Forza 5 Is A Major Dissapointment, Will DLC Save It?

[SlipZtrEm]

I don't notice fps dips though.

This is why I'm saying if anything forza should lock the game at 30 and get the great effects, as high frame rate isn't a priority for me

So you've never done a race with a full grid in the rain in GT6, then? Or, going outside the racing titles - you've never played GTA5 at all?

More so than most other genres, a higher frame rate - and specifically, a locked one - is important in racing games. As @Tornado and @Classic are suggesting, spend some time with both a 60fps and a 30fps game, and you will see a difference, despite what you might think about the limits our eyes can comprehend. Switching back and forth between FM4 and Horizon was jarring enough for me.

 

[GranTurismo guy]

@Tornado What a coincidence, I used that exact disk to prove to my FPS-ignorant buddy there is a huge difference. Hooked up 2 PS1s and 2 TVs. Worked perfectly.

A huge difference, maybe, but I don't really care about it

@SlipZtrEm I said the drops don't really affect me, not that they aren't there.

I disagree that 60 fps is important as I can play 30 fps just fine

 

[TokoTurismo]

@Tornado and @Classic Perfect examples! Ridge Racer forever. :tup:

 

[GranTurismo guy]

@Tornado and @Classic Perfect examples! Ridge Racer forever. :tup:

You and your ridge racer

 

[UKMikey]

A huge difference, maybe, but I don't really care about it

@SlipZtrEm I said the drops don't really affect me, not that they aren't there.

I disagree that 60 fps is important as I can play 30 fps just fine

We'll have to see which way Turn10 go when FM6 comes out next year. I'd be surprised if they dropped a feature they've committed to (1080/60) in favour of features they haven't even announced yet though. Like I said there are plenty of games which don't target 60fps if it's not your thing. But just because you don't care about it doesn't mean that other people don't as the posts on this thread illustrate.

 

[ImaRobot]

A huge difference, maybe, but I don't really care about it

@SlipZtrEm I said the drops don't really affect me, not that they aren't there.

I disagree that 60 fps is important as I can play 30 fps just fine

Being able to play at 30fps isnt the point, or even the problem. For games that take exact precise inputs and corrections, a higher frame rate is always necessary, especially for competitiveness. It may not be to everyones fancy, but it works, and it is much better than 30fps weather you agree or not. You dont deem it necessary, thats fine, 30 fps is good for you, hey its fine for me to. What I do not want though is weather that is going to hinder game play with FPS fluctuations.

Long story short, for games that I know I'm going to be competitive in, especially in multiplayer, I would like them to be 60fps. Games that I would be more casual with I dont mind them being 30fps, I can live with that.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Easier to get, Wipeout HD/Fury on PS3 60fps, then play 30fps racing games.

 

[Brend]

A huge difference, maybe, but I don't really care about it

@SlipZtrEm I said the drops don't really affect me, not that they aren't there.

I disagree that 60 fps is important as I can play 30 fps just fine

Let's go 24FPS for that cinematic experience then. After all, when we get used to it we won't notice a difference?

 

[GranTurismo guy]

Let's go 24FPS for that cinematic experience then. After all, when we get used to it we won't notice a difference?

How about 30 like most games?

 

[Brend]

How about 30 like most console games?

FTFY.

 

[ImaRobot]

How about 30 like most games?

This generation, that seems to be wrong. I think its great as well.

 

[Zer0]

Okay Zero, here's the deal:
I know you're quite passionate about GT, as was I at some point. Let's put aside personal preferences, customer loyalty and sales for a minute.... FM has innovated with every single release, amid disappointments and some letdowns. GT hasn't. I'm sorry, I wish things had gone differently with PD.. though I don't know what happened exactly. Whether it was staff walking out on PD or being let go, or if it was Kaz resting on his laurels for too long.
FM5 now brings to the table better engine sounds, graphics and physics. They even have a "casual racing" version to appeal to wider audiences - Horizon.
What has GT done by comparison? Release updates and more cars/tracks to side step around pressing concerns?
Forza is clearly taking major strides so as to what consoles can give gamers in terms of a realistic virtual driving experience. NOW.. what remains to be seen is who will the first one to be hailed as a "game changer"... FM6 or GT7.
Let's wait it out, shall we?
Happy motoring ye fellow petrol head!

