Forza3 Definitive Trailer: AKA Why we are better than GT5 w Pro Racer Testimonials.

[amar212]

Satan, you have one great problem:

You can't look things on a broader scale.

Enjoy your life, one day you'll grow old and hopefully be a good human who will get a job and than you'll earn enough money to buy yourself both consoles, both games, both wheels, nice 50" plasma and decent broadband internet.

After that I hope you'll have enough time to drive both games and than understand how pathetically ignorant you were back in July 2009.

Until that day, enjoy in your ignorance - having people like you on boards shows us why internet should exist and why it would be better if it never was invented in the same time

 

[Joey D]

You know you probably shouldn't stoop to his level and throw around personal insults like that, especially after Scaff's warnings.

 

[hardvibes]

wow 8 hours ago we were at page 22....now all I see is some kind of game war. I knew it would come since the first message.....even the title.
Satan you just don't belong here. If only you could accept the fact that Polyphony Digital is making a great work......but no, you just can't think outside of the box, or should I say xbox. You sound pretty confident but your arguments are not facts. You're trying in vain to prove that one game is better than another......

It's not funny anymore, I think this thread should be locked.

 

[sumbrownkid]

I wish for a day where people can enjoy the games they want to enjoy, and not be flamed or accused of being fanboys...

 

[Worst_Driver]

Can this flame war ends please ? Just play whatever game you like most and shut up. God is it that complicated ?
This thread should be locked ASAP.

 

[myke6699]

That is one of the main reasons I prefer Forza over GT.

I want a racing simulator, not a driving simulator. I do that enough in real life.

According to Dan Greenawalt (not Greenwalt), "... little things to do with cars, because that’s what our game’s about, cars, not racing so much. I think it’s going to be about you and your mates just having a good time with cars, not necessarily always finding wheel-to-wheel action racing."

Still, I do agree that Forza 2 (or even the 1st one) is much more of a racing game than any GT games to date but in particular GT5P. But I do sense that with FM3, there will a slight departure from racing: the grid count is perhaps the most obvious decision (the quote above is taken from Dan's explanation as to why he's keeping the grid at 8).
And as to SHIFT- although it lacks a few things- tire wear and pitstop- it has all the essential ingredients that FM3 has- sidewall tireflex, physics engine that will actually run 60hz faster than FM3, a proper tire modeliing:

“SHIFT is built on the most advanced physics engine we’ve made, and is by far the most advanced and realistic physics engine of any of the mainstream racing games. We’re talking about an engine that can run unlimited threads, detailed physics parameters running at around 400 Hz on consoles. Things like tire deformation based on g-forces, tire pressures, rubber thickness, which only the most diehard sim fans will notice, but we know it’s there.

We have a full realism hardcore mode called Pro that you can choose to race in from the start that will feel natural and comfortable as well as raising the bar for handling compared to anything out there (or due out soon) for all of our hardcore race sim fans.”- Ian Bell, Head of Development at Slightly Mad Studios

If you're able to get past the NFS moniker, that you'll see that the SMS, not EA is responsible for the physics engine,, the AI and the core game itself. And in the past the team (who was formerly Blimey Games) has developed other racing sims- GT Legends, GTR and GTR2. In the team you have someone like Doug Arnao who's past exploits also include GP Legends (another great sim that lack both tire wear and pitstop).

 

[blademask]

If Shift is an arcade game, then FM3 is the equivalent of PGR3.
Remember your logic about how higher Hz numbers equal better physics? Well, Shift runs 400Hz to FM3's 360Hz.

Keep going, though. I'm loving how your logic is ignoring what only proves your hypocrisy.

Shift also has Tire Flexing & Better graphics.


Satan, F3's cars are so high polygon yet, not accurate at all. After the insults hurled my way from you, well... this is the last thing im saying to you.

 

[sumbrownkid]

Wow GT5 nailed it.

 

[G.T.Ace]

All this polycount stuff is wrong anyway.
No car in FM3 will have 1.000.000 polygons.

EDIT: Too bad that GT5P pic is not from the M3 but from the BMW 1 Coupe.

 

[sumbrownkid]

I don't think any game can do that much of a poly count per each car.

 

[G.T.Ace]

Of course not.
But look how good GT5P already looks with ~200.000 per car (including the interior).

