GT5 Track textures (56K WARNING)

[Forgetful]

Argue points, not people.

 

[Maggot666PL]

Yes, amazing, but people are right in saying that GT5 shouldn't be compared to F2 at all, but to reality. Compare two games only when you are looking for the best one, but when you are going to compare one to reality, don't compare it to the other game again. This exactly happened here, comparing GT, Forza and reality, when Forza shouldn't have been here at all.

Why? It's normal, it should (or at least can) happen. When you compare two games AND the reality, you can see where one of them is really lagging behind another (eg. which one feels better etc.). This way you know right from the start what's really messed up, not just not polished enough. You just have to remember to not focus just on the differences between game, more like note them, but always aim for the perfect solution (eg. "forza's textures are too shiny, gt5's are not shiny enough. Draw" etc.).

You can also search for the solutions used in other games, sometimes not exactly from the same genre (there is no need to reinvent the wheel), since it's not necessary to focus just on one title.

Completely "denying" the existence of a major rival won't lead you anywhere.

 

[Devedander]

but always aim for the perfect solution (eg. "forza's textures are too shiny, gt5's are not shiny enough. Draw" etc.).

Actually I think that draw is an everybody looses situation... The winning situation is that you raise awareness enough that the next versions (or possibly these, however too late in the game for this round I think) impliment those features.

 

[Maggot666PL]

Of course you're right - in a draw there is no winner, so there are two losers. But it's not a tragedy either - constructive criticism is a motor of improvement, after all.

 

[myke6699]

Pasting shots from different sources (which ultimately means different methods and results) is not the best way to do a comparison shots.

 

[Tenacious D]

Now if you take every post that has to do with defending forza and every post that has to do with negative things in GT and attribute them to me, then there you go, but I have plenty of issues with forza, but I also recognize they do plenty of things well.

If you mean me, I've noticed that you've been fairly even handed in handing out criticism lately, and I know GT5 is the focus because it's the one most of us are waiting on.

I hope that everyone understands that Kaz and his team is going to give us the best GT5 they can, and that if something odd is left out, like working windshield wipers, it's either because it's too low on the work list or they just couldn't add one more thing for the PS3 to handle. Everything a game does requires a slice of the performance budget, so no game can do everything, let alone do everything well. A perfect example is Forza 3, which may have the fewest cars in a race of any current console racer - and note, the PSP isn't a console. They just can't break the 8 car barrier yet. Maybe it's because they insist that everything they have the game doing is more important than a few more cars. Personally, I think it's because the 360 is about tapped out for resources, and they have to give the gaming world something on par with Prologue.

GT5 on the other hand might still not have skidmarks. Why? Well, a big hunk of what the PS3 has to render isn't just those amazing cars, but the backgrounds. Remember how it was pointed out that the buildings in Tokyo has their interiors modeled? That's perhaps another 100,000 objects being drawn and perspective managed as you drive around. Essential? No, but it sure adds to the illusion of reality. And haven't there been a few gripes about Prologue's backgrounds being too bland and undetailed? Well, now we have them, but there's no free lunch in the computer world either, so something has to yield for that. Maybe one of those things are tire marks. It could also be rain. It depends on how ingenious the GT5 engine is, so maybe we'll have a lot of surprises in that regard.

Just remember Crysis, and what kind of computer you need to run it with everything maxed, and how expensive it is. Keep in mind that the PS3 is probably a quarter of that, or less. And yet, hardly any game looks as good as GT5, Killzone or Uncharted. So keep all this in mind, and try to be a little grateful when you get hold of that Blu-ray and something glorious comes up on your TV screen.

 

[sumbrownkid]

^*Slowly claps...gets faster*

 

[Devedander]

If you mean me, I've noticed that you've been fairly even handed in handing out criticism lately, and I know GT5 is the focus because it's the one most of us are waiting on.

