Forza 5/6 vs GT6 (See First Post Before Posting)

[shawtyoner]

I've been driving on GT since I was a young man but, the more I read about Forza the more I want to branch out and become a two system home. I was prepared to purchase a PS4 to run GT6. Why do I have to chose one?

I've been a 2 system man since PS2 and original XBox. I couldn't bring myself to only choosing one, as both systems have great games. Which can suck at certain points because usually I buy games more for one system, and only buy a few key games for the other which makes it all the more difficult to throw down all this cash on a system only to play but a few games on it.

I do think however for this new iteration, PS4 will be my main console, XB1 whenever I decide to give in, will be primarily for Forza and any other exclusives that peak my interest.

The only thing that is still really keeping me from buying next gen right away is that GT6 will remain on PS3. I figured I would wait for FM5 to run its course, release all its DLC, and hopefully down the line I can pick it all up at a reasonable price.

 

[Speedster911]

Tell me about it. I think the GT5 E3 2009 & 2010 and TGS 2010 trailers were some of the biggest culprits. I remember getting so excited when I first saw them.

PD was like, "Oh look! GT5 will have Top Gear, The Stig, Supert GT, NASCAR, WRC, weather, night racing, blah, blah, blah!!!"

Then you finally get the game and see these things were barely put to use...

After that massive disappointment, it was very easy for me not to get excited during the GT6 E3 trailer. They are never getting me hyped up again. 👎

I also would have liked to see what GT6 could have been like if we're a PS4 game. I'm glad it's coming to PS3. Less money to spend in order to play it, but on the other hand, I wouldn't have really mind seeing it on the PS4.

GT5 did get a few jaws dropping when my mates used to pop over...until they heard the engines! Hahahaa...

I just don't know how GT6 is going to better GT5. Graphics alone is not a selling point, if you're a serious gamer. More importantly, if you're a serious sim lover, graphics, I think, is somewhat secondary. Unless, they do some serious revamping to the sound design and physics.

I believe somewhere down the line, GT6 will most likely be re-released on the PS4. It has to keep up with FM5, it can't just fade out like that!

 

[I'm Motarded]

PS4. It has to keep up with FM5, it can't just fade out like that!

It won't just fade out. After they sell another 10million copies on PS3, sony and PD will evaluate whether it's worth porting to PS4.

They will both agree it is.
Kaz 1.5 years into the port will decide to scrap the GT5/6 engine.
Release a GT6 prologue after another 1.5 years.
Scrap that engine.
Then after another 3.5 years release GT6.
Patch/DLC that for 2.5 years.
Sony announce PS5.
PD announce GT7... for PS4

And the cycle continues for our grandchildren to get hype over.

 

[Starciller]

They will both agree it is.
Kaz 1.5 years into the port will decide to scrap the GT5/6 engine.
Release a GT6 prologue after another 1.5 years.
Scrap that engine.
Then after another 3.5 years release GT6.
Patch/DLC that for 2.5 years.
Sony announce PS5.
PD announce GT7... for PS4

And the cycle continues for our grandchildren to get hype over.

It's kind of true.....ok yeah it is true

 

[Speedster911]

^^ Oh it's damn true! *Kurt Angle*

 

[TRC GeorgiaDawg]

PD was like, "Oh look! GT5 will have Top Gear, The Stig, Supert GT, NASCAR, WRC, weather, night racing, blah, blah, blah!!!"

Then you finally get the game and see these things were barely put to use...

We seem to end up replying to each others posts quite a bit here the last few days. Must be a Georgia thing.👍

But I have to counter. T10 did the same thing with Forza. They hyped how they were adding Aussie V8 Supercars and how they had this big partnership with the ALMS and of course Top Gear. And they barely used any of that. The ALMS and V8 Supercars are owned by the lame trumped up U class exotic supercars stuffed with parts and Lotus on drag tires. The real race cars are basically useless within their own class. Even in R1 and X the LMP cars all have HP upgrades on them. Some of them are even running on Dubz at the top of the class. Might as well have spinners on them.

Then the Top Gear license was basically just to get the track. Which is no different really than what PD did. Both missed on the opportunity to tie the game in with the show. A virtual beat the stig competition and challenges that went along with the show would have been huge.

I think both games would probably be better if the people at the top got replaced. Kaz seems to always be wanting to tinker and I don't think has a firm grasp on what online gamers want. And Dan is so concerned with getting casual gamer$$$$ that he has long since abandoned his desire to beat GT as a simulation (the stated goal of FM1) and is following the EA playbook.

 

[HAL20XX]

Then the Top Gear license was basically just to get the track. Which is no different really than what PD did. Both missed on the opportunity to tie the game in with the show. A virtual beat the stig competition and challenges that went along with the show would have been huge.