 

[sumbrownkid]

A little off topic, but can someone explain how polycount equates to detail?

 

[G.T.Ace]

Too lazy, use this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygon
Its actually, the more polygons you use, the rounder and more realistic an object will be in a game, but more polys=more hardware power is needed.

Of course thats just one part of the whole graphics package (lighting, mapping, how you actually use the Polygons), but a big one.

 

[sumbrownkid]

Thanks.

Reading that Wiki made me remember my Geometry class in High school....god I hated it, but I still pulled off an A...don't know how I did it.

 

[WolfRacer543]

Yeah, things like the detail on the light would be because of textures rather than polygons.

Also, while the detail on the light may look great, notice how the GT5P pic the circle thingy isn't actually a circle, its a decagon, also the curves on the square thingoes aren't smooth. All these things go into making a nice model.

 

[blademask]

Yeah, things like the detail on the light would be because of textures rather than polygons.

Also, while the detail on the light may look great, notice how the GT5P pic the circle thingy isn't actually a circle, its a decagon, also the curves on the square thingoes aren't smooth. All these things go into making a nice model.

It will never be a smooth circle unless the rest of the model is dense enough to create a perfect circle, and no game can run a model that detailed with todays technology. For reality sake, its not just an image of a circle that appears to be a circle. Its a separate part of the model.

Just made this,

See, the lower polygon model is always going to create non smooth edges because its.. lower polygon count. Now the high polygon part creates a perfect circle, but.. that means that your entire model is going to have to be as dense as that portion. And if not the entire part, then just the patches around the circle.. which can also be done.. but you are on a polygon budget, and lets keep in mind this is zoomed in to show the writing on the lens. Its like blowing up a image and questioning why its blurry.

The GT model has actual parts modeled for the reflector lens and other parts in the headlights. If you look at the GT5 Trailer you can see bulbs. These aren't textures, its a more accurate model. Im just proving it by zooming into the small details portion. For example in the forza image, unlike GT they do model the detail of the lenses.. which speaks on a microscale for the entire model. The M5 headlight from the Forza3 image isn't even remotely accurate to the real thing, or texture accurate. It doesn't reflect/refract/distort at all. This is the scale that GT starts with, and expands on with all the model detail.

 

[phil-t]

Shift also has Tire Flexing & Better graphics.


Satan, F3's cars are so high polygon yet, not accurate at all. After the insults hurled my way from you, well... this is the last thing im saying to you.

Before I say anything, overall there is absolutely no doubt that the shaders/lighting etc on the cars in GT5 is where PD put a huge effort, and it shows, they know what to concentrate on, and what not to..

FM3 from what I've seen so far doesn't seem to be investing in the 'detail' of the cars to the degree PD are (obviously), but just a few of minor points...

1. The headlamp of the E60 M5 'bulb/refractor/reflector'..
The headlamp you have posted in reality pic of is actually not the same lamp type they have modelled in FM3..

Now, there is still detail missing in FM3's rendition, but it's a bit closer to reality in terms of the 'model'

2. The bump mapping of headlamp washer jets
This seems not too bad to me. The E60 M5 has 'flush' washer jets, unlike the 135i that is supposed to have them slightly raised, you'd really have to look at the same car in FM3 to see if they would model them above the surface or not. Bumpmapping 'flush' features seems a pretty valid way of doing it considering they probably aren't going for the quite 'insane' zoomed in levels of the 135i and afford a higer 'resolution' as such of the bump map detail.

3. The PDC sensors
You didn't show these on the FM3 model, but again bump mapping allows a pretty good approximation of the concentric circled flush sensors in FM3 which is one area that actually is nice to see they've put a little detail in.
The 135i has just a single circular flat surface which PD have modelled, but they've certainly skimped on the polys with the very octagonal shape, it works well enough at a distance, but with their zoomed in pause mode view, I am surprised they didn't throw in a higher LOD on that 1 aspect.


I agree that even if PD's models are slightly less poly, they do more with the 'lighting' and detail to make it look better.. Not forgetting some of T10's extra poly's will be spent on the undercarraiges for roll-overs..

I quite like analysing some of the 'details'.. it's interesting to see where they spend their 'resource' budgets, and clearly they spend them differently!

 

[Lucas]

There's was a saying that went something like "It's not the amount of polygons. It's how you use them."

