GT4 vs Forza [Let the battle begin]

[cobragt]

Whatever code. PD has the skill to pull it off.

 

[code_kev]

Ummm Cobra, I've actually played the BMW nurb demo and GT4p, I think I'm in a pretty good position to comment on how the game feels to play. You on the other hand have only seen vids and screenies. I never doubted PD's skill btw, so please don't feel that you have to mention PD's skill every time anything is said that may not conform to the "gt4 pwns all" idea going about.

Admire, even the beloved GT4 can look pretty ****e at times, check out those sexy up close shots . And forza looks fake.. NO WAY!!! It's a computer game, they all look fake when compared to real life. Lets remember kids, racing game realism isn't just about LOOKING real, it's about FEELING realistic, thank you GTR.
This is in no way slagging off gt4 btw, so don't jump on me.

 

[tha_con]

Admire, even the beloved GT4 can look pretty ****e at times, check out those sexy up close shots .

First I'm going to comment on the tweaking of speed, I do not think that would be an area that PD would tweak. If anything, curb weight and other aspects of the car have been tweaked so as they reflect closer to their real life counter parts, rather than making them faster/slower. I.E. it would be difficult to compute all aspects of a car, so you simply tweak certain aspects so that on different terrain turns and evironments the car responds similarly to it's real life counter part, while not completely simulating exact realsm, it does indeed work on a much more simple scale, and gives a nice effect and simulates realistic control. THe problem Forza may have with all the tire pressure calc's is that they will have to be generalized and will not respond differently on each car, which will make the tire wear a little bit boring, since each car will have the same tire wear. ANyway off that, lol, I strongly believe that PD would not have cut corners and made a car faster/slower to match a lap time.

And as for the "up close shots", seriously who looks at the textures that close? Only code When you're driving/playing you will never notice that, and rarely will you notice it on a replay...lol. Forza just looks a bit less real because it's TOO polished, if they would have done what real life does, and offered up some imperfections etc and perhaps softened up some of the edges it would have looked outstanding, but it's too sharp and too flashy, so things tend to stand out and not blend well as elements on the screen..yenno?

 

[kinigitt]

And as for the "up close shots", seriously who looks at the textures that close? Only code When you're driving/playing you will never notice that, and rarely will you notice it on a replay...lol. Forza just looks a bit less real because it's TOO polished, if they would have done what real life does, and offered up some imperfections etc and perhaps softened up some of the edges it would have looked outstanding, but it's too sharp and too flashy, so things tend to stand out and not blend well as elements on the screen..yenno?

It's shiny, pretty and sharp.

Pro Race driver 2's graphics are pretty ****e on PS2, but I'm currently having a blast on pro sim mode. Goes to show that graphics really don't make bugger all of a difference unless you're watching the replays. Which suck in PRD2. Really bad.

 

[slackbladder]

This isn't going to be settled until both games are out (and maybe not even then)!

Anyway, I have seen the vids at IGN and I have a few questions. There is a LOT of skidmarks but no tyre smoke. Why is that? Does the engine sound seem a little flat to anyone else? I did notice a nice "pishhh" sound though.
The vid showing the NSX getting parts added. Is it normal to add a wing ontop of the NSX's original rear wing? And seeing as the game has damage and Honda are in, does that mean that Honda have finally agreed to show damage on their cars? And finally, what is the games frame rate? I had heard 30fps. Is that right?

Apologies if any of these questions have already been answered.

 

[livemusic]

30 fps, correct. 👍

 

[TriplePlay]

GT4 right now = *yawn*

The red sox just scored.

 

[tha_con]

About the "honda letting damage be in the game" that is all rumor. I'm pretty sure honda was never one of the manufacturers that siad not.

The problem with GT is that they ahve a ton of car manufacturers, some say no, then car damage is nixed. However, with other games like Forza, that have fewer manufactuers, and I'm sure MS can buy out rights to damage them, then things are okay, in the future, I think companies will be more forgiving, but till then I really doubt we'll see car damage in a GT series.

 

[code_kev]

Or it could just be that PD can't be arsed.

 

[slackbladder]

I remember reading an interview with the makers of "Automodellista". In it they said they had considered car damage but did not do it because a big Japanese car company said no. They didn't say who, only that the name started with a "H". Also in PGR there is car damage, but no Honda which suprised me when I played it. And Bizarre Creations had also said they had issues with car manufacturers over damage.
Of course the whole "car damage in Gran Turismo" is a sore point for many people. Hopefully it will come with the first GT game on the PS3. Personally it on't bother me if it does'nt, but it may finally give one less reason to criticise the game.