But Forza did do something with that license. Jeremy Clarkson providing a voice over on all Auto Vista cars, the same camera angles from the show on the track, Reasonably Priced Car events through Rivals mode, and wasn't Soccer borrowed from Top Gear as well?

PD couldn't even be bothered to replicate the camera angles in replays.

 

[TRC GeorgiaDawg]

But Forza did do something with that license. Jeremy Clarkson providing a voice over on all Auto Vista cars, the same camera angles from the show on the track, Reasonably Priced Car events through Rivals mode, and wasn't Soccer borrowed from Top Gear as well?

PD couldn't even be bothered to replicate the camera angles in replays.

Turn 10 did do more than PD. But IMO it was still not what it could and should have been. Clarkson did do Autovista, but most people I know used it about as long as it took to get the achievement. The camera angles used in the show is a nice touch, but just a touch. The Rivals events are a good point, but unless I'm mistaken (and I didn't play that much to know) the Rivals events that were Top Gear related were just the permanent ones. And car soccer is a nice gimmick for laughs on TV, but it doesn't translate very well to gaming IMO.

T10 did do more. That can't be debated. But how great would it have been for weekly challenges with cars that matched what was on the show? Or to have the real Stig run laps on the game for gamers to try and beat. So much more could have been done by both devs that would have been huge hits.

 

[HELLAFLUSH240SX]

How were they going to get The Stig to sit in front of a video game for days on end hot lapping in every car?

 

[Imari]

How were they going to get The Stig to sit in front of a video game for days on end hot lapping in every car?

Pay him. The same way they get him to drive real cars for days on end.

Besides, there's another option. Just get Joe Random and put him in a white suit. No one is going to know the difference. It doesn't actually have to be the real Stig.

 

[TRC GeorgiaDawg]

How were they going to get The Stig to sit in front of a video game for days on end hot lapping in every car?

They were able to get people like Juan Pablo Montoya to run...so why not the Stig?

 

[Northstar]

Besides, there's another option. Just get Joe Random and put him in a white suit. No one is going to know the difference. It doesn't actually have to be the real Stig.

They probably have more than 1 stig in real life so it really wouldn't matter(Not counting the "cousins"). They really wouldn't even have to get a driver to do the laps, just figure out the figurative best time for a track and take off .25 seconds or something like that.

 

[HELLAFLUSH240SX]

How would that make the game better by making a fake time. Rivals is perfect. See the fastest time, try to beat it.

Same thing. literally.

 

[HAL20XX]

How would that make the game better by making a fake time. Rivals is perfect. See the fastest time, try to beat it.

Same thing. literally.

And it's more likely that an avid sim racer is going to churn out a better time than a real life racer.

Sure, not having The Stig may seem like a lost opportunity, but I don't see any way of integrating it well other than his real life lap times from the show.

 

[I'm Motarded]

The stig set the fastest laps in every class and car in the game.. (if you know the where the replay option is).

 

[QuikSlvr223]

I've got it simplified.

Forza is a better game, with much more freedom (perfect example: paint chips in GT/livery editor in Forza) and... It's just more of an actual game.
GT, on the other hand, is a better sim, for a more hardcore audience that wants the cutting edge of realism. It depends on your interests. Personally, I like them both but prefer GT. That's how I see it.

 

[HELLAFLUSH240SX]

They sim nothing better than Forza does though. The physics are better in Forza.

 

[ProjectWHaT]

You can't compare FM5 and GT6. Why? Well FM5 is for next gen only if I read my facts right and GT6 will be made for current gen.

If you're comparing FM and GT, GT should be superior. Why? Well GT has more cars (but most of them are standard), GT has a longer history than FM (meaning they have more experience), Shulze racing team used GT6 to do suspension tuning for the 24H of Nurb, and there's GT Academy. And winner of that have won in their class at Spa this year, and came in third at the 24h of Le Mans in their class.
But FM does has things GT doesn't have, such as vinyls and other stuff. But if I remember correctly, the Nurb is longer than it should be in FM4.

 

[Kake Bake]

They sim nothing better than Forza does though. The physics are better in Forza.

For all that Forza does correctly physics-wise (a lot more than GT), there are still some intangibles that GT seems to nail in spite of its outdated engine.

The most obvious example of this for me is the compression and rebound of the suspension over bumps and curbs. In Forza, it makes the car look like a piece of cardboard that's caught some wind. Compounding this issue, however, is the fact that circuits (real and fictional) in Forza aren't bumpy to begin with. In GT, the cars bounce more believably off of bumps and curbs and wobble a bit afterward.