We have a different idea of "innovation". I have discussed the stagnancy of the Forza series before with FM4, but the same apply to FM5 and is easy to see how the fans can be as happy with the actual progression when some of them just don't care about anything more than cars and tracks in the next release. T10 are lucky to have a fanbase so easy to make happy, contrary to GT, at least in forzaplanet. Things don't look the same from the outside and I can expect a big rage if FM6 don't really steps at some point.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/who-will-not-buy-gt6.255020/page-5#post-7170378

@Zer0 I find it a bit ironic that you obsess over the fact that T10 MIGHT not be able to get weather at its intended 1080/60fps yet you haven't as much as raised an eyebrow at GT for having weather and not being able to achieve 1080p/60fps. In this case, what does it matter, if they have no experience? worst case is, is that it'll turn out like Gran Turismo. If you seem ok with them doing it, than you should be fine in this case.

In the past generation GT in PS3 was the only contender with these features and you agree or not it was a feat to have all that running at that resolution, with those gameplay graphics and at with that framerate. They were capable of things that not even FM5 in a beast of a hardware in comparisson is doing years after. PD is well known to take risks, research new technologies and push things beyond what is possible with the hardware. T10 is known to being ultra-conservative and don't compromise their framerate and resolution, that means graphical cuts and cheaper solutions that at the end means barriers to implement all the expected modern features. They have not changed that formula since FM1 and for that reason the day they feels obligued to add all the real-time features to become competitive would be much more difficult to achieve than to others that are being implementing them for years. Now, when GT7 will be ready, we well see how well those effects does work and look in PS4, but is sad that the future of Forza is being compared to GT5-6 given the new hardware posibilities. I see there not the major problem in the XBone, but T10.

 

[GranTurismo guy]

FTFY.
Although I am forgetting that most computers aren't for high performance gaming and don't actually achieve anywhere near 60 fps.

And I FTFY

 

[ImaRobot]

In the past generation GT in PS3 was the only contender with these features and you agree or not it was a feat to have all that running at that resolution, with those gameplay graphics and at with that framerate. They were capable of things that not even FM5 in a beast of a hardware in comparisson is doing years after.

Those features do run, to an extent. They do not work as PD intended I'm sure. If so why would they intend to add a feature that would hinder the game? To have them is one thing, to have them work is another. Its obvious that they are doing this with every aspect of the game.

Weather? We got it(*may cause frame rate drops and tearing(when we say may, it definitely does).)

Cars? we got it, over 1000 at that(*cars may very in graphics ranging from a 6 polygon model, to 1mil polygon models. 800 are standards and not up to par with current gen, or even last gen. Many many duplicates.)

Thats just two examples that use the same idea that you're speaking of.

PD is well known to take risks, research new technologies and push things beyond what is possible with the hardware. T10 is known to being ultra-conservative and don't compromise their framerate and resolution, that means graphical cuts and cheaper solutions that at the end means barriers to implement all the expected modern features.

Oh I definitely agree with you, they did push far past the limits of the console( on a certain part of the game), and released a game with all these features(and lack of features advertised) just so they say "I can." No one company should compromise there game in anyway, why would you want to ruin what you built? I'm glad they stick to the 1080/60fps, thats an amazing feat that not even PD can seem to get right. What graphical cuts are you talking about? I think the game has some great detail to it, please explain. Also, what cheaper solutions are you talking about?

Now, when GT7 will be ready, we well see how well those effects does work and look in PS4, but is sad that the future of Forza is being compared to GT5-6 given the new hardware posibilities. I see there not the major problem in the XBone, but T10.

You see, thats the problem. You are only speaking from a visual point of view. The 400 premiums are beautiful, but they focused so much on only those 400 pushing them over the limit, while leaving the rest lacking(severly lacking) in detail. Give me graphical consistency all across the board. If your fine with less 50% of your game looking up to date, thats fine. Just dont come over here acting like its better, when they only aim to achieve the bare minimum.

EDIT: all that aside, please answer this as you seem to just skim passed it(I doubt that):
Why is it such a problem that you think there is a possibilty that T10 MIGHT not be able to get weather down correcly, but seem to be perfectly ok with PD NOT being able to get weather down correctly?

 

[VXR]

Whose to say Turn 10 won't forgo the Kinect features to release that extra system power and learn how to make the most out of the ESRAM in the meantime? They were one of the few 1080p60 games at launch with hardware they had a headstart on, in the same way PD intimately knew the PS3.

That familiarity tells me that there's at least a chance they can get Horizon's weather system working in the 60fps ideal.