By the way, could people stop comparing GT to Forza? And vice-versa? Thanks.

 

[markao]

If you're able to get past the NFS moniker, that you'll see that the SMS, not EA is responsible for the physics engine,, the AI and the core game itself. And in the past the team (who was formerly Blimey Games) has developed other racing sims- GT Legends, GTR and GTR2. In the team you have someone like Eero Piitulainen who's past exploits also include Richard Burns Rally physics engine (another great sim that lack both tire wear and pitstop).

Hope you don't mind Myke

But look how good GT5P already looks with ~200.000 per car (including the interior).

Thank you for summing up my thoughts 👍

 

[phil-t]

I know, they really seem to be struggling with tail lamps..

What is interesting, and shows something is afoot, but looking at their Japanese car shots, you can see some proof of either some LOD system, or they are not completed models..

Both are the G37 inifinity.. neither is totally accurate to real life, but look at the change in LOD..

I can't make up my mind if it's LOD or what, since the cars are not that dissimilar in their size relative to frame, I just don't know..

Also, their M5 rear lights do look at least 'passable'.. those 300C rear lights look terrible.. Either they have some low budget cars (they do outsource to Rabcat) mixed in with better ones, the same goes for some chrome surfaces, some seem again OK, some seem as if they have non-reflective silver placeholder textures..

The inconsistency doesn't bode well for comparison at this stage, if you want to be fair, it might be worth waiting, but I don't know if you are trying to be a little biased in your 'appraisals', or whether you are genuinely interested.

 

[WolfRacer543]

It will never be a smooth circle unless the rest of the model is dense enough to create a perfect circle, and no game can run a model that detailed with todays technology. For reality sake, its not just an image of a circle that appears to be a circle. Its a separate part of the model.

Yeah, I'm aware of that But that doesn't change the fact it looks crap. They coulda made it a texture but made it a separate polygon shape (I assume for the sake of shadows).

People act like these little details on the lights are an indication of graphical quality. But whilst they show that GT5P has a great attention to detail and high textures when viewed up close, its not an indication of what looks nice when actually racing, the racing where jaggies rule the day and distant LOD reduction sticks out like a sore thumb

 

[G.T.Ace]

Still doesnt change that it looks better than Forza or any other racing game.
Dont forget GT5 is already 1 1/2 years old, we dont know if the anti aliasing will be better in GT5.

 

[phil-t]

Still doesnt change that it looks better than Forza or any other racing game.
Dont forget GT5 is already 1 1/2 years old, we dont know if the anti aliasing will be better in GT5.

The only stand out thing in FM3 is the 'vistas' on the Camino Viejo game play vids on Gamersyde.. it does look like they've stopped the car models/lighting at an 'OK' level (in their eyes), and put this almost immense resource into delivering that type of 'distant' scenery.. Odd, but it was the one moment that I thought FM3 might have some chance of wowing on the graphics front.

I'm sure that's all personal preference though, I am very open minded and just love racing games, I just don't hate either franchise and find myself often defending both games when people try to put them down, call me a charlatan if you will..

 

[G.T.Ace]

I dont say FM3 looks bad, or its a bad game, i actually think it looks very good and it will be a great game for sure, but i just cant imagine how anyone could think that FM3 looks better (better=real) than what weve seen from GT5 (and Prologue).
And dont think that FM3 is completely free from aliasing, the game also has jaggies (like almost every game, except for some PC games played with a monster machine).

 

[Zer0]

The 135i has just a single circular flat surface which PD have modelled, but they've certainly skimped on the polys with the very octagonal shape, it works well enough at a distance, but with their zoomed in pause mode view, I am surprised they didn't throw in a higher LOD on that 1 aspect.

I agree that even if PD's models are slightly less poly, they do more with the 'lighting' and detail to make it look better.. Not forgetting some of T10's extra poly's will be spent on the undercarraiges for roll-overs..

I quite like analysing some of the 'details'.. it's interesting to see where they spend their 'resource' budgets, and clearly they spend them differently!

Speaking of LODs:

Low LOD:

High LOD:

Curious that the gameplay vids look more like the first one... and nothing like the second.

