Forza3 can't be compared with GT5....

[Christian_C]

Flame bait thread for one and

It won't help. If you can win race with AI having half of mile advantage, how same AI can compete with you starting at same line?

And it couldn't. In GT4 I could pass two Esprit V8 with M3 in no more than two turns. In normal game you will never reach them, Esprit V8 beats M3 in every possible way.

GT4 was a total mess, no physics, no AI, random cars in events and so on. GT5P made half way between GT4 and simulator. Due to last interview PD is working hard to clean the rest of GT4 from the game, so chances are GT5 will be great game in every aspect.

We all know your opinions of GT4 and really its getting tiresome now. GT4 wasn't a random mess it was a very good game and as you say (one of the few things I agree with) that GT5 will be a great game, but really are you honestly trying to compare you driving a car in the game against the AI driving a car? It just doesn't work and its not just GT either, In Forza which you really do adore and claim its the best sim around has the same problems I can out do cars such as a Mitsubishi Evo 8 MR in my Renault Clio 197 STOCK. So don't go saying about how its just a problem with GT because it isn't not even slightly.

 

[Famine]

It won't help. If you can win race with AI having half of mile advantage, how same AI can compete with you starting at same line?

Helps if you pick a car at, or slightly below, the same standard.

And it couldn't. In GT4 I could pass two Esprit V8 with M3 in no more than two turns. In normal game you will never reach them, Esprit V8 beats M3 in every possible way.

Top Gear Test Track (designed by Lotus)
49. BMW M3 Sedan (E90) 1:25.3
77. BMW M3 CSL (E46) 1:28.0 (very wet)
104. BMW M3 (E46) 1:31.8
110. Lotus Esprit V8 1:32.5

Hockenheimring (shortened)
80. BMW M3 Sedan (E90) 1:15.2
83. Lotus Esprit Sport 350 1:15.3
113. BMW M3 (E46) 1:16.3
132. Lotus Esprit V8 1:16.9

Reality says "no".

GT4 was a total mess, no physics, no AI, random cars in events and so on.

Again with the "no physics". You throw away the entire physics model because of an understeer bias and slightly squiffy low-speed tyre dynamics - you who refuses to accept that weight transfer can be felt and indeed occurs in normal road use (did you try that simple demonstration yet? I bet you didn't).

If you're going to declare all games with less than 100% faithful physics (and I dispute, given the above, your ability to assess that) as having "no physics", then no game yet made has any physics.


Still a little vague on how any of that applies to FM3 but there you go.

 

[RX-7_FD3S]

I think both game have different direction, PD trying to make the perfect looking game when T10 is trying to make the perfect driving game. I'm very stressed by GT5 lacks of tracks actually and I have to say T10 did an awesome jobs on the new tracks, where I'm fed up of GT tracks. Dont get me wrong I love Fuji speedway and Monaco but that's nearly the only original tracks I like and in the list of the GT5 tracks you'll have to take off Dirt/snow tracks and nascar tracks. I was really hoping PD would put also some of the tracks from D1GP since they sponsoring the event.

Now I dont really car which will be the best because I'll enjoy both.

 

[Biggles]

I'm not sure what PD has been working at for the last 5 years - perhaps modelling those 1,000 cars? - but it's pretty clear that Turn10 has been working consistently on improving its product & has now, unquestionably, created an all-round, first-class racing sim.

Having thrown my lot in with the Sony/PS3/PD/GT camp some time ago, mostly due to the wheel support, I'm hoping that GT5 also turns out to be a first-class racing sim. But I have my doubts, & those doubts are only re-inforced when I read the endless fanboy comments on GTPlanet that claim, with little substance to back it up, that GT is just inherently superior to Forza by some kind of divine right, regardless of any evidence to the contrary...

oh yeah, the brake lights.

 

[FyreandIce]

I'm not sure what PD has been working at for the last 5 years - perhaps modelling those 1,000 cars? - but it's pretty clear that Turn10 has been working consistently on improving its product & has now, unquestionably, created an all-round, first-class racing sim.

Having thrown my lot in with the Sony/PS3/PD/GT camp some time ago, mostly due to the wheel support, I'm hoping that GT5 also turns out to be a first-class racing sim. But I have my doubts, & those doubts are only re-inforced when I read the endless fanboy comments on GTPlanet that claim, with little substance to back it up, that GT is just inherently superior to Forza by some kind of divine right, regardless of any evidence to the contrary...

oh yeah, the brake lights.

Good post

 

[Seismica]

At the end of March next year we will see.

I believe that as long as PD don't put rubber banding in GT5 and remove the career mode like Kaz hinted once in an interview, it will turn out to be the best racing game ever made to date.