I hope that everyone understands that Kaz and his team is going to give us the best GT5 they can, and that if something odd is left out, like working windshield wipers, it's either because it's too low on the work list or they just couldn't add one more thing for the PS3 to handle. Everything a game does requires a slice of the performance budget, so no game can do everything, let alone do everything well. A perfect example is Forza 3, which may have the fewest cars in a race of any current console racer - and note, the PSP isn't a console. They just can't break the 8 car barrier yet. Maybe it's because they insist that everything they have the game doing is more important than a few more cars. Personally, I think it's because the 360 is about tapped out for resources, and they have to give the gaming world something on par with Prologue.

GT5 on the other hand might still not have skidmarks. Why? Well, a big hunk of what the PS3 has to render isn't just those amazing cars, but the backgrounds. Remember how it was pointed out that the buildings in Tokyo has their interiors modeled? That's perhaps another 100,000 objects being drawn and perspective managed as you drive around. Essential? No, but it sure adds to the illusion of reality. And haven't there been a few gripes about Prologue's backgrounds being too bland and undetailed? Well, now we have them, but there's no free lunch in the computer world either, so something has to yield for that. Maybe one of those things are tire marks. It could also be rain. It depends on how ingenious the GT5 engine is, so maybe we'll have a lot of surprises in that regard.

Just remember Crysis, and what kind of computer you need to run it with everything maxed, and how expensive it is. Keep in mind that the PS3 is probably a quarter of that, or less. And yet, hardly any game looks as good as GT5, Killzone or Uncharted. So keep all this in mind, and try to be a little grateful when you get hold of that Blu-ray and something glorious comes up on your TV screen.

I didn't mean any particular person.

As for reasons, the ones you list are quite possible, but there are any number of others that are also possible ranging from KY just said what he wanted to say before checking with the programmers such a thing was possible; the programmers are incompetent in some areas; PD is just lazy; Sony stepped in and laid down some law, who knows.

I think a big part of the issue isn't so much that it's not there, but that it's been hyped and promised either directly or indirectly. This kind of thing leads people to get more dissapointed than had nothing been promised and also never made an appearance.

Take your F3 8 cars example. T10 never said they would have more than 8 cars racing, and so the fact that it's still only 8 is not terribly dramatic. However if T10 had promised something like 'more cars on track than any other racer!" then only had 8 and decided to announce it was because they were feeling out if the gamers really wanted more cars on track... that's where dissapointment sets in.

Just of note: read your post and look at the difference in how you talk about areas where F3 could improve vs areas where GT5 could improve. Note how you are comfortable suggesting possible reaons for F3 shortcomings, but you are quick to say what the reasons are for GT5 actually are and follow them up with the fairly positive explanations.

Not trying to make anything of it, but think it's worth noting. Think about that from a completely objective standpoint and see if that hints of some ulterior motive... I am not trying to say anything negative about, justs find this (likely subconcious result) interesting. You know, in a Freudian way

 

[Zer0]

Take your F3 8 cars example. T10 never said they would have more than 8 cars racing, and so the fact that it's still only 8 is not terribly dramatic. However if T10 had promised something like 'more cars on track than any other racer!" then only had 8 and decided to announce it was because they were feeling out if the gamers really wanted more cars on track... that's where dissapointment sets in.

They initially announced 12 cars in Forza2.

 

[Pierced Lead]

What's up with the LOLCats sig below?


Just to remind you guys, alot of the GT4 tracks have noticeable skidmarks in the places they're supposed to be - like in the starting grid, and in case you people haven't noticed, the dark part of the road (on which the racing line is and which we usually follow) are years and years of skidmarks made because of racing on those tracks.

If GT4 has them, then I don't see how GT5 couldn't

 

[Lucas]

They initially announced 12 cars in Forza2.

KY initially announced online mode for GT4.

I don't understand what does this have to do with GT5.

 

[Pierced Lead]

Turn10 announced realistic physics in Forza 2...



Ok guys, this was just a joke

 

[Zer0]

I don't understand what does this have to do with GT5.

It was a reply for Devedander's post, read his quote.

