Forza Motorsport 3

[TBR 427]

Well, I can't see any point playing GTR2/GTR Evo if I had Forza. It's like playing Tomb Rider instead Uncharted. LOL

The one facepalm picture I have that would adequately describe your failure is so large it would probably break GTPlanet, at at the very least piss off everyone ITT by being 5000x5000 and about 40mb.

I mean seriously, fanboy much?

Personally I like a slightly exaggerated FOV (maybe 85ish degrees) and a seat position that lets me see the cars gauges, and hopefully the mirrors (though that depends on the car). This is with my 24" monitor sitting about a 6" to a foot behind my G25.

Hence why console games need to learn from PC sims and actually get some adjustability in their FOV and seat position settings.

Just wondering, what cars do you use the most, and are you a fan of the realistic seat positions?

 

[otago]

The one facepalm picture I have that would adequately describe your failure is so large it would probably break GTPlanet, at at the very least piss off everyone ITT by being 5000x5000 and about 40mb.

I mean seriously, fanboy much?

Yeah, dude. I already played GP2 in 1995 with racing wheel and it wasn't begining of my PC gaming career.

You can tell somebody else about PC gaming and PC simulators. PC gaming is dead. Modern PC simulators are cheap budget games. Claims like "sister of this developer is married with former FIA GT racer, that's why this is the most realistic simulator on Earth" means nothing for me

 

[TBR 427]

You can tell somebody else about PC gaming and PC simulators. PC gaming is dead.

You almost had me, but then you said that. LOL

Anyway, what are the odds of the R15 making it into F3 for launch? Or is it going to be DLC?

 

[Eric.]

you CAN make it round the outside of that corner. You CAN stick 2 wheels on the grass and make it through the inside.

Keep racing on proper versions of the ring and you'll get it.

Yeah, passing on grass is realistic. Can you find me some 'Ring footage of race cars making passes by purposely edging into the grass?

 

[aspect8]

The most common result whenI touch the grass on Nurburgring:

Regarding R15: Full car list is supposed to be released some time later today. In the mean time, most definitive list (see what I did there?) is here.

 

[McLaren]

According to the Tx State Fair Website, there will be 4 arcade setups of FM3 available.

FORZA MOTORSPORT 3 isn't out until Nov. Be first to play the game! Stop by the Forza tent + its four arcade-style racing simulators. Play the game & receive cool giveaways. In East Park Plaza, FREE with Fair admission 10/7 - 10/18.

Anything anyone want me to try and find out if possible?

 

[myke6699]

That looked AWESOME. Everything I have seen so far of the ring in FM3 looks night and day better than the FM2's build.

I seriously can't see much difference except for texture improvement on the road and the perhaps the colour. The track still have that airport hangar sheen and seems to leveled and it's still the same almost treeless landscape.



SHIFT on the other hand is brilliant when it comes to depicting real world track. Comparison between the real Road America and fromt the game. FM2 version of this track suffers from the same fate as Suzuka in that it misses a few critical elevation changes(both ascend and descend) and some section seems streched out. Hopefully, it's much different in FM3.

 

[aspect8]

Anything anyone want me to try and find out if possible?

How about you find out if it's possible to steal 2 of the booths. Then I want you to find out how much it would cost to ship one of them to Australia. That is all.

 

[otago]

SHIFT on the other hand is brilliant when it comes to depicting real world track.

I know Turn10 measured every track with sub foot precision modern GPS, including all important objects near the road.

Haven't heard anything about Shift devs measured something. Considering Race Pro tracks are completely off anything real, I won't trust them too much

This is the whole point about Forza, I know how everything were made, how tire physics works, etc. And I don't know anything about the most of other racing games except claims how realistic they are. I don't trust claims

 

[dzidza]

I know Turn10 measured every track with sub foot precision modern GPS, including all important objects near the road.

Haven't heard anything about Shift devs measured something. Considering Race Pro tracks are completely off anything real, I won't trust them too much

This is the whole point about Forza, I know how everything were made, how tire physics works, etc. And I don't know anything about the most of other racing games except claims how realistic they are. I don't trust claims

Then how do you explain inaccuracies in the Ring, if they sub foot modern precision GPS meassured the track, their GPS must be a bit wide.

 

[myke6699]

I know Turn10 measured every track with sub foot precision modern GPS, including all important objects near the road.