Oh and the undercarriage looks like a plain texture, nothing like the high detailed CGI trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxu8j-ZRz54#t=3m30s

 

[WolfRacer543]

I dont say FM3 looks bad, or its a bad game, i actually think it looks very good and it will be a great game for sure, but i just cant imagine how anyone could think that FM3 looks better (better=real) than what weve seen from GT5 (and Prologue).
And dont think that FM3 is completely free from aliasing, the game also has jaggies (like almost every game, except for some PC games played with a monster machine).

I'm still gonna wait for the games to come out before I decide which looks better (better = pleasing to the eye) because I think the environments in FM3 look nice. Most the videos I've seen make the HDR look overdone, but the Gamersyde ones dont, so I'm assuming the overdone HDR is a property of a bad video rather than FM3s fault. I dont own GT5P so I can't really comment on it... but in the videos and screenshots I've seen of it I haven't really been impressed by the environments.

Most people just focus on the cars when looking at graphics, but personally I look at:

Level of detail in the environment

Texture quality of the environment

LOD bias in the distance (do things look good as they get further away, or do the become muddy and blurry too soon)

Sharpness and clarity (PC sims have a big advantage with AA and AF available, but from my understanding the Xbox 360 is capable of 4x AA without affected performance due to the way the GPU is designed)

Car quality

Most people just focus on the car quality, but things like how well the car quality scales into the distance is very important to me, as its rare for a car to fill more than 1/4 of my screen unless I'm crashing into it, and most the time they are further away and running at a lower LOD than you'd normally see in the showroom.

Most of those things are things you can't judge until you've seen it yourself, in the flesh, on your own TV, in full motion

 

[audikiller008]

speaking of forza 3 what i found ironic is the dashboard of the Nissan gtr is designed by PD turn 10 biggest rival

 

[WolfRacer543]

speaking of forza 3 what i found ironic is the dashboard of the Nissan gtr is designed by PD turn 10 biggest rival

I dont really see that as all that ironic Its not like it has a huge badge on it "This was designed by the same people who are making GT5. In our race car we use Aly honeycomb we bought off our competition, and have data from other teams and even lent parts of our car to another team so they could test how well it'd work on their car.

You guys act as if the devs of these games hate each other, I'm sure there is more hatred from the fanboys on these forums than the actual devs themselves.

 

[audikiller008]

I dont really see that as all that ironic Its not like it has a huge badge on it "This was designed by the same people who are making GT5. In our race car we use Aly honeycomb we bought off our competition, and have data from other teams and even lent parts of our car to another team so they could test how well it'd work on their car.

You guys act as if the devs of these games hate each other, I'm sure there is more hatred from the fanboys on these forums than the actual devs themselves.

yup i heard Ken Kutaragi wants to work with Microsoft

 

[Mr Fox]

I'm still gonna wait for the games to come out before I decide which looks better (better = pleasing to the eye) because I think the environments in FM3 look nice. Most the videos I've seen make the HDR look overdone, but the Gamersyde ones dont, so I'm assuming the overdone HDR is a property of a bad video rather than FM3s fault. I dont own GT5P so I can't really comment on it... but in the videos and screenshots I've seen of it I haven't really been impressed by the environments.

Most people just focus on the cars when looking at graphics, but personally I look at:

Level of detail in the environment

Texture quality of the environment

LOD bias in the distance (do things look good as they get further away, or do the become muddy and blurry too soon)

Sharpness and clarity (PC sims have a big advantage with AA and AF available, but from my understanding the Xbox 360 is capable of 4x AA without affected performance due to the way the GPU is designed)

Car quality

Most people just focus on the car quality, but things like how well the car quality scales into the distance is very important to me, as its rare for a car to fill more than 1/4 of my screen unless I'm crashing into it, and most the time they are further away and running at a lower LOD than you'd normally see in the showroom.

Most of those things are things you can't judge until you've seen it yourself, in the flesh, on your own TV, in full motion

Some good points there.

One thing i notice too many people focusing on its screens taken within the photo mode on both games, these cant be used to judge either game, things always look better in photo mode.

also on the LOD issue, useing a screen shot of Forza 3 taken in photo mode where camera focus and the like can be adjusted by the player gives no indication of how things will look in game.

I made the mistake of thinking GT5p would play as well as it looked when i saw all those uber photo realistic screen shots just prior to its release, only to discover that in game it just doesnt look as photo realistic as the "jazzed up" screens portayed it.

all bets are off till we get in-game high quality HD video of the gameplay of GT5 & FM3.