 

[Lucas]

Forza 2 has already been released. So he is right, it's no big deal that they only have 8 cars on a track, they didn't say they would have more in Forza 3, and Forza 3 is what counts, because it is the game that it's going to be released.

 

[Tenacious D]

As for reasons, the ones you list are quite possible, but there are any number of others that are also possible ranging from KY just said what he wanted to say before checking with the programmers such a thing was possible; the programmers are incompetent in some areas; PD is just lazy

Considering Polyphony Digital has some of the most respected modelers and coders in the industry, and many of these guys practically live in the building with cots beside their desks, mentioning that is rather silly.

Take your F3 8 cars example. T10 never said they would have more than 8 cars racing, and so the fact that it's still only 8 is not terribly dramatic.

As was pointed out, Turn 10 people in december 2006 interviews stated that you would be racing 12 cars off and online in FM2. And this is entirely different from stating something like Polyphony making a GT Online, when most PS2s wouldn't work online. Mine is on the safe list but doesn't want to work with many PS2 online games. They tried it in Japan, remember, but it was so hard to get it to work right so they didn't get it either. Meanwhile, the XBox is nothing but a gaming PC. Some people still use their XBoxes as servers. Oh well, that argument is now moot with the PS3.

Just of note: read your post and look at the difference in how you talk about areas where F3 could improve vs areas where GT5 could improve. Note how you are comfortable suggesting possible reaons for F3 shortcomings, but you are quick to say what the reasons are for GT5 actually are and follow them up with the fairly positive explanations.

The only shortcoming I mentioned with F3 was the number of cars confirmed to be in race. What others did I mention? And the reason I speak so positively about GT5 is because of the work I see evidenced in the GamesCom demo, and the work I'm still enjoying evidenced in Prologue. If it doesn't impress you, oh well. The rest of the intranets are still buzzing about it.

And by the way, yes, I do see the 360 as an inferior system. It's been on the market a year longer. Developers have a year's more experience with it. It's "the easier system to code for." And yet, it doesn't have a Metal Gear Solid. It doesn't have a Killzone. It doesn't have an Uncharted. It doesn't have a Folding @ Home app. It doesn't even have a Prologue. It's evidently still not that reliable. These are solid points of evidence, not flimsy allusions.

Not trying to make anything of it, but think it's worth noting. Think about that from a completely objective standpoint and see if that hints of some ulterior motive... I am not trying to say anything negative about, justs find this (likely subconcious result) interesting. You know, in a Freudian way

Sure, whatever.

 

[Zer0]

Forza 2 has already been released. So he is right, it's no big deal that they only have 8 cars on a track, they didn't say they would have more in Forza 3, and Forza 3 is what counts, because it is the game that it's going to be released.

It's not a big deal or it's not a big disappoint now because they announced early since first day?

I think all Forza fans expected more than 8 cars in-game after Forza2 and after GT5P's 16 cars, and one of the first things you will see on the next Xbox first Forza is more cars in-game because they can.

 

[Devedander]

Considering Polyphony Digital has some of the most respected modelers and coders in the industry, and many of these guys practically live in the building with cots beside their desks, mentioning that is rather silly.

You will notice I just said it was one of many possibilities. I think it's highly unlikely too, but anythings possible (maybe some of them got disgruntled or just took ill or got mono or who knows what). I wasn't inferring that was the reason, just noting that while no one knows the reason in either case, you are happy to speculate on negative reasons why in Forzas case, but you are quick to state in a factual way the positive and foregiveable reasons why in GT5s case.

As was pointed out, Turn 10 people in december 2006 interviews stated that you would be racing 12 cars off and online in FM2.

I don't remember that, but I am sure that it got some people quite dissapointed then just as I was saying. BTW I know I didn't specificy but I was talking about F3 release in my post.

The only shortcoming I mentioned with F3 was the number of cars confirmed to be in race. What others did I mention?

You only mentioned one, but it was the way you mentioned it. Tbe tone and style.