Haven't heard anything about Shift devs measured something. Considering Race Pro tracks are completely off anything real, I won't trust them too much

This is the whole point about Forza, I know how everything were made, how tire physics works, etc. And I don't know anything about the most of other racing games except claims how realistic they are. I don't trust claims

That foot must be that of a Sasquatch

And since you know the inside out of Forza, can you explain to me why despite the 360Hz physics and all the claim to accuracy, my times in Forza 2 (and more than likely Forza 3 as well) is always so much faster than RL records. eg. At Road America, in a stock 911 turbo I can easily reach sub 2:10 (all assists off and MS wheel). In RL that would be the territory of GT2 class cars. SHIFT with all its physics compromises (but great FFB especially with the G25 cranked to 10), driving a stock 911 GT2, I have a hard time breaking 2:20 and with the GT2 class 911 GT3 RSR, I'm hovering above 2:10, which is more in line with reality (FYI- at this year ALMS at RA, the fastest GT2 class car clocked 2:06). And yes, part of a racing sim is that the timing should simulate as close possible to real life. And if a game fail to do so, it's missing quite an important component in the simulation.

 

[Chronos]

I know Turn10 measured every track with sub foot precision modern GPS, including all important objects near the road.

Haven't heard anything about Shift devs measured something. Considering Race Pro tracks are completely off anything real, I won't trust them too much

This is the whole point about Forza, I know how everything were made, how tire physics works, etc. And I don't know anything about the most of other racing games except claims how realistic they are. I don't trust claims

Whatever T10 say they do its not worked out at Suzuka. Can you not see how flat Forza is to the real track?

You seem to take a leap of faith when it comes to Forza and the stuff they say. All your comments about other games are making sense now. Just like listening to a religious fanatic.

 

[FyreandIce]

According to the Tx State Fair Website, there will be 4 arcade setups of FM3 available.

Anything anyone want me to try and find out if possible?

See if the sub par in game LOD has been fixed for the build running (more specifically are interiors visable from the outside in gameplay) and do replays use the high LOD that pulls upto the grid.

As for this talk on inaccurate tracks.

That stems from an FOV issue.

From what I have seen in the demo being in car gives a realistic FOV but any other view warps in (and increases sense of speed to boot)

 

[killanite]

I know Turn10 measured every track with sub foot precision modern GPS, including all important objects near the road.

Haven't heard anything about Shift devs measured something. Considering Race Pro tracks are completely off anything real, I won't trust them too much

This is the whole point about Forza, I know how everything were made, how tire physics works, etc. And I don't know anything about the most of other racing games except claims how realistic they are. I don't trust claims

I think you should read this

http://www.seight.com/ring-sims.html

 

[TBR 427]

Yeah, passing on grass is realistic. Can you find me some 'Ring footage of race cars making passes by purposely edging into the grass?

Check out the N'ring 24 hour race footage (not just the highlights). Of course most of the overtaking is between cars of different classes, but when there's two cars fighting for position, you'll see some sticking two wheels up and over the ripple strips (heck, that Audi R8 (red/silver one) was often sticking two on the grass anyway).

Remember, these are GT cars (heck, some of them are just touring cars). Unlike F1 cars, they do not explode into a million bits of carbon fiber when one or more wheels leaves the bitumen.

Also, LOL@otago

 

[Chronos]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/free-legends-dlc-at-forza-3-launch

Microsoft will give all buyers of Forza Motorsport 3 a coupon to download a batch of free DLC from 27th October.

That will be the Motorsports Legends Car Pack, which includes 10 classic cars and two new maps.

Those sporty stallions are the '65 Alfa Romeo Giulia Sprint GTA, '64 Aston Martin DB5 Vantage, '81 BMW M1, '60 Chevrolet Corvette, '69 Dodge Charger, '57 Ferrari 250 Testa Rossa, '80 Fiat 131 Abarth, '67 Lamborghini Miura P400, '71 Nissan Skyline 2000 GT-R and '65 Shelby Cobra Daytona Coupe.

The duo of maps accompanying them are the Benchmark High Speed Ring - a converted airfield and hangar (an "automotive playground") - and the Sidewinder Proving Grounds.

Turn 10 also released the full, 400-strong list cars and full, 100-strong list of tracks appearing in Forza Motorsport 3. Or at least the developer said it did - we can't find it on the official website, which is where we were told to look.

http://gamerscoreblog.com/press/archive/2009/10/07/yui786.aspx

Additionally, the Motorsports Legends Car Pack gives players another great reason to be excited about picking up “Forza Motorsport 3” on launch day, delivering 10 classic race cars and roadsters, on top of two extra tracks: the brand new Benchmark High Speed Ring and the returning circuit Sidewinder Proving Grounds. On Oct. 27, this pack will be exclusively available via a one-time-use token card included in every new copy of “Forza Motorsport 3.”