It's indicative of a model and engine that goes the extra mile to nail the fine touches and intangibles, but in doing so loses sight of the big picture with regards to handling.

 

[Speedster911]

^^ Keen observation, that.

Agree completely. A very good model would have been a marriage between Forza and GT's physics.

No wonder GT's replays always looked more realistic. The cars just look more alive bouncing and wobbling about on bumpy tracks/spin off curbs.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

The GTR GT3 on the GTA 2013 demo replay looks miles better than GT5, the wheel, suspension, chassis/body looks realistic when interacting with the road. Watch the replay and look for the wheel movement

 

[TRC GeorgiaDawg]

I've got it simplified.

Forza is a better game, with much more freedom (perfect example: paint chips in GT/livery editor in Forza) and... It's just more of an actual game.
GT, on the other hand, is a better sim, for a more hardcore audience that wants the cutting edge of realism. It depends on your interests. Personally, I like them both but prefer GT. That's how I see it.

That's pretty much the way I see it. Forza is the by far better game. It's made for a 21st century online audience whereas it seems GT5 was just a graphically better version of GT2 with online tacked on as afterthought. But GT has better physics, cars and tracks. If you could combine them both they'd make a hell of a game. Or better yet take Forza's game freedom stuff, combine it with GT's cars and tracks with the physics of Race Pro then you'd have the ultimate driving sim/game.

 

[Scaff]

For all that Forza does correctly physics-wise (a lot more than GT), there are still some intangibles that GT seems to nail in spite of its outdated engine.

Ah the mysterious Woo that people claim makes GT5 so realistic.

The most obvious example of this for me is the compression and rebound of the suspension over bumps and curbs. In Forza, it makes the car look like a piece of cardboard that's caught some wind.

Utter and complete nonsense. If anything GT5 is the one with the serious issues with suspension movement, particularly with older cars in which the rebound is simply wrong.

This

and this



Do not look like a piece of card in the wind at all.

Compounding this issue, however, is the fact that circuits (real and fictional) in Forza aren't bumpy to begin with. In GT, the cars bounce more believably off of bumps and curbs and wobble a bit afterward.

Once again competently untrue. How many videos of racks with bumps in FM4 would you like?

Now while GT6 certainly has moved things on a long way in terms of suspension, any claim that GT5 was more accurate than FM4 in this regard is simply not close to accurate.

It's indicative of a model and engine that goes the extra mile to nail the fine touches and intangibles, but in doing so loses sight of the big picture with regards to handling.

Yep it nails the fine details so well that it ignores them completely. Tyres are managed by one of the simplest models possible (basic grip increase factors rather than actually modelling differing tyres) with no attempt to deal with pressure or deformation. Suspension is simply a massive step behind FM4 (which in itself was poor prior to FM4) and doesn't model damper reaction and weight transfer well at all.

As a result torque steer from a standing start doesn't exist in GT (and that is still the case in the GT6 demo), tyres that don't loose grip in a progressive or realistic way and lift off oversteer that is almost non-existent.

I could go on and while GT6 moves things on in a serious way, to try and place GT5 above FM4 in terms of how vehicle dynamics by citing 'woo' is simply inaccurate. However feel free to have a read of this thread and continue the discussion in it.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=226995

 

[Kake Bake]

I disagree.

Take it easy, guy. I know Forza 4 has a much more comprehensive tire model than GT5. I'm aware of all the tests that GTP forum members have done to prove the model in 5 is just a lookup table of scaled grip amounts. Also, I agree that overall, the suspension model in GT5 is a lot worse than in Forza 4.

I own both games, I like them both for different reasons and acknowledge that FM4 had more work put into it in that regard. But, I still think that compression and rebound over curbs looks more lifelike during gameplay in GT5 than it does during gameplay in FM4.

I should clarify that I refer to cars with relatively stiff (upgraded or otherwise) suspensions when I say GT5 inches ahead of FM4. In GT5, even stiffened suspensions still demonstrate some travel; in FM4, you get cardboard catching a breeze syndrome.

BUT, when in wallow-y cars with soft or old suspensions (like the ones in the first video you posted) FM4 wins hands down. No contest. I really love the way FM4 handles it.

With regards to the bumpiness of FM4 tracks, let me give some examples of T10's mighty steamroller: the dip on the inside of the turn right before the straight at Nurburgring will lift a couple of wheels if taken too quickly in GT5; in FM4, you'll be lucky to even notice it's there. The Mulsanne straight in GT5 sends even prototype cars into an upset; whereas on FM4, you only get two speed humps (one right after the first chicane and one before the second).

If you can find video evidence otherwise, I'd welcome it.