Forza is excellent i'm sure, it has always had something that PD have not had. Although the last full game GT released was GT4 in 2004, a year before Forza was released. I don't think GT5P or GTPSP come close to what a full GT game should be.

Basically, you cannot compare Forza to any GT game, unless you mean GT4 and Forza 1. That is the only close comparison between the two game developers we actually have. Forza 2 was ahead of GT4 (due to the fact it was released years later on a next gen console), but i myself enjoyed GT4 more. As to everyone else thats their opinion.

GT5 and Forza 3 should be a good comparison. That is when we actually have the two things to compare with eachother...

I feel people in this thread are comparing the Forza 3 demo with all the positives of Forza 2 added to it. I also notice that because it is a GT forum, nobody cares to mention the positives of that game because we all know them and take them for granted, but thats only because most people are disregarding the positives of Forza and only focusing on the negatives... nevermind.

To quote Jeremy Clarkson again (is this my argument trump card?):

By doing some research and giving it some thought, i've turned a fairly held conviction into one side of an intercranial debate.

The inescapable conclusion to all this is that if you have all the facts to hand, you will see there are two sides to every argument and that both sides are right. So you can only have an opinion if you do not have all the facts to hand.

 

[otago]

Top Gear Test Track (designed by Lotus)

I don't care about lame Top Gear testing and their "track", which is more like city crossroad than anything else. Lotus is lighter, has more power, much better balanced due mid engine layout. M3 has no chances.

Again with the "no physics". You throw away the entire physics model because of an understeer bias

It wasn't understeer. If you want to see some giant understeer go to Race Pro, this is understeer. In GT4 it was a kind of weird parallel sliding, which I never seen before in any other racing game. Plus stability of car wasn't affected by braking/throttling at all. Plus 95% of cars drove exactly same, FWD, RWD, front engine, rear engine - who cares? Definitely not PD.

Even PGR 4 did a much better job. Physics were simplified, but it was right in basis. Different cars drove different. AI was pretty challenging.

 

[McLaren]

I don't care about lame Top Gear testing and their "track", which is more like city crossroad than anything else. Lotus is lighter, has more power, much better balanced due mid engine layout. M3 has no chances.

I like how you just ignored the Hockenheim Ring time, then.

 

[TwentyValve]

I don't care about lame Top Gear testing and their "track", which is more like city crossroad than anything else. Lotus is lighter, has more power, much better balanced due mid engine layout. M3 has no chances.

I fail to see what an actual Lotus has to do with their help in desiging the track? I also don't think you know what he was talking about. let me explain. The engineers at Lotus helped Top Gear lay out a track at the run way to bring out specific traits in cars, like understeer, and see how they react.

As for the rest of your comments, I am going to go with "if you don't ahve anything nice to say then don't say anything at all".

Thank you and good night.

 

[otago]

The engineers at Lotus helped Top Gear lay out a track at the run way to bring out specific traits in cars.

The track has basically only one type of turns with almost same curvature connected by straights. Pretty bad job for track designer I say

 

[Eric.]

I can't believe that this non-comparison thread had allowed to become another comparison/general FM3 thread after the flamebait OP...

"Your game sucks because they got the lights wrong on one car lololol, obviously your developers don't care".

Which was an awful basis to decide the definitive sim to begin with. But when that statement is then proven wrong...

 

[Terronium-12]

The track has basically only one type of turns with almost same curvature connected by straights. Pretty bad job for track designer I say

No. Just, no.

 

[aspect8]

I can't believe that this non-comparison thread had allowed to become another comparison/general FM3 thread after the flamebait OP...

I can't believe that after morphing into another Forza vs GT thread, it then turned into a Top Gear credibility debate! Just like every other thread! It's like these debates are on rails... in circles... or perhaps a downward spiral.

 

[ItsHim]

The track has basically only one type of turns with almost same curvature connected by straights. Pretty bad job for track designer I say

Well just take a look for yourself then:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Top_Gear_test_track_map.svg

I won't say the TopGear test track is the quintessence in car performance testing, but as you can see it offers a nice challenge.

btw, if you connect all the apexes counter-clock wise, it spells out a very rude word. So don't do this, please 💡

 

[otago]

Well just take a look for yourself then:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Top_Gear_test_track_map.svg

I won't say the TopGear test track is the quintessence in car performance testing, but as you can see it offers a nice challenge.

btw, if you connect all the apexes counter-clock wise, it spells out a very rude word. So don't do this, please 💡

Piece of advice: look at Nurburgring lap times and compare them to Top Gear times. Just to understand what an enormous 🤬 TG lap times and car's order are. LOL

 

[Terronium-12]

Piece of advice: look at Nurburgring lap times and compare them to Top Gear times. Just to understand what an enormous bull**** TG lap times and car's order are. LOL

Did you just compare an F1 track to a power track?