The Benchmark High Speed Ring is best described as an old airfield and hangar converted into a race track and automotive playground, perfect for all manner of creative “Forza Motorsport” hoonage and multiplayer mayhem. The track is characterized by 3.96 miles of rough surfaces and huge open areas, featuring a massive oval, an 8-lane drag strip, and an airplane hangar that players can drive (or drift) through.



The free Motorsports Legends Car Pack includes these 10 cars hand picked by Turn 10:

· ’65 Alfa Romeo Giulia Sprint GTA

· ’64 Aston Martin DB5 Vantage

· ’81 BMW M1

· ’60 Chevrolet Corvette

· ’69 Dodge Charger

· ’57 Ferrari 250 Testa Rossa

· ’80 Fiat 131 Abarth

· ’67 Lamborghini Miura P400

· ’71 Nissan Skyline 2000 GT-R

· ’65 Shelby Cobra Daytona Coupe

 

[kamkor]

myke6699 in reply to otago:

TAnd since you know the inside out of Forza, can you explain to me why despite the 360Hz physics and all the claim to accuracy, my times in Forza 2 (and more than likely Forza 3 as well) is always so much faster than RL records. eg. At Road America, in a stock 911 turbo I can easily reach sub 2:10 (all assists off and MS wheel). In RL that would be the territory of GT2 class cars. SHIFT with all its physics compromises (but great FFB especially with the G25 cranked to 10), driving a stock 911 GT2, I have a hard time breaking 2:20 and with the GT2 class 911 GT3 RSR, I'm hovering above 2:10, which is more in line with reality (FYI- at this year ALMS at RA, the fastest GT2 class car clocked 2:06). And yes, part of a racing sim is that the timing should simulate as close possible to real life. And if a game fail to do so, it's missing quite an important component in the simulation.

And what's best rating of physics according to you? Is really timing that important? What if developers lenghten the straights a bit so that you don't notice, but so that they can get more realistic times etc. ?

1) The feel of the car you get.
2) The times.
3) The difficulty.
4) What developers say.

I noticed this trend of people rating physics according to either their imagination (how they imagine that real car behaves), difficulty ("the harder the better"), the times, and by pure belief to what developers say. I think the very main rating should be the feel from game, compared to the feel from real life experience - expected car reactions, car behaviour etc.

As far as tracks are concerned I think driving on a real thing is needed to properly judge them, but based on someone's videos from this thread it indeed seems that Suzuka looks too flat.

 

[Chronos]

So about the Legends Car Pack.

If I change or format the HDD or need to replace the 360 in the future, can I download it again?

 

[Joey D]

So about the Legends Car Pack.

If I change or format the HDD or need to replace the 360 in the future, can I download it again?

I would imagine you could download it again, since it should show you already paid for it through XBL.

And I'm floored we get free DLC, that's something I would never expect from any developer.

 

[TBR 427]

myke6699 in reply to otago:



And what's best rating of physics according to you? Is really timing that important? What if developers lenghten the straights a bit so that you don't notice, but so that they can get more realistic times etc. ?

1) The feel of the car you get.
2) The times.
3) The difficulty.
4) What developers say.

I noticed this trend of people rating physics according to either their imagination (how they imagine that real car behaves), difficulty ("the harder the better"), the times, and by pure belief to what developers say. I think the very main rating should be the feel from game, compared to the feel from real life experience - expected car reactions, car behaviour etc.

As far as tracks are concerned I think driving on a real thing is needed to properly judge them, but based on someone's videos from this thread it indeed seems that Suzuka looks too flat.

Video comparisons have made checking the 'realism' of games like Forza much, much easier.

Firstly, track accuracy:
Is a track super-smooth in-game, while the real thing is rough as guts?
Is it the right length? We can easily find out what length the track is IRL, and you can figure out how long it is in-game (to a reasonable degree) by driving along at a set speed and timing a lap.
Is it the right shape; are the corners in the right places, are the elevation changes done accurately? Are the braking markers there?
Is the track the right width?

Secondly, car performance. If the tracks fail in any way (see above), there's probably little point even going this far.
Does the car accelerate at a realistic rate?
Is the sop speed correct?
Is the car the right size/shape? If not, then the wheels won't be where they're supposed to be, will they?
Does the car drive like it does in the videos and in the reviews?
Are the lap times close to the real thing (with as many variables taken into account)?

TBH, once a game has ALL those things down, then any lack of realism is going to be negligible.