 

[imported_skidmark]

That sounds about as lackluster and withdrawn as a certain other game that happens to have a large following also that says the same thing when innovations are asked for and felt to be needed. At least the two groups have common ground, and I for one actually side with FM now days more than the other game based on effort made (as can be found in this thread). However, the "we don't need your damn day/night and weather" when other games in the Arcade and Simcade as well as the obvious sim categories do it...you've then obviously slotted yourself in the position of this thing can do no harm. So what makes that any different than the over zealous GT fans that do it?

EDIT: Also the more content bit sounds like something PD would say or a former GT fan would say and just carry over to this game because of other let downs due to the former.

Wholey moley!! I'm none of the above!.. I didn't say I didn't want or am against weather and time change being in forza,ive just accepted it might not happen,especially after Dan G spoke about it in an interview.60fps is a must and if having weather effects that,bin it I say!

GT does have rain but its ugly thanks to screen tear and frame drops sadly..
Pgr4 is the best racer for weather variety out there! Loved that game.

Turn 10 might surprise us and pull it off you never know! I'm just not counting on it and I'm fine with that!

 

[SlipZtrEm]

A huge difference, maybe, but I don't really care about it

@SlipZtrEm I said the drops don't really affect me, not that they aren't there.

I disagree that 60 fps is important as I can play 30 fps just fine

You said you don't notice them, and I find it a bit hard to believe since GT6 is fully capable of dropping to less than half the quoted 60fps, and GTA5 can have a whole lot of frame rate issues too, especially online.

I can play 30 fps games too, but for precision, 60 fps is preferable. And racing games, especially sim-ish ones, are about precision, I think we'd agree

We have a different idea of "innovation".

Oh, we certainly do. You count being able to play dress-up with our drivers as an innovation.

some of them just don't care about anything more than cars and tracks in the next release.

That right there is what GT6 has amounted to over GT5. Well, sort of - they went and cut features out, which admittedly FM5 did in comparison to FM4, too, so neither did good in that regard. Of course, FM5 is on a new system compared to its predecessor, GT6 wasn't.

In the past generation GT in PS3 was the only contender with these features and you agree or not it was a feat to have all that running at that resolution, with those gameplay graphics and at with that framerate.

At what framerate? Because it wasn't 60.

They were capable of things that not even FM5 in a beast of a hardware in comparisson is doing years after.

And the reverse is true in other areas of the games too.

PD is well known to take risks,

Quite. Recycling decade-old assets is something no other company has done.

research new technologies and push things beyond what is possible with the hardware.

Why is pushing the hardware past its limits seen as a good thing, again? I don't want a stuttering, glitchy tech-demo of a game, that chugs to simply display everything. That is the opposite of good design.

T10 is known to being ultra-conservative and don't compromise their framerate and resolution, that means graphical cuts and cheaper solutions that at the end means barriers to implement all the expected modern features.

Were there or were there not massive advances in the last-gen's ablities, graphically, between launch day and now? Or are you still working under the impression that a launch title is an accurate representation of what a system will ever achieve over its life?

 

[TheCrazySwede]

Please lads, keep in mind that we are discussing a video game here. Not saying you guys aren't aware of that fact, but I know how sometimes these online discussions can get out of hand. Thank You

As I had mentioned in one of my earlier posts, I work with computers for a living. My love for motorsport and my profession as computer engineer has lead me towards racing sims like Forza, GT and so forth. I am, however, well aware of how these games are developed, and better yet, I know what type of hardware the consoles, themselves, inhabit.

Having friends who work in the gaming industry has given me a lot of insight. I have friends who work/have worked at DICE, Insomniac, Rockstar, UbiSoft and TellTale Games. I've bugged one of them in particular a lot lately about the new consoles. To make a long story short, he was explaining to me how they start development in multi-platform games. Essentially, the games are gonna be almost identical across all platforms. Now that might sound like a good thing, but keep in mind that they have to adapt the game for the lowest common denominator. This means that the final product is only as strong as the weakest link, and yes, that link is the XBox One. As I mentioned before, I was told that a lot of developers are starting development of games on the PS4 this time around, because not only is it much easier this time around, but also because it houses a lot of potential. My friend avoided to agreeing to the notion that games have gotten "dumbed down" for the new XBox, but that's what I got from our conversations. Again, this isn't my own biased opinion (keep in mind that I own a XBOX One, but not a PS4) but just information I've gathered from people in the industry and from my own professional research.

First Party games is something completely different. There is no "dumbing down" for the T10 Team because they are trying to squeeze every drop of juice that they can out of the console. PD has done a fantastic job with GT6. Go ahead and mock them all you can, but let's see how your racing game would compare if you only had 512MB of RAM. The way the guys over at PD have developed GT5/GT6 is extremely impressive! Knowing how to utilize a piece of hardware's resources can be very difficult and hair-pullingly frustrating! Kudos for that achievement alone, PD!