 

[Scaff]

Take it easy, guy. I know Forza 4 has a much more comprehensive tire model than GT5. I'm aware of all the tests that GTP forum members have done to prove the model in 5 is just a lookup table of scaled grip amounts. Also, I agree that overall, the suspension model in GT5 is a lot worse than in Forza 4.

And yet you still cite a mysterious happening that then makes GT5's physics model better?

I own both games, I like them both for different reasons and acknowledge that FM4 had more work put into it in that regard. But, I still think that compression and rebound over curbs looks more lifelike during gameplay in GT5 than it does during gameplay in FM4.

I should clarify that I refer to cars with relatively stiff (upgraded or otherwise) suspensions when I say GT5 inches ahead of FM4. In GT5, even stiffened suspensions still demonstrate some travel; in FM4, you get cardboard catching a breeze syndrome.

BUT, when in wallow-y cars with soft or old suspensions (like the ones in the first video you posted) FM4 wins hands down. No contest.[/quote]
Odd then that you didn't come close to saying that at all, rather just dismissed FM4's suspension model as cardboard in the wind.

GT5 does a good job of secondary ride in terms of both suspension movement and feedback, but primary ride does't far anything like as well at all.

With regards to the bumpiness of FM4 tracks, let me give some examples of T10's mighty steamroller: the dip on the inside of the turn right before the straight at Nurburgring will lift a couple of wheels if taken too quickly in GT5; in FM4, you'll be lucky to even notice it's there. The Mulsanne straight in GT5 sends even prototype cars into an upset; whereas on FM4, you only get two speed humps (one right after the first chicane and one before the second).

If you can find video evidence otherwise, I'd welcome it.

Well done on moving those goalposts, you've gone from "Forza aren't bumpy to begin with" to not bumpy enough.

However I still disagree, plenty of surface bumps exist in FM4, you just don't get the feedback via Force Feedback as you do in GT5, which as primary ride you shouldn't anyway. Which is exactly why Prototypes get upset at the Mulsaine, and again should not to the degree they do in GT5 - buts that's a combination of incorrect FFB and a poor aero model.

As for video evidence - did you miss the ones I posted? Or did they have zero surface irregularities? However more than happy to provide, should be ready by the morning (UK time)

Oh and a hint, if you don't want a counterpoint then don't make inaccurate blanket statement and then get defensive when someone takes them to task.

 

[Kake Bake]

I'm cross.

I don't know why you are getting so steamed. I agree with you that FM4 has a better physics engine overall. It's great and I very much prefer it to GT5's.

I guess I could get a tattoo saying as much if it would calm you down.

 

[Scaff]

I don't know why you are getting so steamed. I agree with you that FM4 has a better physics engine overall. It's great and I very much prefer it to GT5's.

I guess I could get a tattoo saying as much if it would calm you down.

If you don't want a discussion then don't post on a discussion forum, I'm not getting 'steamed', I'm not 'cross' and I don't need to 'take it easy' but you do seem to have an issue when someone disagrees with you and provides substance to it.

So far all I've seen is a member make sweepingly inaccurate statements they can't back up, then back-track and start making sly digs rather than discuss them, not traits that will sit well here at GT Planet, if you wish to simply post comments and not get any replies then a blog would be what your looking for.

 

[Kake Bake]

This was my original point:

It's indicative of a model and engine that goes the extra mile to nail the fine touches and intangibles, but in doing so loses sight of the big picture with regards to handling.

Here is something you said:

GT5 does a good job of secondary ride in terms of both suspension movement and feedback, but primary ride does't far anything like as well at all.

They are similar. We agree. Let's both shut our pie holes.

 

[Wolfe]

For what it's worth, I don't think Kake Bake meant to endorse Gran Turismo's physics model to quite the extent you may have thought, Scaff. The language we use in talking about physics accuracy is a bit difficult to pin down and varies from person to person.

The way I read it, Kake Bake was saying that while the cars in FM4 move and behave more accurately, the way they "wiggle" and rebound in GT5 seems more lifelike. While I'm not exactly impressed by GT5's JELL-O-like jiggling, I agree that FM4 is rather "dead" and stiff. The "cardboard in the wind" comment made me think of the way cars enter a rollover in FM4/Horizon, just tipping over as you would lift a hardcover book. As for track bumpiness, in GT it's pretty much just a visual and FFB effect.

I think it's incorrect to say GT "goes the extra mile to nail the fine touches and intangibles," but I can see where Kake Bake is coming from.

 

[Com Fox]

I'm liking the Drivatar idea, if it is successful the A.I will be awesome.
I hope GT6 fixes most of GT5s problems and includes more content.