Notice how you are constantly negative about it and the reasons you suggest (while you make it clear are they are just ideas and not facts) are negative as well. You use terms like "they just can't break the 8 car barrier"... basically if you read it from an objective view there are lots of negative undertones. Any assumptions you make about the possibility of why (and again you do make clear they are assumptions) are negative.

Now look a the GT5 portion... you don't assume why GT has areas that could use improvement, you spin them up as positively as possible, rationalize them away and tell us why they are there... despite the fact you can't know.

It reminds me of a portion of debate class where they focused on things like opening statements in court and how to make things sound positive or negative with undertones but not do it so blatently as to offend the jury.

Sure, whatever.

No really, I am sure I do it too... I was just pointing it out because really it was a good job at (sorry can't think of a better term and I know this one sounds negative) "spinning" the situation. I just bet you didn't even realize it...

 

[Tenacious D]

You will notice I just said it was one of many possibilities.

Sorry, it's not even possible.

you are happy to speculate on negative reasons why in Forzas case, but you are quick to state in a factual way the positive and foregiveable reasons why in GT5s case.

There's a huge gaping difference here.

• We know most of what will be in F3.
• This game is being heralded as THE BEST EVERYTHING by Turn 10 and their supporters, despite obvious evidence to the contrary, such as releasing surprisingly unflattering media they really shouldn't if they want to maintain their BEST EVERYTHING GAME dogma.
• In the case of GT5, you are quite happy to complain about things that haven't even been revealed, let alone things we know, which is actually very little.

I have Forza 2 and raced it for about 10 months straight, and own FM1, and raced it for several months straight - which you have to do because it's such a wonky game to get into. So as someone who has played both series extensively, as well as PC sims now, I feel that even with biases, I'm well within the realm of validity in making my statements. I don't make wild claims about F3 except in mocking reply to some ridiculous Forza post.

I don't remember that, but I am sure that it got some people quite dissapointed then just as I was saying. BTW I know I didn't specificy but I was talking about F3 release in my post.

Well, you missed quite a party. It was exciting to watch the Forza boards melt down when it was revealed that the many promises T10 made about all the content and gameplay FM1 had and more, with 12 car races, went away one by one. When they found out it was actually a smaller game than FM1 except for the car count... well, that grudge is still simmering with a few of them. And add to that all the unpatched bugs we had to swallow, the numerous leaderboard wipes when the "perfect" physics and aerodynamics produced unrealistic supercars that had to be patched, and you have a very slipshod game. These, also, are not thin allusions or maybes.

You only mentioned one, but it was the way you mentioned it. Tbe tone and style.

I mean... seriously...

Notice how you are constantly negative about it

In response to often silly criticism or even things that aren't true.

and the reasons you suggest (while you make it clear are they are just ideas and not facts)

Not always. Re-read my posts.

You use terms like "they just can't break the 8 car barrier"

Well? True or false? Is this an opinion, or is this a fact? Are you saying they think the "definitive" racing game is going to only need 8 car races?

... basically if you read it from an objective view there are lots of negative undertones. Any assumptions you make about the possibility of why (and again you do make clear they are assumptions) are negative.

My assumptions are also facts. T10 made choices which restricts them to 8 car races, not 8 or so online. And while this is an assumption, I think it's pretty clear that one of those factors is the limitations of the 360. You can say that's negative if you like, but the 360 is hardly the definitive gaming console.

Now look a the GT5 portion... you don't assume why GT has areas that could use improvement, you spin them up as positively as possible, rationalize them away and tell us why they are there... despite the fact you can't know.

You're hardly debating from solid footing because you assume the worst about GT5 in your posts.

No really, I am sure I do it too... I was just pointing it out because really it was a good job at (sorry can't think of a better term and I know this one sounds negative) "spinning" the situation. I just bet you didn't even realize it...

No, I don't play mental games with myself. I say what I mean.