If you guys read my posts from earlier where I talked about my discussion with a T10 employee at Laguna Seca, then you'd know that T10 actually HAD to dumb things down for the 360. I don't think this should be the case (for now!) with FM6. Yes, even I mentioned how COD failed to run at native 1080/60FPS on the XBox One, but also keep in mind what I said earlier about multi-platform games. This is a case of a developer not opting to dumb down a game across all platforms, but instead started development and released the differences too late into the cycle and made sacrifices. Ubisoft, too, had similar problems with Watch Dogs, but I don't recall how they solved that.

Do I think T10 can pull off full night/day and weather while keeping the game locked at 60FPS? Yes, I believe they can, but they are going to have to get real up close and personal with the console and really know the ins-and-outs of their hardware. I can't imagine their dynamic weather/day cycle to be very advanced, however. They are going to have to pull some tricks out of their sleeves and make some sacrifices here and there to compensate....like having slower framerate in the car's mirrors and such mumbo-jumbo.

 

[Wolfe]

To add my $0.02 to the subject of processing priorities:

I want a 60fps game with night racing and weather. The difference between 60fps and 30fps is clear, and a fluctuating <30fps is beyond obvious. While I can tolerate 30fps, especially if it's locked like Forza Horizon, 60fps is best. For a racing game, the fluidity helps you to connect with subtle feedback from physics/handling. In my view, adding time-of-day options effectively multiplies the circuit list, and adding weather multiplies it again -- racing at night or in the wet is unlike racing on a dry sunny day. Even just a handful of night/wet options (GT/Enthusia style) adds fresh variety, and different palettes in terms of visuals. A game like FM4 can be rather dull by comparison.

I couldn't care less about 1080p. Some members here already know I currently play console games at 480i on a CRT. When I play PC games, I prefer to drop the resolution down and boost quality elsewhere. I think 720p is more than adequate if it allows for gains in other areas -- and I don't mean insane polygon density or texture detail. In my opinion, the vehicle assets in FM5 or even the Premium cars of GT5/GT6 are already excessively detailed. They eat away budgets and disc space, and spend processor cycles or memory on things that don't really benefit gameplay. Graphics matter, but not that much. How about more cars on a grid? More detailed physics calculations? More trackside assets (things you'll actually be looking at during a race)? Why not spread graphical fidelity more evenly to create a richer overall experience?

With all that said, Turn 10 may have cornered themselves with the ridiculous assets in FM5 and their promise of 1080p. Who knows what they'll be able to add for FM6, but as far as I'm concerned, you can thank those tiny little pixels and polygons for holding the game back.

 

[Zer0]

Those features do run, to an extent. They do not work as PD intended I'm sure. If so why would they intend to add a feature that would hinder the game? To have them is one thing, to have them work is another. Its obvious that they are doing this with every aspect of the game.

Weather? We got it(*may cause frame rate drops and tearing(when we say may, it definitely does).)

Cars? we got it, over 1000 at that(*cars may very in graphics ranging from a 6 polygon model, to 1mil polygon models. 800 are standards and not up to par with current gen, or even last gen. Many many duplicates.)

Thats just two examples that use the same idea that you're speaking of.

Are you talking about the first GT5 with no updates, GT5 Spec2 or GT6? where have you read that the weather or time features does hinder the gameplay rather than improve it?

You know that the standards are not a problem for most players and are being used extensively online no matter its graphical look? You guys keep thinking that your preferences should be treated as universal and most of them are the contrary, very personal.

Oh I definitely agree with you, they did push far past the limits of the console( on a certain part of the game), and released a game with all these features(and lack of features advertised) just so they say "I can." No one company should compromise there game in anyway, why would you want to ruin what you built? I'm glad they stick to the 1080/60fps, thats an amazing feat that not even PD can seem to get right. What graphical cuts are you talking about? I think the game has some great detail to it, please explain. Also, what cheaper solutions are you talking about?

1080/60 with all the compromises that T10 needed to put during the gameplay, even running on a static baked world, is far from a feat. They reduced the graphical charge and effects until the desired framerate fitted, even they downgraded the initial visual quality in its first playable demos (devkits), to fit inside the console.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=90613279&postcount=220

The FM5 result maybe can look "modern" to the untrained eyes, but what is really the gameplay at 60fps with many cars on track is technically a dinosaur, even compared to GT6. I can't imagine the GT7 differences.

You have many of those cuts explained in the Photomode Vs thread in the GT6 forum, but basically are the same as they used in its previous games.