This off topic dribble should end now.

 

[otago]

Helps if you pick a car at, or slightly below, the same standard.

Slightly? Well, if AI drove 1.5 times more powerful car it could do around same lap times.

But it's not races again cause AI will be faster on straight and slower in turns. So you fell behind on straights and catching up like rocket in turns. Good races means you fight same car bumper to bumper for a whole lap, which wasn't the case in GT4

Licenses were different. Maybe cars in licenses were driven by scripts, not AI. Or maybe PD made special AI adjustment in this case

 

[McLaren]

Piece of advice: look at Nurburgring lap times and compare them to Top Gear times. Just to understand what an enormous bull**** TG lap times and car's order are. LOL

This explains everything. You seem to be just another person who relies solely on 'Ring times....

 

[otago]

This explains everything. You seem to be just another person who relies solely on 'Ring times....

Veyron is faster than Maserati MC12? SL65 AMG Black Series is faster than Koenigsegg CC8S? 370Z is faster than Cayman S?

What are you talking about? This is just laughable

 

[McLaren]

Veyron is faster than Maserati MC12? SL65 AMG Black Series is faster than Koenigsegg CC8S? 370Z is faster than Cayman S?

What are you talking about? This is just laughable

The Cayman S & 370Z are extremely equal in lap times. There isn't 1 track where the cars have been over a second apart from each other besides Anglesey National.

What's so hard to believe about a 661Bhp track-tuned car beating a 665Bhp car that's showed its age next to its CCX brother?

The only thing laughable here is you. You've never driven any of these cars, so who are you to say a Veyron can't beat a MC12, or a 370Z isn't faster than a Cayman S (when track times say they're equal as day & night)? The MC12 may be a very track-oriented car, but it's not like the Veyron is some kind of slouch.

 

[killanite]

The only thing laughable here is you.

I 2nd that motion. otago, the nurburgring, while a good indication of car performance isn't as accurate as most power circuits for the fact that it is very long and a perfect lap in a car is near impossible (also the track is rarely always under the same conditions (wet/dry) across the whole 12 miles) thats why tracks like the top gear test tracks are better indications of a cars performance, especially since top gear use an independant driver while some nurburgring laps are run with different drivers.

 

[Crispy74]

Yet another thread that has degenerated into an off topic slanging match!

 

[Famine]

I don't care about lame Top Gear testing and their "track", which is more like city crossroad than anything else. Lotus is lighter, has more power, much better balanced due mid engine layout. M3 has no chances.

Except in all places where they have recorded lap times, when the M3 beats the Esprit V8. Got it.

It wasn't understeer.

Yes it was.

Plus stability of car wasn't affected by braking/throttling at all.

Unless you had all the aids on, yes it was.

Plus 95% of cars drove exactly same, FWD, RWD, front engine, rear engine - who cares?

Driven every car in every GT game have you? I know I have, and I can say without fear of contradiction that no, they don't.


All this misses the point I made (but you do like to dodge points so you can use yet another easily disproven argument). You say GT4 has "no physics" simply because it doesn't completely faithfully represent reality - which it doesn't. By that argument every game ever made has "no physics".

In fact GT4 has very good physics, with one or two flaws. The same is true of most games - GT3 (screwy tyre grip), GT2 (extreme oversteer bias), FM2 (oversteer bias), FM1 (extreme oversteer bias) - it's just a question of whether the flaws are flaws you can live with. Further to that, given your disbelief that weight transfer occurs in everyday driving (still no answer on the simple test I gave you) and your insistence that your cranial paper-racing is right and reality is wrong, I dispute your credentials to speak with any authority at all about the driving physics of any game.

 

[H3avyM3tal]

Famine, you know he will just say that your opinion has been noted, and ignore everything else. I think it is time he tasted some of his own medicine.

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

just played it for a bit.... Turn 10 did tried really hard to compete with PD.... but they failed at some really minor details from what I noticed... yes, they have reverse lights....BUT... they can't even get the California's brake light to light up correctly... if I'm ferrari, I wouldn't be too happy about it. it looks like they just rushed it and forgot to look at the details.

what I think of Forza so far is that its a fun game, but the developer definitely didn't put the heart into the game, but rather made it to please the community.