Beyond that, there's going to be flaws in any other means. A car will only 'feel' right if that's what you expect it to feel like, regardless of whether you've a) driven the car, or b)haven't.
Lap times are a reasonably good benchmark, because, all other things being equal, it's the least opinion-based.
Difficulty is just like feel; and many people are ignorant of the levels of difficulty. ie in GT5P the GTR is relatively well-behaved, it doesn't exactly wallow over the place, nor does it have power-down issues (at all). Heck, I'll even say it holds itself better and more stably into, through and out of corners than the Corvette. While people may claim it is therefore a less difficult car to drive, apply the pressure and it's every bit as difficult to nail perfect lap times as the Corvette is. Of course, if you screw up, the result isn't always as bad, but that's not the point.

What developers say regarding realism generally isn't to be trusted. It is to be tested.
For example, this:
http://forums.forzamotorsport.net/forums/1/1065747/ShowThread.aspx
brought to light some of the compromises to the accuracy that I doubt many F2 players wouldn't have known.

 

[G.T.Ace]

I would imagine you could download it again, since it should show you already paid for it through XBL.

And I'm floored we get free DLC, that's something I would never expect from any developer.

Burnout Paradise?
Its cool though, i guess they wanted to put these cars in the game from the beginning but couldnt finish them. Some nice cars in the list for sure.

 

[Lucas]

Yeah, passing on grass is realistic. Can you find me some 'Ring footage of race cars making passes by purposely edging into the grass?

The 1957 German Grand Prix was a Formula One race held on 4 August 1957 at Nürburgring. The 22 lap race was won by Juan Manuel Fangio, and is often cited as one of the greatest victories in racing history.

-------

Over the next 10 laps, Fangio broke and rebroke the lap record 9 times (7 of the records were in successive laps). Early in the 21st lap, Fangio was beside Collins on a straightaway, approaching a bridge that was barely wide enough for both cars to fit side by side. Collins backed off, and Fangio took 2nd place. Late in the 21st lap, during a left corner, Fangio cut past Hawthorn on the inside of the corner, with only his right tires on the track and his left tires on the grass. Fangio maintained his lead, and won the race.



Source: Wikipedia.

So no, it isn't unrealistic.

 

[TBR 427]

So no, it isn't unrealistic.

Not only is it possible IRL, it was possible (and it was done) in ye olde F1 cars.

I would love to see that race in modern-day coverage quality (as in the quality of picture and audio, the camera placements, etc of a 2009 F1 race).

 

[kamkor]

TBR 427:

I respect your opinion ofcourse, but I will have to disagree mostly (you have valid points imo, but they are just not about that much important aspect of simulation to me), as it seems simulation means something different to you and me.

I will just try to explain my point of view a little bit better.

Take live for speed as an example, it's much superior to ISI engine games (RFactor, GTRs etc), GT5P or Shift. And it (lfs) mostly has fantasy cars and only virtual tracks. The point is that car behaviour beyond simple under or oversteer is right. Take rFactor as an example, it's totally wrong when you go over the limit. Or GT5P, which slow speed physics suck, it is too snappy, and during latter part of drift things are wrong as well. Or shift in which things are just plain wrong quite often.

I'm not talking about car accelerating 100% the same as real car in terms of seconds or doing very close laptime, or having perfectly similar top speed to real car. I'm talking about general driving physics behind it all. That's the core of simulation to me. And it cannot be judged by videos or laptimes (imo).

 

[TBR 427]

TBR 427:

I respect your opinion ofcourse, but I will have to disagree mostly (you have valid points imo, but they are just not about that much important aspect of simulation to me), as it seems simulation means something different to you and me.

I will just try to explain my point of view a little bit better.

Take live for speed as an example, it's much superior to ISI engine games (RFactor, GTRs etc), GT5P or Shift. And it (lfs) mostly has fantasy cars and only virtual tracks. The point is that car behaviour beyond simple under or oversteer is right. Take rFactor as an example, it's totally wrong when you go over the limit. Or GT5P, which slow speed physics suck, it is too snappy, and during latter part of drift things are wrong as well. Or shift in which things are just plain wrong quite often.

I'm not talking about car accelerating 100% the same as real car in terms of seconds or doing very close laptime, or having perfectly similar top speed to real car. I'm talking about general driving physics behind it all. That's the core of simulation to me. And it cannot be judged by videos or laptimes (imo).

Those nuances in the Physics should be reflected in the videos and laptimes.

As I said, it's a case of eliminating those variables to find out if it's accurate or not. Because those accuracies (or inaccuracies) WILL eventually show up in on-limit (and over-the-limit) driving, and videos, and laptimes thereof.