 

[Zer0]

Juiced interview:

Total destruction is off the cards where licensed cars are concerned, but we think you'll be very surprised at what manufacturers are allowing us to do. They are certainly a lot more open minded and forgiving.

IGN: And what is a typical conversation like with the manufacturers with regard to damage to their cars? Which manufacturer is the most lenient? Which is the most conservative?

Don: They are generally all of similar mind-set… penalize the player for causing damage, don't compromise the passenger compartment, don't kill pedestrians and don't set the vehicles on fire or explode them.

http://ps2.ign.com/articles/507/507293p2.html

These points are big obstacles for a realistic damage.

 

[erahk64]

Juiced interview:

Total destruction is off the cards where licensed cars are concerned, but we think you'll be very surprised at what manufacturers are allowing us to do. They are certainly a lot more open minded and forgiving.

IGN: And what is a typical conversation like with the manufacturers with regard to damage to their cars? Which manufacturer is the most lenient? Which is the most conservative?

Don: They are generally all of similar mind-set… penalize the player for causing damage, don't compromise the passenger compartment, don't kill pedestrians and don't set the vehicles on fire or explode them.

http://ps2.ign.com/articles/507/507293p2.html

These points are big obstacles for a realistic damage.

The cars doesn't have to explode, that is just visual effects.
They could make the cars undrivable instead.
It's more important that the damage affects the car handling realistically.

 

[code_kev]

You can set the cars on fire in GTR.

 

[Zer0]

The cars doesn't have to explode, that is just visual effects.
They could make the cars undrivable instead.
It's more important that the damage affects the car handling realistically.

It was being spoken about the visual damages.

code_kev: The rally cars and race cars it seems that follow another rules, these points only applies to tourisms. GT must treat the same to all the cars.

 

[_aj]

I remember reading that PD do have a damage system setup and it's effective in making 80% of all crashes fatal. PD have been and are practicing damage modelling and simulation for a few years, just to keep them upto speed for when they will finally be able to implement it.

 

[slackbladder]

I've often thought that it could be possible for the race cars in Gran Turismo to show damage as opposed to the ordinary road cars. But of course you can't have it with one and not the other. If I remember correctly Sega GT on the Xbox does'nt show actual damage but instead has a bar that fills up over time and forces you to pay for damage out of your winnings.

 

[code_kev]

The bar system is a big sack of crap. I don't want a silly bar, I want bits ripping off!

 

[GTXLR]

I remember reading that PD do have a damage system setup and it's effective in making 80% of all crashes fatal. PD have been and are practicing damage modelling and simulation for a few years, just to keep them upto speed for when they will finally be able to implement it.

That will probably be 10 years After the AI is completed which according to Kaz Will take at least 10 years, by which time ill be getting close to drawing my Pension, (Opps no sorry the succesive governments will have increased retirement age to 75 by then).
My reactions will be so slow by then, that ill probably get to see the benefits of real world crash modeling a lot.

 

[tyzone_gt1]

Kaz still has alot of secrets hidden behind gt4
lets hope one of them is damage ?

that would be cooooooooooool

 

[tha_con]

That will probably be 10 years After the AI is completed which according to Kaz Will take at least 10 years, by which time ill be getting close to drawing my Pension, (Opps no sorry the succesive governments will have increased retirement age to 75 by then).
My reactions will be so slow by then, that ill probably get to see the benefits of real world crash modeling a lot.

I think you misunderstand what Kaz is talking about. He's speaking about the perfect AI, that will respond to you, and all of the other racers, as well as them responding in accordance, without the need of a "race line" at all. An AI that will work independantly from all other aspects of the game and make it's own decisions on when to pit, how hard to drive, when to pass, when to ease up, etc. If you think for one moment that anything like this is simple, then you aren't really too familiar with how AI works. Also, given new hardware, and with Manufacturers being a bit more forgiving with their car damage rules, I believe it's very possible we could see damage in GT5.

 

[code_kev]

Manufacturers being a bit more forgiving with their car damage rules

Myth.

Anyway, kaz should pull his finger out, and get a PROPER team for the AI. Saying that it will get better is hardly an excuse. I should be good now. It seems to be a running thing with gt..