Some things about the Forza series are a matter of taste or preference, such as "a smaller car list is fine" or even better. "Partial damage is better than nothing," fair enough. "The physics in Forza are better." In some aspects, this is certainly not true, such as the criticisms, not opinions, I've expressed previously such as oversteer on all cars, easy drifting, jerking the wheel to stop a skid and others. "The tire sounds in GT are freaking awful. They should be like (the truck tire) sounds in Forza 2." My point in parenthesis.

Anyway, I don't care how you think I think. I think I think just fine, thank you.

 

[Bogie 19th]

8 car max has nothing to do with the Xbox 360 maxed out. We hear that with every release of new games from people, and it's funny. The 360 (and PS3) probablu won't be maxed out for 4 years or more. Xbox 1 wasn't maxed out with 8 cars in Forza 1. Xbox 360 wasn't maxed out with Forza 2. And the Xbox 360 is running a 12 car grid in Race Pro, and 16 car grid in SHIFT (which has simulation, damage and excellent graphics). It's probably more an issue of them focusing on the physics attention to detail and providing that for 8 cars.

 

[MonkeySkater]

^ So T10 have maxxed out the 360 or have a game which is poorly optimized?

IMO are the only possible reasons why there is only 8 cars on track.

 

[Devedander]

Sorry, it's not even possible.

You know this for a fact? What if the whole office got mono for 4 years... that would explain some severe laziness... Or People change, I know people who have been drivin and hard working for years who one day for no apparent reason become lackadazical and dreary.

Again, I don't think anyone believes it's the case, but when you go say something is not possible you are making a VERY strong statement, and the stronger the statement the less it takes to poke a hole in it.

There's a huge gaping difference here.

• We know most of what will be in F3.

• 
  
  So how come almost ANYTHING could happen to GT5 (I mean we still have people saying Porsche could be in it and almost anything could be remedied by launch or even in DLC) but you nothing bad could be final because the game isn't released yet, but we can know about F3? Who's to say T10 doesn't completely rebuild F3 between now and release? (No I am not saying that's even remotely likely, but if the argument holds for one then why not the other?)
  
  

  

  
  
  I mean... seriously...

  
  Supposed to say "The tone and style."
  
  

  In response to often silly criticism or even things that aren't true.

  
  I was talking about how you address Forza's issues negatively, you don't even give benefit of the doubt let along try to rationlize and explain it away as harmless, reasonable, or not T10's fault - all things which you do when discussing issues with GT5.
  
  Not always. Re-read my posts.
  
  
  Well? True or false? Is this an opinion, or is this a fact? Are you saying they think the "definitive" racing game is going to only need 8 car races?
  
  
  

  My assumptions are also facts. T10 made choices which restricts them to 8 car races, not 8 or so online. And while this is an assumption, I think it's pretty clear that one of those factors is the limitations of the 360. You can say that's negative if you like, but the 360 is hardly the definitive gaming console.

  
  Here is the crux of it... they aren't facts, they are opinions. Very likely accurate and educated opinions... but they aren't facts. I would venture that should the same sort of thing happen vice versa and GT5 be in the crosshairs you wouldn't be so giving in what you accept as reassonable.
  
  If this opinion can be assumed as fact can we also assume that when I said the AI barreling down the straight in that GT5 video blindly into a pileup, just like the GT AI has done for generations, in a video released to huge anticipation, with no disclaimer that's its an early or dated build, so close to launch which will closely follow GTM, is a bad thing is fact?
  
  See where I am going? It's a double standard... we can assume things to be fact with one but not with the other?
  
  How does one not know that T10 just likes 8 car races? Perhap they feel more is too cluttered?
  
  I am not suggesting I feel that way, but any benefit of the doubt given to one side must be given to the other no?
  
  

  You're hardly debating from solid footing because you assume the worst about GT5 in your posts.

  
  First off I assume what I see, not the worst, just what I see. Now if it's a post about a potential negative, well then yes, I probably saw something negative and it was (just like your assumption about why T10 has only 8 cars) an edcuated assumption.
  