EDIT: all that aside, please answer this as you seem to just skim passed it(I doubt that):
Why is it such a problem that you think there is a possibilty that T10 MIGHT not be able to get weather down correcly, but seem to be perfectly ok with PD NOT being able to get weather down correctly?

It's easy to understand. Because the future weather effects of FM6 are going to be compared to other new generation games, not old, and the standards now are very very high and I'm sure that GT7 will also surprise in that regard. See Driveclub how good it looks compared to FH2.



Knowing the past T10's excuses for not implementing the features (lack of hardware, meaning graphics not up to par to the standars they require ...or "the best with no compromises or nothing") you will understand my doubts about what can they deliver this time with those unrealistic standards, along the 1080/60 that not even FH2 can deliver (even with modest effects), and with all the logistic and hardware problems that would require to don't look a weak intent vs other games running in a more favourable position.

Of course, there are other options if they want to work something with no major changes. But all of them will be more limited and look less reallistic in comparisson. As I said time will tell, I'm not expecting much and I already explained my reasons more than would be necessary.

 

[HAL20XX]

^^^ Your bias is showing. Awkward.

 

[ImaRobot]

Are you talking about the first GT5 with no updates, GT5 Spec2 or GT6? where have you read that the weather or time features does hinder the gameplay rather than improve it?

No experience with GT6 yet, strictly speaking of the frame rate problems that plagued the weather usage in GT5, sorry I should have elaborated that.

You know that the standards are not a problem for most players and are being used extensively online no matter its graphical look? You guys keep thinking that your preferences should be treated as universal and most of them are the contrary, very personal.

Exactly, and I never portrayed them to be anything else, that is something that you are doing however.

1080/60 with all the compromises that T10 needed to put during the gameplay, even running on a static baked world, is far from a feat. They reduced the graphical charge and effects until the desired framerate fitted, even they downgraded the initial visual quality in its first playable demos (devkits), to fit inside the console.

What did they reduce exactly, please source it so I can read up on it. I do know how ever that the Prague track looked a bit better in the demo though, but thats hardly something that is only done by T10. However, please show me it was reduced because of frame rate issues.

The FM5 result maybe can look "modern" to the untrained eyes, but what is really the gameplay at 60fps with many cars on track is technically a dinosaur, even compared to GT6. I can't imagine the GT7 differences.

I'm unsure what you mean or what your talking about in this part, I'm thinking its the language barrier. You shouldnt be able to imagine the Gt7 differences, there is nothing to go off of.

You have many of those cuts explained in the Photomode Vs thread in the GT6 forum, but basically are the same as they used in its previous games.

Good thing taking a picture isnt the only thing that is making these games.

It's easy to understand. Because the future weather effects of FM6 are going to be compared to other new generation games, not old, and the standards now are very very high and I'm sure that GT7 will also surprise in that regard. See Driveclub how good it looks compared to FH2.

The standards are high? How are they high when the only other current racing game to have it has had problems with fame rate issues with it. The standards would be high if it actually worked at 60fps locked, with a full grid. (strictly speaking from my GT5 experience, not from gt6. Although I dont remember reading anything different concerning GT6).

There is no game out currently that has weather besides GT, and it hasnt really even set a high standard with that. Until Forza Horizon and Drive club come out, we have no idea how its actually going to wind up. We have videos of it, but thats it.

For some reason my youtube isnt even loading on this computer, I am not able to check out that video you posted.

Knowing the past T10's excuses for not implementing the features (lack of hardware, meaning graphics not up to par to the standars they require ...or "the best with no compromises or nothing") you will understand my doubts about what can they deliver this time with those unrealistic standards, along the 1080/60 that not even FH2 can deliver (even with modest effects), and with all the logistic and hardware problems that would require to don't look a weak intent vs other games running in a more favourable position.

An open world game is hardly comparable to a set track. There is going to be so much more going on in FH2 at one time than on FM, so its not entirely unrealistic to think that with less going on in FM, they can very well achieve it at 60fps. Yet, Its also odd that you dont have doubts on other games when they release something faulty. This is just showing your Bias more and more.

Of course, there are other options if they want to work something with no major changes. But all of them will be more limited and look less reallistic in comparisson. As I said time will tell, I'm not expecting much and I already explained my reasons more than would be necessary.

Time will tell.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

You know that the standards are not a problem for most players and are being used extensively online no matter its graphical look? You guys keep thinking that your preferences should be treated as universal and most of them are the contrary, very personal.

