but not competitive. FM can be competitive, but the price you pay is that you will be crashed out some of the time (a lot of the time).

Which you prefer is personal preference. Driver skill also plays a fairly large role. If you're a slower driver, you'll find more competition in GTs AI and it could be deemed better. If you're quicker, you may be more willing to put up with the BS of FMs AI in order to get a competitive race.

It's not like one is objectively superior to the other, although you can definitely see how for certain people one is subjectively superior.

You explain it rather well!

 

[avens]

Only problem now is I want to read that whole book. Very engaging writing style.

 

[shved111]

 

[Terronium-12]

What does that video prove?

Forza has some silly exploits as well, some of which have been carried from as far back as the original.

 

[SlyNine]

I reduced my GT5 screen size to around 92 / 94 %, then I used my TV stretch function to bring it to full screen again, barely any loss in crispness but more stable frame rate. Been doing it for over a year now. I also used 1080i mode at times, not sure if makes any difference in terms of frame rate, but on my TV, the picture quality looks as good as 1080p.

Ya, but at that point Forza's minor aliasing problems should be small compared to the scan line mismatches and blurry stretched frames. This sounds like a hideous way of fixing a problem, in my opinion.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Ya, but at that point Forza's minor aliasing problems should be small compared to the scan line mismatches and blurry stretched frames. This sounds like a hideous way of fixing a problem, in my opinion.

None of that happen on my TV, even my brother couldn't make out the difference with 100% screen + just scan on the TV at 1080i VS 94/96% + 16x9 at 1080i. The TV might have good upscaling.

 

[Speedster911]

Guys, if you're noticing or seeing too many jaggies in FM4, you need to adjust your screen; either tone down the sharpness, sit farther away from the screen, or use edge enhancements/blurring, to see if that helps. Though I'm not a fan of using any kind of enhancements, while gaming.

I sit about 6-8 feet from my 40" screen, and the jaggies are not noticeable, or anything to complain about. Now, if you're expecting to get the same fidelity as PC games, then friend.. you're in the wrong league!

Also, make sure you're using your TV's native resolution, and have 1:1 pixel mapping enabled. Essentials, to getting the most out of your TV.

 

[rtsbasic]

Just to add, there's so many outputs the 360 can use, it's difficult to say what's best for picture quality. Eg. My living room 52" plasma is great with hdmi, but my desk 32" which is much higher specification and what I use with my wheel shows a far better picture through a vga cable. Possibly as it processes full 4:4:4 croma through vga. No doubt GT5 has better anti aliasing, Forza really prefers a slightly softer picture to really enjoy. It's much more particular to the tv's calibration as well, owing to its wider use of HDR in the lighting I think. Far more sensitive to black/white crush than practically any other racing game I'm aware of.

1:1 pixel mapping and native res are a great place to start

 

[Stephanos82]

I haven't read all 137 pages but all I want to say in responce to some comments is Fanboyism does not help at all! Why do some people (don't want to mention names) persist that either on of the two titles is faultless! By doing that you hurt the same game you think you are supporting!
I love the GT series, and I will buy gt6 no matter what, but that doesn't change the fact that some things about it are totally off! (progression from grip to slip, the fact that there's no tyre pressure adjustment, braking and abs, clutch ..etcetc ! ) -> my main complaint with the GT series bring the tyre physics - sadly nothing has changed in gt6 demo IMO! (love the new suspension)
Now Forza in the other hand, I find quite LFS-ish and I consider to be much higher in my sim list than Gt! The only reason why I might not buy F5 is financial difficulties!
Please don't hate! My main point is, if we do make it clear that we want our beloved title to become a real sim, we need to make ourselves heard!
Lots of respect to Scaff - I'm one of your biggest supporters - I love how you explain things related to the two games! Keep up the good work!

 

[Wolfe]

@Stephanos82:

Have you ever heard of Enthusia Professional Racing? If you like Live for Speed and you have a Playstation 2, you owe it to yourself to give EPR a try. 👍 To this day it remains the closest thing to LFS for consoles that I've ever played. Like GT/Forza, it has a bunch of licensed cars, and the track list includes the Nürburgring and Tsukuba (the rest are fictional), which certainly sets it apart from LFS.

 

[Tornado]

Wolfe has provided more advertising for Enthusia in the intervening years than Konami did when it actually came out.

 

[Wolfe]

Bah. I save it for individuals I'm pretty certain would enjoy it. So I've not only done more advertising, I'm better at targeting it.

There's no point in recommending EPR to someone who's solidly convinced that either Forza or Gran Turismo is a perfect simulator. Which they're not. There, I'm on topic.

 

[Bellus505]

I prefer Forza 4 and here is why.

What Forza 4 Does better

Better Sound
More Car Variety
Better Damage Modeling
Cars actually react when hit (may not matter to some people)
Player made Paint Designs
Better Multiplayer
More Tuning optoins/customization options for added exterior components to your car

What GT5 Does better

Weather for every track
Course editor
Better tracks
Night Racing

As for graphics, the difference is very small. I think they are about equal.

http://kotaku.com/5852641/which-looks-better-gran-turismo-5-or-forza-4/


Forza 4 is better than GT5 in more aspects.

 

[iRevelationz]

I prefer Forza 4 and here is why.

What Forza 4 Does better

Better Sound - Opinion
More Car Variety - Opinion
Better Damage Modeling - Opinion
Cars actually react when hit (may not matter to some people)
Player made Paint Designs
Better Multiplayer - Opinion
More Tuning optoins/customization options for added exterior components to your car

What GT5 Does better

Weather for every track - Completely false
Course editor
Better tracks - Opinion
Night Racing

As for graphics, the difference is very small. I think they are about equal. - Opinion

http://kotaku.com/5852641/which-looks-better-gran-turismo-5-or-forza-4/


Forza 4 is better than GT5 in more aspects. - Opinion

I'll try to help with any flaming issues.

 

[ImaRobot]

I'll try to help with any flaming issues.

It was fairly obvious that it was his opinion. Although, the weather thing I understand.

 

[iRevelationz]

It was fairly obvious that it was his opinion. Although, the weather thing I understand.

True, but the last statement "Forza 4 is better than GT5 in more aspects" could've caused some confusion.

I don't know where all GT5 tracks having weather came from.

 

[Wolfe]

To add a bit to what ImaRobot said, Bellus505 did preface his post with, "I prefer Forza 4 and here is why."

Just picking on you, iRevelationz. As can be seen from the rules for the thread in the OP, opinions presented as fact are a recurring problem for this sort of topic.