Building a physics engine to get one car to nail one track in one time is easy, because you can play with it until you get what you want, which just happens to be a realistic time over one large piece of track.

But now we're dealing with 400 (or even 1000) cars, and they all have to nail not just that one track, but individual braking points and corner speeds, on all tracks. This demands a far more encompassing engine, which while naturally imperfect (anything less than the 2TB simulators that Volvo uses for virtual crash testing frankly hasn't got a chance), should have most things down to 95%-odd percent.

Of course this just comes down to "who has the most 'important' variables", because if you build your physics engine around them, every aspect will be improved and shown on every level, from the feel to the laptimes. Everything has an effect, and every effect is quantifiable.

(tl;dr what you said about the feel of the cars directly correlates to the overall statistics of the cars that I said, as both are just the results of a limited physics engine).

 

[Chronos]

Launch trailer

[YOUTUBEhd]uKWYPgfK_a8[/YOUTUBEhd]

 

[Nigo]

It's automatically added to driving games when you use the pad due to the inherent problems with driving with a gamepad. If it was full one to one motion cars would be virtually impossible to drive in a true sim.

it's not impossible, I tried on PC sims. Of course it's much harder and the car "giggles about" (is that english?) unrealistically dues to the harsh movements on the wheel

some assistance is needed to make realistic movements. Too much assistance spoils the fun and it's the case with this demo

Well, I can't see any point playing GTR2/GTR Evo if I had Forza. It's like playing Tomb Rider instead Uncharted. LOL

actually, I'm not a GTR fan, but that's a very stupid thing to say. GTR's are racing and online oriented sim. Forza is MOSTLY a road-car and offline racing game

Take live for speed as an example, it's much superior to ISI engine games (RFactor, GTRs etc)

I read the articles that say it SHOULD be so superior. It may technically be. The fact is, it's just not more realistic than ISI games, and it's the same with Netkar Pro

Take rFactor as an example, it's totally wrong when you go over the limit

... compared to what ?!? I disagree here, rFactor is about the best over the limit (possibly with iRacing) and yes, and it's the only "drifting sim" to date I know. LFS is used for drifting because it's waaaayyyy too easy over the limit, which should have been an inspiration for Forza 2

I'm talking about general driving physics behind it all. That's the core of simulation to me

so do I. And not being able to do a donut is a such a bad start that GT5P is off topic for me, while Shift was not designed as a sim at all (though I think it has an interesting gameplay for a console game)

 

[kamkor]

TBR 427: Well yes, I can't disagree with you. But still, I will rather have not very accurate laptime, but accurate car behaviour, than accurate lap time, but not accurate car behaviour in its core.

HOVEWER . Ofcourse it will be best if we get accurate car behaviour and proper lap times.

... compared to what ?!? I disagree here, rFactor is about the best over the limit (possibly with iRacing) and yes, and it's the only "drifting sim" to date I know. LFS is used for drifting because it's waaaayyyy too easy over the limit, which should have been an inspiration for Forza 2

Well. Compared to real life. Live for speed, Enthusia and Forza 2/3 are the only games representing drifting feel properly. It's still not the same, but the feel is there. Right behind is GT5P, which minus is the overdid snapyness and bugs that are mostly felt on lower speeds. But it's still a very big improvement over gt4.

Where do you get your idea of rfactor drifting being realistic? I have spend 2007 and beginning of 2008 filming many drifting events. Drifted on 3-4 drift practices with e34 535 in 2007, drove 2 small laps in proffesional s14a, and drifted 2008/2009 season in e30 325i, competing in three 2-day drift competitions and few single day practices. After all this driving, I can't see rfactor physics over limit being realistic. I'm using g25 on pc with 900 degrees.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS5RlPHitYU more vids on my channel.

 

[Bogie 19th]

Yes, the 'Ring is looking better, but was I the only one who though the GT3's wheel animation looked ghastly?

Yeah, that needed work. Ugh.

SHIFT on the other hand is brilliant when it comes to depicting real world track. Comparison between the real Road America and fromt the game.

I was at Road America in July, and had my car out on the track. It's actually pretty darn accurate in FM2.

actually, I'm not a GTR fan, but that's a very stupid thing to say. GTR's are racing and online oriented sim. Forza is MOSTLY a road-car and offline racing game

Forza is mostly an ONLINE game, and has been since FM2 was out. The entire game is focused around online racing/sharing/auctionhouse and community.

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

Surprise! I am not into Nascar but I was pretty shocked to see these stock cars in Forza 3. Now we can easily make any Nascar type we want. In GT5 you will be limited to the existing cars in the game. In Forza 3 we will have unlimited.