You know the lack of weather is not a problem for most players and they still play extensively online no matter the graphical look? You guys keep thinking that your preferences should be treated as universal and most of them are the contrary, very personal.

Phew. That was easy.

The FM5 result maybe can look "modern" to the untrained eyes, but what is really the gameplay at 60fps with many cars on track is technically a dinosaur, even compared to GT6. I can't imagine the GT7 differences.

As you've already alluded to - when it's convenient for your argument, of course - the majority of people are the untrained eyes.

And of course you can't imagine the GT7 differences - it is a product of your imagination and nothing more at this point. Not that reality has ever stopped you from coming to different conclusions before, anyway.

Knowing the past T10's excuses for not implementing the features (lack of hardware, meaning graphics not up to par to the standars they require ...or "the best with no compromises or nothing")

Pointing and blaming the hardware for any shortcomings is precisely what PD has done for the entirety of GT's PS3 period. It's hardly a unique thing in the industry, somewhat sadly.

 

[ImaRobot]

Looking up GT6 weather issues I find this

The cockpit and dynamic weather, also present in GT5, continue to negatively impact the engine's ability to reach its 60fps objective. When all of these elements are combined we encountered frame-rates that can reach the low 40s in 1080p mode. Interestingly, despite these performance issues, Polyphony Digital insists on updating all reflections and mirrors at the same rate as the game itself. Games such as Forza 5 actually decouple these elements and display them at a variable frame-rate - no doubt in order to help maintain a solid frame-rate elsewhere. It seems to us that perhaps the no-compromise attitude in regards to certain features could actually be doing more harm than good in certain cases.

When GT4 was released on PlayStation 2 it felt like something close to a complete, finished product from end to end: there was the sense that everything the team set out to accomplish - bar online racing - had been achieved. With Gran Turismo 6, we simply don't get that same feeling - the engine created for Gran Turismo on PlayStation 3 has never quite fully delivered and Polyphony's ambitions were seemingly too high to be delivered on last-gen tech. The frame-rate dips here are just too jarring at times, impacting the interface between player and game, introducing too much inconsistency into the way the cars handle from one race to the next.

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/syst...shed-the-ps3-to-it-s-absolute-limit-31089016/

I guess it hasnt changed. So my opinion still holds for Gt6.

 

[Zer0]

First please Forzaplanet, don't talk about bias in this forum , everyone defending a position here is biased in some form, don't be hypocrite. A different thing is if the people stay reasonable and true to the evidences, proofs and facts or their bias is stronger than all that and prefer to ignore and put on attack-mode to any thing not positive said to its cause.

What did they reduce exactly, please source it so I can read up on it. I do know how ever that the Prague track looked a bit better in the demo though, but thats hardly something that is only done by T10. However, please show me it was reduced because of frame rate issues.

You don't know about the 2D crowds fiasco? The downgrade was never oficially admited but was heavily discussed. T10 in their usual fashion deleted much of the related threads in the official forums and banned the users. The game demo at that E3 time was running in devkits (a powerful pc). The downgrade was noted months later with the final game running in the console. Some of the differences spotted by the people are in the neogaf link that I posted. Anyway the 3D crowd replaced with the 2D cut-outs is easily noticeable.

I'm unsure what you mean or what your talking about in this part, I'm thinking its the language barrier. You shouldnt be able to imagine the Gt7 differences, there is nothing to go off of.

Sorry, I mean that it will look great for some people but is nothing special if you consider what is moving, its restrictions and what PD have achieved in a much more weaker hardware. I can't wait to see what PD can deliver with a PS4 hardware, but taking in consideration GT6 in PS3 should be something rather impressive for sure. Probably we will see a difference much bigger this time between franchises.

Good thing taking a picture isnt the only thing that is making these games.

The same graphical problems noted in the photomode examples apply also to the in-game graphics, it has been noted in some posts.

The standards are high? How are they high when the only other current racing game to have it has had problems with fame rate issues with it. The standards would be high if it actually worked at 60fps locked, with a full grid. (strictly speaking from my GT5 experience, not from gt6. Although I dont remember reading anything different concerning GT6).

There is no game out currently that has weather besides GT, and it hasnt really even set a high standard with that. Until Forza Horizon and Drive club come out, we have no idea how its actually going to wind up. We have videos of it, but thats it.

For some reason my youtube isnt even loading on this computer, I am not able to check out that video you posted.

Until something better appears, the best reallistic weather visuals are there, no matter if are at 30 or 60 fps, and that will be the reference to beat to other games and reviews. Will see what can deliver GT7 and FM6 and who ends closer, or can surpass, that reference.