They did what you people ask for... especially in terms of car selection, one or two cars from the entire model to represent the line up. ie One single R33 GTR to represent the entire R33 Skyline line up... etc I could list a lot more examples. I want choice, not being forced into what they think its best.

I can't say i'm disappointed in the car selection in F3, what I don't like is that they base the cars from a certain region only. I mean, they have the Euro Civic Type R, but not the JDM FD2 Civic Type R. or not to mention there are no R35 GTR in the car list (could be because the car is co-developed with PD) From what I noticed, PD seems to respect auto manufacturer a lot more compare with any other racing games out there. especially in terms of authenticity. Every car in GT5 have the original model designation logo as the license plate. like the one manufacturer put on during car shows.

Car tuning in this game again its still a step up over GT series especially with the exterior customization. This alone would allow me to spend the most time into it. Especially when I can show off my customized ride online its something I really like about Forza. I loved it when in Forza 2, i used a stock 300HP STI with real world tuning philosophy and kicked everyone's ass in the Class B range and people kept wondering why their 450HP turbo upgraded EVO wasn't able to keep up.

I'm definitely looking forward to this game in the next couple of days, its still a fun game and it will be a good choice to ease the pain of waiting for GT5 until next march. But as a GT5 competitor, its far from it.

As mentioned this is a flame bait thread with no proof that the OP even played F3.

Overall sounds like your only main complaint is graphics. Again comparing graphics from a 2 year build game to a 5 year build game. I will take gameplay over graphics anyday and for a 2 year build Forza 3 looks very good. Imagine what it would look like with 5 years of development.

Forza 3 doesnt need a huge car list because we can make any car we want. So 400 cars will easily turn into thousands and thousands of cars of any variety you can think of. Forza 3 allows users to swap engines, drive trains, and paint the car any way you want. Thats why there are separate Skylines and Evos with different paint jobs. Because GT does not have a livery editor.
GT has so many cars because it doesnt allow the modifications that Forza 3 has. You can turn a FWD car into an AWD car if necessary.

Forza 3 is pretty much the hybrid game that GT5 should have been. Remember how people were using hybrids to make all the cars in GT3? Well thats pretty much what the entire Forza series has been like.

GT still does not even have a proper tire wear indicator and does not even leave tire marks on the track at all. Forza nailed both of those in the first game.

Turn 10 listened to the community and gave us all the content and features instead of wasting 5 years on just graphics. I will take all the features and gameplay over graphics any day.

 

[TwentyValve]

Forza 3 doesnt need a huge car list because we can make any car we want. So 400 cars will easily turn into thousands and thousands of cars of any variety you can think of. Forza 3 allows users to swap engines, drive trains, and paint the car any way you want.

So you are saying I can start with a SL Black edition and make it into a Sauber C9? Or start with a RX-8 and make it into a 787B?

I know you can't but it just goes to show you need to watch how you word things. You can however paint the cars and "make" any livery for them you want. For instance, you can have a RX-8 and make the Charge livery for it to look like the mighty 787B.

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

You are exaggerating and thats understandable. But what you dont realize is we can swap in entire crate engines from different cars, make FWD cars into AWD cars, AWD into RWD and many more options. So yes there are a LOT of cars that can be created and thats not just using the liveries. Full drive train swaps like the hybrids in GT3. So the car list might say 400 but there are MANY more cars in the game than that by a longshot. What you get in GT is what you get and thats why they have to create so many more cars and so many of the same type.

 

[Joey D]

The title of this thread is right, Forza 3 can't be compared with GT5 for the sole fact GT5 isn't out yet. You can't compare what doesn't exist yet.

And is it really necessary to have yet another Forza vs. GT thread? It'll probably just result it horrific fanboyism, childish name calling, and circular arguments.

 

[Jay]

As mentioned this is a flame bait thread

So why are you taking the bait then and dropping to the same level?

Again comparing graphics from a 2 year build game to a 5 year build game.

Then compare FM3's graphics to GT HD (premium) graphics, which was released in 2006 (2 years).

Because GT does not have a livery editor.
GT has so many cars because it doesnt allow the modifications that Forza 3 has. You can turn a FWD car into an AWD car if necessary.

You don't have a clue what GT5 has (neither do I) so how can you say this? You can say in past GT games, but this thread isn't about past GT games, it's about FM3 vs GT5 which I think is a silly dead end because we only know a lot about one of the games.

Forza 3 is pretty much the hybrid game that GT5 should have been.

That GT5 should have been? It's 5-6 months from release!? How can you speak about GT5 in past tense?

GT still does not even have a proper tire wear indicator and does not even leave tire marks on the track at all.

As already stated we don't know what GT5 has got.