  But again, look at your post on GT... every negative you address, you give a reason for it (again, which you can't know as fact no matter how likely it is and how educated your guess behind it) and you say it in a very positive way. Example:
  
  Forza only has 8 cars becuase of the 360's hardware limitations. Sounds pretty negative.
  
  GT has no skid marks? Well that's becuase of all the grogeous cars and awesome backgrounds they are rendering!
  
  Wait... so you are saying GT can't render skid marks because it's already used up all the system resources... isn't that also then a hardware limitation? If the hardware had more to give, then by your logic this issue wouldn't exist...
  
  Here is an example of turning it around:
  
  Forza forcused on making sure every detail was paid attention to in full so that you could have the best racing experience with all the 8 cars on track rather than a lesser experience with more cars. Remember Forza is tracking a huge number of stats and caculations hundreds of times per second for a huge number of things!
  
  GT 5 left out something as obivous and in your face as skid marks becuase they chose to spend the limited 256MB of graphics and 256MBs of core memory on shiny cars and the insides of rooms which you will hardly see or notice when driving fast whic is what you will do most of the time in a racing game.
  
  That's an example of spinning things one way or the other. Now look at your post on GT again...
  
  GT5 on the other hand might still not have skidmarks. Why? Well, a big hunk of what the PS3 has to render isn't just those amazing cars, but the backgrounds. Remember how it was pointed out that the buildings in Tokyo has their interiors modeled? That's perhaps another 100,000 objects being drawn and perspective managed as you drive around. Essential? No, but it sure adds to the illusion of reality. And haven't there been a few gripes about Prologue's backgrounds being too bland and undetailed? Well, now we have them, but there's no free lunch in the computer world either, so something has to yield for that. Maybe one of those things are tire marks. It could also be rain. It depends on how ingenious the GT5 engine is, so maybe we'll have a lot of surprises in that regard.
  
  Notice how you constantly make everything sounds positive? Things are always spun with an upswing. Those are a lot of phrases that have a positive intonation. Even out of context or not blatently used as such, these are words that carry a positive feeling with them. A choice of words that subcounciously draws the mind one way vs another.
  
  Now lets look at the F3 portion
  
  A perfect example is Forza 3, which may have the fewest cars in a race of any current console racer - and note, the PSP isn't a console. They just can't break the 8 car barrier yet. Maybe it's because they insist that everything they have the game doing is more important than a few more cars. Personally, I think it's because the 360 is about tapped out for resources, and they have to give the gaming world something on par with Prologue.
  
  Those are all negative terms with negative intonations... "fewest" instead of just listing a number. "Just can't" are you sure they can't or they chose not to? Saying they just can't as if it's a fact intones weakness just like if I said "PD is too lazy to put in the effort to model all the damage". "Barrier" is negative, it intones an unsurmountable situation. It is not the same as choosing to allocate resources one way or another or making a trade off.
  
  Also note with the GT section, you always refer to it in the infinitive or as an object or thing. It's the game, the game engine... never the people behind it. This lends towards it being a logic issue, a math problem if you will. Not emtional.
  
  Now notice in the Forza section you refer to it as "they"... this personalizes it... gives it a feeling of decision, intention and emotion. You can blame a person for doing something wrong, but if an it just doesn't work, there must be a logical reason, not a personal failure.
  
  Really I wouldn't expect you to know you were doing this, it's all proably subcouncious and the idea that you might be skewing things subcounciously might offend your idea of yourself as impartial and objective so it might be hard to accept. But trust me, it's right there plane as day.
  
  This is really more a psychological disection of your post than anything else, and hey maybe it's something you just don't understand or comprehend (I don't mean that negatively, but if you haven't taken a few psych courses, it would be easy to dismiss or not understand.
  
  

  No, I don't play mental games with myself. I say what I mean.

  
  I am sure you do, but I think perhaps sometimes you don't know how much how you say it shows how you think about it.
  
  

  Anyway, I don't care how you think I think. I think I think just fine, thank you.