An open world game is hardly comparable to a set track. There is going to be so much more going on in FH2 at one time than on FM, so its not entirely unrealistic to think that with less going on in FM, they can very well achieve it at 60fps. Yet, Its also odd that you dont have doubts on other games when they release something faulty. This is just showing your Bias more and more.

FH1 (30fps) time change does have not meant a FM4 (60fps) with time changes. FH2 (30fps) with time change and weather should not meant a FM6 (60fps) with the same features. Will be even more difficult to apply two new features than one at double the framerate, and it don't happened before with only one feature in FM4, so you should understand that is very reasonable to be sceptic with that idea.

 

[Speedster911]

Whose to say Turn 10 won't forgo the Kinect features to release that extra system power and learn how to make the most out of the ESRAM in the meantime? They were one of the few 1080p60 games at launch with hardware they had a headstart on, in the same way PD intimately knew the PS3.

That familiarity tells me that there's at least a chance they can get Horizon's weather system working in the 60fps ideal.

I believe the 10% extra juice as a result of no Kinect is a myth, according to one of @CAMAROBOY69's post in another thread.

A Horizon game at 60 fps? Sounds like a pretty GOOD deal to me!

Wholey moley!! I'm none of the above!.. I didn't say I didn't want or am against weather and time change being in forza,ive just accepted it might not happen,especially after Dan G spoke about it in an interview.60fps is a must and if having weather effects that,bin it I say!

GT does have rain but its ugly thanks to screen tear and frame drops sadly..
Pgr4 is the best racer for weather variety out there! Loved that game.

Turn 10 might surprise us and pull it off you never know! I'm just not counting on it and I'm fine with that!

I don't care much for weather or night. The ability to have different times of day where the use of headlights might somewhat come into play, would be nice, without actually having the need to project full on beams on the track. Kind of like FM4 where you had sunset/sunrise versions of tracks. Only in FM6, you could maybe switch em' on/off.

Weather would be a great addition, but I don't mind doing without it. More important in Forza game, I'd like to see proper rally racing!

To add my $0.02 to the subject of processing priorities:

I want a 60fps game with night racing and weather. The difference between 60fps and 30fps is clear, and a fluctuating <30fps is beyond obvious. While I can tolerate 30fps, especially if it's locked like Forza Horizon, 60fps is best. For a racing game, the fluidity helps you to connect with subtle feedback from physics/handling. In my view, adding time-of-day options effectively multiplies the circuit list, and adding weather multiplies it again -- racing at night or in the wet is unlike racing on a dry sunny day. Even just a handful of night/wet options (GT/Enthusia style) adds fresh variety, and different palettes in terms of visuals. A game like FM4 can be rather dull by comparison.

I couldn't care less about 1080p. Some members here already know I currently play console games at 480i on a CRT. When I play PC games, I prefer to drop the resolution down and boost quality elsewhere. I think 720p is more than adequate if it allows for gains in other areas -- and I don't mean insane polygon density or texture detail. In my opinion, the vehicle assets in FM5 or even the Premium cars of GT5/GT6 are already excessively detailed. They eat away budgets and disc space, and spend processor cycles or memory on things that don't really benefit gameplay. Graphics matter, but not that much. How about more cars on a grid? More detailed physics calculations? More trackside assets (things you'll actually be looking at during a race)? Why not spread graphical fidelity more evenly to create a richer overall experience?

With all that said, Turn 10 may have cornered themselves with the ridiculous assets in FM5 and their promise of 1080p. Who knows what they'll be able to add for FM6, but as far as I'm concerned, you can thank those tiny little pixels and polygons for holding the game back.

Yeap, sure does. Games requiring precision absolutely need 60 fps, and it does help the physics, movement and real life-like factor tremendously. Prime examples: Forza, COD, Tekken etc.

I think if we could have a 'several times of day' option in FM6 for every track, that would mix things up very nicely. Imagine if Camino makes a comeback featuring a noon or early morn/late evening setting. Adding different weather conditions without actually having rain would just make my day. For instance a sunny version of The Nurb, as opposed to a completely overcast or partially cloudy version. BTW, I do not like the Nurb much while it's overcast! I wanna see all the green around the track beaming while I'm driving and the sun bathing those delightfully dangerous curves!

Graphics aren't top priority. You're right when you say T10 has cornered themselves. Look at all that visual pizzazz in FM5, and the tire smoke effects look worse than FM4. The amount of time they spent working on that overdone lens flare could have been maybe spent on perfecting shadows, reflections and tire smoke.