Turn 10 listened to the community and gave us all the content and features instead of wasting 5 years on just graphics. I will take all the features and gameplay over graphics any day.

You really think thats all PD have been doing for 5 years, your assumption is just graphics? Even though within 2 years we already had a demo version that was close in graphics level (GT HD premium).

The title of this thread is right, Forza 3 can't be compared with GT5 for the sole fact GT5 isn't out yet. You can't compare what doesn't exist yet.

And is it really necessary to have yet another Forza vs. GT thread? It'll probably just result it horrific fanboyism, childish name calling, and circular arguments.

Exactly, I agree. Everytime one of these threads get closed due to endless back and forth rants and name calling another pops right up to start again

 

[Krayzeebyker]

Hello guys,

My first post here!

I have been reading forums all over the net for some years now regarding GT5 and its possible peers, but currently it is most compared with Forza 3.

I feel the time has come to express some of my views on the subject, as I don't see them ever all mentioned elsewhere in the same place for all to see.

Let me start by saying, I have spent many, many happy hours playing with GT, GT2,3,4, & 5 and Forza 1,2 and many other racers(seen a lot of Forza 3 & GT5 online).

Firstly, IMO both games look great, and are certainly a credit to their makers. however Gran Turismo has always been, and continues to be, at the forefront for the photo-realism of their gaming experience.

Small differences though they may have between them, of the two(GT5 & Forza 3), GT5 always seems to win blind tests in terms of realism quality, whether because of its more muted colour spectrum, or because of its superior shadowing/lighting.

There are certainly some features that Forza has which GT would benefit from, not least the ability to swap engines on certain cars, and visual mods, also the fact that changes in displacement/power etc are more accurately reflected on the vehicles data sheet after modifying/upgrading/tuning takes place.

On the whole however, GT5 seems to have the greater and/or superior feature set; more impressive gfx, comparable soundtrack, stock handling realism, physics (something like 27 calculations per second for handling alone) , tuning, car models...Nascar, WRC, 24 Hour...the list goes on...

The most lacking features in the GT series so far(in comparison to Xbox-based competition), have been in online functionality and damage modelling, mainly for these reasons.
1)Prologue is, exactly that, a 'prologue' or 'preview' or, in more common terms, a work-in-progress demo.
2)GT4 was based on PS2, with that hardware seriously lacking in terms of online feasibility and ability to handle complex damage systems at high detail when compared to Xbox/360 hardware.
3)Xbox360 has had several current-gen racing games with successful xbox-live-based online gameplay already, essentially meaning that Forza is treading known ground when it comes to online, whereas GT is having to build its online interface/features practically from scratch.

In theory, on paper, the PS3 is the superior hardware, and extensive experience of PC gaming & working in IT, has taught me that although the GPU in the 360 is capable of slightly newer graphical effects (like elements of DirectX 10 support), the hardware capabilities of the PS3 are extensive enough to allow it to compensate in solely DirectX9, with such great effect, that it can easily surpass the finite graphical potential of the Xbox360.

What this means is that Forza has to wait until the next gen of Xbox until it can make things look significantly better in-game!

Let us not also forget, the creator and team behind Gran Turismo are one of the most respected not only in the Racing-game world, but also when it comes to the respect they hold within the car industry. With them also having designed the central console information display interface on the real-life R34 Nissan Skyline GTR, hence the slight resemblances to GT dials.

All in all, I love both games, but in terms of what I know of the graphics and physics representations in each, the following must be considered as facts; Gran Turismo is the game with the best hardware behind it, made by the better team, with the best looking visuals to date, with things still set to improve. (as frankly the current state of damage modelling is a bit half-done to say the least. )

For those that doubt my image quality debate, by all means, go out and grab Forza 3, I'm sure you'll enjoy it, but also be sure to google GT5 Koenigsegg.

What you will see is the level of detail that Polyphony Digital specify, and aim to retain in their car models for GT5, and is likely closer to what we'll actually see in GT6 (even if only in time-trial mode!). And in my well-exposed opinion, it looks simply almost real!

I am sure you will agree that it looks better than ANYTHING else out there right now.

Also, there are a few uber-short clips of GT5 Nurburgring floating around on youtube, and I'd be willing to bet they exceed what Forza 3 can bring to the table.

The info is all out there, search it for yourselves and see!

This is like my hate for Ipod/Iphone/Mac buyers that only buy for image rather than functionality.......and the fact that some consoles come with all the gadgets and have free online gaming, whereas others come with next to nothing built in, and charge fee's for access to their online features.......nuff said!!

I'll stop boring you all to death now,

Thank you and good night! Lol.

...Krayzeebyker...