  
  Well Freud would probably ask why you put so much effort into something you don't care about, but that's another subject all together...
  
  I have no doubt you think just fine, you may even think better than you realize you do if you are subcounciously doing all these things with what you say and not realizing it. I mean this is the kind of spin PR companies make big money for being good at!

 

[Lucas]

It doesn't matter how many cars does a game have, it matters how many of those are you actually going to use. I compared Forza 2's car list to that of GT4. And GT4 just overflows with Skylines, Evolutions, and Imprezas, something that everyone has noticed, even those who have played the game for just two days. Forza 2 doesn't.

Remember how it was pointed out that the buildings in Tokyo has their interiors modeled?

What do I care about the interiors of buildings, if I can't even see them? How do you know they are not lying to you? What purpose do they have? Especially when you could model just a small part of the building, and having the same effect, cause granted, an empty box and a full one will have the same aspect. Can I drive into the buildings? Do I work inside the buildings to earn cash to tune my car? That makes perfect sense.



Devedander, don't even bother to continue, I'm telling you this as a partner in logic, cause this is an argument you can't win in a GT dedicated forum.

 

[MonkeySkater]

Forever
Arguing
Nerds
Bring
On
Yawning

 

[Zer0]

How does one not know that T10 just likes 8 car races? Perhap they feel more is too cluttered?

It's been revealed that Forza 2 is already running at a sweet 60 frames per second. Was this easy to achieve or were there some trade-offs made in the graphics or physics to accommodate it?

Dan: While it's never "easy" to squeeze in the high level of detail we have, the Xbox 360's power has made this an achievable target at 60fps and 720p with 12 unique, customizable and damage-able cars on track at once. We're still working hard on getting as much lifelike material in the game as possible, but we're thrilled with what we've been able to achieve – and we think players will be too.

http://www.xboxworld.com.au/articles/interviews/forza-2-interview---xbw-&-microsoft-game-studios.htm

 

[Lucas]

MonkeySkater

So true, that I changed a line on my signature. I'm reporting this thread, I can't stand where is it heading...

EDIT: Props go to Kinetic, for starting the original argument. Thank you, we really needed it. This is why Forza or any other game for that matter shouldn't be in a GT5 dedicated subforum.

 

[Devedander]

Devedander, don't even bother to continue, I'm telling you this as a partner in logic, cause this is an argument you can't win in a GT dedicated forum.

It doesn't bother me really... I am a debate fan... debate is great because you don't have to win to enjoy the trip

http://www.xboxworld.com.au/articles/interviews/forza-2-interview---xbw-&-microsoft-game-studios.htm

Zer0 (devils advocate here) so where does that say they didn't choose 8 over 12? In fact if you want to take it at face value, maybe what he said was accurate, maybe 12 were and are possible, but again, they just chose not to go 12 because it was too cluttered?

I bet you are cringing at that line of logic aren't you?

Now look around the forums... you will see that kind of logic backing up any number of shortcomings dealing with GT...

 

[Tenacious D]

Devedander, I was going to make a point by point address to your post, and spent about 20 minutes on it, but honestly, why bother. Regardless of how I slant my posts addressing Forza, it only really matters if I post incorrect contradictory matter, like saying "The bots in GT5 won't ram you blindly like the bots in Forza do." Which the Forza bots do. They do it in F3 videos on the net. So what? I mean, it is funny, considering Dan Greenawalt is making the very same claims about F3's A.I. that he did about F2. Is it a deal breaker? No. Is it a point of contention with the Forza fans here? Yes, because their arguments are one sided and they ignore their own game's idiosyncrasies, and the blatant flatulence coming from T10 spokeshumans.

If F3 was pretty much the same game as GT5, then I would still have a bone to pick with Turn 10, because they couldn't even bother to spend the effort to come up with their own game. Which is exactly what they did with Forza to start with, they just basically stole Kazunori's entire concept. And they couldn't even bother with a thank you or any good words of appreciation. Especially now.