I'd rather all that hardware horsepower be evenly and nicely divided between graphics, physics calculations and audio fidelity. It mostly goes to graphics. And yes... good highly detailed audio does suck resources out of your processor and RAM.

 

[ImaRobot]

First please Forzaplanet, don't talk about bias in this forum , everyone defending a position here is biased in some form, don't be hypocrite. A different thing is if the people stay reasonable and true to the evidences, proofs and facts or their bias is stronger than all that and prefer to ignore and put on attack-mode to any thing not positive said to its cause.

I have a bias toward racing games, unlike you who seem to only blatantly attack a company for faults they havent even commited yet, but you praise one for releasing faulty content. That is exactly why we say you are biased.

You don't know about the 2D crowds fiasco? The downgrade was never oficially admited but was heavily discussed. T10 in their usual fashion deleted much of the related threads in the official forums and banned the users. The game demo at that E3 time was running in devkits (a powerful pc). The downgrade was noted months later with the final game running in the console. Some of the differences spotted by the people are in the neogaf link that I posted. Anyway the 3D crowd replaced with the 2D cut-outs is easily noticeable.

I know all about that, as I've already said. So thats something that you would want in the game? 3d crowds? You discredit them for not spending time to get major things working or implemented, but you're going to get mad that they didnt spend time on 3d modeled crowds? That is one thing we should all be glad isnt implemented, as those small resources can be used in other departments, say, like the weather you want in the game.

Sorry, I mean that it will look great for some people but is nothing special if you consider what is moving, its restrictions and what PD have achieved in a much more weaker hardware. I can't wait to see what PD can deliver with a PS4 hardware, but taking in consideration GT6 in PS3 should be something rather impressive for sure. Probably we will see a difference much bigger this time between franchises.

PD have managed to release a fraction of a game completed, not release features that are actually labeled on the retail box, and push the hardware so hard that it can hardly function and use these features to the fullest. Dont get me wrong, I'm hoping with the more powerful hardware they can fix all these problems, but there track record is far from great, or anything to look up to.

The same graphical problems noted in the photomode examples apply also to the in-game graphics, it has been noted in some posts.

Thats not what I was arguing. The game plays the same no matter what content is being used, unlike its competitor.

Until something better appears, the best reallistic weather visuals are there, no matter if are at 30 or 60 fps, and that will be the reference to beat to other games and reviews. Will see what can deliver GT7 and FM6 and who ends closer, or can surpass, that reference.

haha, no not technically. Its all we have, you're correct, it doesnt necessarily mean its the best. Its obvious that its faulty, and doesnt work as intended. So just because nothing else is available, it doesnt automatically make something horrible, good. The thing is, its not at 60 or 30, its all over the damn place which is always worse than being locked at a certain FPS.

FH1 (30fps) time change does have not meant a FM4 (60fps) with time changes. FH2 (30fps) with time change and weather should not meant a FM6 (60fps) with the same features. Will be even more difficult to apply two new features than one at double the framerate, and it don't happened before with only one feature in FM4, so you should understand that is very reasonable to be sceptic with that idea.

At the same time, FM without time or weather did not mean FH without time or weather either. Its also very reasonable to suspect that they have not even reached the pinnacle of what the Xbox one has to offer, considering we are in the first year of it being released, isnt it?

 

[Speedster911]

^^ Well put. A launch title is by no means a solid indicator of what the console's fully capable of. This applies to ALL console manufacturers and every generation of console gaming we've seen.

 

[chromatic9]

The standards are high? How are they high when the only other current racing game to have it has had problems with fame rate issues with it. The standards would be high if it actually worked at 60fps locked, with a full grid. (strictly speaking from my GT5 experience, not from gt6. Although I dont remember reading anything different concerning GT6).

There is no game out currently that has weather besides GT, and it hasnt really even set a high standard with that. Until Forza Horizon and Drive club come out, we have no idea how its actually going to wind up. We have videos of it, but thats it.
.

PGR 4 had weather. Ferrari Challenge on PS3 had weather. There's a bunch more I won't mention.

I will agree GT5 weather is rather poor. The Time of day is well done though. GT7 is probably going to improve its weather considerably and there's also going to be Driveclub and Horizon with weather when Forza 6 releases and pcars.

 

[ImaRobot]

PGR 4 had weather. Ferrari Challenge on PS3 had weather. There's a bunch more I won't mention.

I will agree though GT5 weather is rather poor. The Time of day is well done though.

Yeah, I was trying to keep with most current games. I agree, time of day is great, and is something I liked most about the series.