"oh it will be in the NEXT game"

and it isn't

"oh it will be in the NEXT game"

...

 

[tha_con]

Myth.

Anyway, kaz should pull his finger out, and get a PROPER team for the AI. Saying that it will get better is hardly an excuse. I should be good now. It seems to be a running thing with gt..

"oh it will be in the NEXT game"

and it isn't

"oh it will be in the NEXT game"

...

Not myth. A decade ago there was NO DAMAGE period, none allowed. Now there are very strict rules, but they are indeed much more forgiving than that of the past, and given time it will be implimented.

Also, if you cannot create AI, then do not comment, because it's not that easy, and again, you are wishing to have things without making sacrifices, you forget this runs on PS2, given the physics, visuals, etc, it's really crunching the PS2, so to have it think better for AI would be pushing too much and they would have to sacrifice other aspects of the game.

Would you rather it looked like GT3 running at 30 fps, as well as shared the same physics engine, yet had better AI? Or would you rather have a better driving experience, in terms of visuals and physics, with AI that is not quite as challanging.

Sometimes I wonder if you guy's ever think about what NEEDS to be done in order for a company to survive, and go through the logic of marketing and sales...or if you just spout out things like "I want I want" even though you know next to nothing about the industry and economics.

 

[ELecTriC]

I have no interest in Forza at all. Did see a couple of images month ago, posted here, but it did not get my attention! And besides, i dont own X-box. X-box+Forza as a gift, sure i give it a try!

 

[code_kev]

Not myth. A decade ago there was NO DAMAGE period, none allowed. Now there are very strict rules, but they are indeed much more forgiving than that of the past, and given time it will be implimented.

10 years ago, mehbeh, but not now.

Also, if you cannot create AI, then do not comment, because it's not that easy, and again, you are wishing to have things without making sacrifices, you forget this runs on PS2, given the physics, visuals, etc, it's really crunching the PS2, so to have it think better for AI would be pushing too much and they would have to sacrifice other aspects of the game.

Just because I can't make a cake, doesn't mean I can't say "this cake tastes like crap". Granted I may not be able to create AI, but that doesn't excuse a massive dev company. Cars that zip about on rails may have been ok on my sega saturn, but on the ps2, xbox and pc I expect more. There is no excuse. With sonys MASSIVE resources, I find it rather pathetic.

Would you rather it looked like GT3 running at 30 fps, as well as shared the same physics engine, yet had better AI? Or would you rather have a better driving experience, in terms of visuals and physics, with AI that is not quite as challanging.

So you'd rather have tarty graphics over decent AI...tbh I'll have 60 fps and AI, if it meant lower quality graphics (though I doubt it would, seems to me that PD is just being lazy). Lets remember that it's a racing game, not a sunday drive sim. I want thrilling, smart opponents.
Decent AI is NOTHING to ask for these days, it's expected. Your 30 fps comment is senseless.

Sometimes I wonder if you guy's ever think about what NEEDS to be done in order for a company to survive, and go through the logic of marketing and sales...or if you just spout out things like "I want I want" even though you know next to nothing about the industry and economics.

Well "they want they want" our money

 

[Pak]

I expect better AI from a dev with a very big budget and team. I wonder what the LFS team could do with such a budget. =]

 

[code_kev]

The GT team have had a VERY VERY VERY long time to get all this stuff right, and they still havn't

 

[tha_con]

10 years ago, mehbeh, but not now.



Just because I can't make a cake, doesn't mean I can't say "this cake tastes like crap". Granted I may not be able to create AI, but that doesn't excuse a massive dev company. Cars that zip about on rails may have been ok on my sega saturn, but on the ps2, xbox and pc I expect more. There is no excuse. With sonys MASSIVE resources, I find it rather pathetic.



So you'd rather have tarty graphics over decent AI...tbh I'll have 60 fps and AI, if it meant lower quality graphics (though I doubt it would, seems to me that PD is just being lazy). Lets remember that it's a racing game, not a sunday drive sim. I want thrilling, smart opponents.
Decent AI is NOTHING to ask for these days, it's expected. Your 30 fps comment is senseless.



Well "they want they want" our money

Then let me break this down for you. Casual gamers far outnumber us who are on this site. That is fact.

PS2 is near maxed with GT4. The 30 FPS is KEY. It uses POWER to run this game at 60FPS, power that could be used in other areas, however with both the new physics engine, the AI, and rendering the visuals, the PS2 simply does not have the power to have independant thinking for each car on screen, because each one has to work on it's own, in order to be considered "AI". And knowing you Code Kev, if GT4 were any less pretty, even if it had better AI, you would still complain because "the textures were too low in resolution".

And yes Polyphony does want your money, which is why they go through what they go through with the PS2. It's a limited system, Kaz has stated his frustrations with this, however he knows how large the Sony user base is, much larger than Nintendo and Xbox, and the fact is, GT4 would not do as well if it were on any other console.

There is a trade off. Sure, they could have made GT4 extremely sim like, BUT then they would lose a HUGE part of their user base, because they would have to sacrifice the visuals of the game, in order to harness more processing power, and that IS GT4's main selling point, it's beautiful...period. PD is NOT a large company, they only have support from Sony because of the success of the GT series. Should the lose their user base, and cater only to the "hardcore" sim crowd, they will not last very long, especially since the industry is hurting so much now a days from piracy etc. Video games only make money from sales. Period. They are not like music videos, CD's, etc, they do not get royalties etc, and extra sources of revenue, they have to sell in order to succeed, if a company cannot sell, they will not succeed...realize all of thise before you accuse them of being lazy, they ahve to sell the game, they have to do what they have to do in order to make this game appeal to everyone while still offering hte best racing experience...so there Kev, now that I have explained it to you, anything else that you say will be purely opinion and have no fact base whatsover, only the wants of a greedy consumer who cannot appreciate anything he is given...enjoy.

 

[code_kev]

Then let me break this down for you. Casual gamers far outnumber us who are on this site. That is fact.

PS2 is near maxed with GT4. The 30 FPS is KEY. It uses POWER to run this game at 60FPS, power that could be used in other areas, however with both the new physics engine, the AI, and rendering the visuals, the PS2 simply does not have the power to have independant thinking for each car on screen, because each one has to work on it's own, in order to be considered "AI". And knowing you Code Kev, if GT4 were any less pretty, even if it had better AI, you would still complain because "the textures were too low in resolution".

Don't be so judgemental of me please. If Gt4 offered incredible AI etc, I wouldn't give a flying hoot about textures. it just strikes me that PD have concentrated on graphics so much, that they kinda forgot that the point of a racing game was to race AGAINST opponents, not dodge brain dead drones. While they did a pretty good job of the physics, and a damn fine job of the visuals for the system...no excuse.

And yes Polyphony does want your money, which is why they go through what they go through with the PS2. It's a limited system, Kaz has stated his frustrations with this, however he knows how large the Sony user base is, much larger than Nintendo and Xbox, and the fact is, GT4 would not do as well if it were on any other console.

No arguments there.

There is a trade off. Sure, they could have made GT4 extremely sim like, BUT then they would lose a HUGE part of their user base, because they would have to sacrifice the visuals of the game, in order to harness more processing power, and that IS GT4's main selling point, it's beautiful...period. PD is NOT a large company, they only have support from Sony because of the success of the GT series. Should the lose their user base, and cater only to the "hardcore" sim crowd, they will not last very long, especially since the industry is hurting so much now a days from piracy etc. Video games only make money from sales. Period. They are not like music videos, CD's, etc, they do not get royalties etc, and extra sources of revenue, they have to sell in order to succeed, if a company cannot sell, they will not succeed...realize all of thise before you accuse them of being lazy, they ahve to sell the game, they have to do what they have to do in order to make this game appeal to everyone while still offering hte best racing experience...so there Kev, now that I have explained it to you, anything else that you say will be purely opinion and have no fact base whatsover, only the wants of a greedy consumer who cannot appreciate anything he is given...enjoy.

I've never asked for Gt4 to be a hardcore sim, I've said before that I enjoy its easier gamer play.
I'm sorry, but sloppy AI, no excuse. None. Decent AI, as I said before is EXPECTED from all games these days, and while you try and make excuses for PD, they don't have one. Nice to see you get your opinions over in a decent way though.

 

[Zer0]

I expect better AI from a dev with a very big budget and team. I wonder what the LFS team could do with such a budget. =]

A large budget doesn´t make a close system more powerful(PS2), I wonder what Polyphony could do with such a hardware(high end PC).

 

[code_kev]

I wonder what Polyphony could do with such a hardware(high end PC).

Probs a very nice looking game, but with AI of pong quality.