You can make light of Zer0's post if you like, but it just makes your position look sillier.

It doesn't matter how many cars does a game have, it matters how many of those are you actually going to use. I compared Forza 2's car list to that of GT4. And GT4 just overflows with Skylines, Evolutions, and Imprezas, something that everyone has noticed, even those who have played the game for just two days. Forza 2 doesn't.

I still don't see your point. If you take out every Skyline, Evolution, and Impreza from GT4, you're getting a game with well over 600 cars. I sold some from my GT4 garage just yesterday and still have over 370 cars, cars that I intend to keep, and add to. I can't have that many cars in my Forza 2 garage, because I reached my limit. Now, some of them are in limbo on the auction house server just so I can have a space of three or four cars to work with. And this, with a 120gig hard drive!

What do I care about the interiors of buildings, if I can't even see them? How do you know they are not lying to you? What purpose do they have? Especially when you could model just a small part of the building, and having the same effect, cause granted, an empty box and a full one will have the same aspect. Can I drive into the buildings? Do I work inside the buildings to earn cash to tune my car? That makes perfect sense.

You seem to have conveniently forgotten the roadside detail debates, like the one dealing with trees. See, this is something a number of people want improved. It does add something tangible to the racing experience. For me, it wasn't a huge deal, but the improvements Polyphony made to Tokyo are breathtaking, and I really like it. It is a good thing. Now, what it means as far as stuff that has to be toned down, I don't know. It may mean nothing. But acting like it doesn't matter is to ignore the uproar it's caused to the internet community we both belong in. Just like seeing the sun line up well with shadows in GT4 and Prologue. Just like seeing damage. Just like learning that GT5 will have Ferrari and Lamborghini. Just like learning it has the NASCAR and WRC license. Everyone doesn't think like you. Me either, but I'm willing to bet if you browse the GT5 discussions and looked at the content, you'd find more posters like me than you. Hey, maybe we're all just fanboys when it comes to Gran Turismo.

 

[lpb-nissan-gt-r]

Nobody cares enough to argue this much over a computer game you guys need to take a step back and relise (SP) that you are adults arguing over a pair of games ( which are both good) so just let it go.

 

[Devedander]

Devedander, I was going to make a point by point address to your post, and spent about 20 minutes on it, but honestly, why bother. Regardless of how I slant my posts addressing Forza, it only really matters if I post incorrect contradictory matter, like saying "The bots in GT5 won't ram you blindly like the bots in Forza do." Which the Forza bots do. They do it in F3 videos on the net. So what?

So what do you think of the ridiculous pileup in the video recently fom gamecon? I have been told that videos mean nothing since the product is not released yet...

If F3 was pretty much the same game as GT5, then I would still have a bone to pick with Turn 10, because they couldn't even bother to spend the effort to come up with their own game. Which is exactly what they did with Forza to start with, they just basically stole Kazunori's entire concept. And they couldn't even bother with a thank you or any good words of appreciation. Especially now.

I think we are getting somewhere here... if only I had a leather couch for you to lie on while you unearth these truths...

So basically you harbor a deep dislike or even hatred for T10 for stealing from GT/PD... interesting... do you think this might make you unable to be truly objective? If T10 cranked out somethign seperate but equal do you think you could openly recognize it as such? If T10 surpassed GT in a undeniable fashion would you be happy at the results or feel more angry at their success?

BTW I seem to recall back in the Forza 1 days, some (or many) from Turn 10 openly said they were GT fans and GT is what inspired them to do what they are doing... they were taking something they really liked and trying to improve on it...

That's not exactly slapping "thank you GT!" on the lable of ever Forza box, but still...

Also, new generas are discovered and developed all the time... how many games give tribute to the original platformers (mmm Jungle Hunt... Pit Fall... Mario...) and I don't see a lot of sandbox games paying tribute to GTA... do you really feel it's a reasonable grudge to hold?

 

[Zer0]

Zer0 (devils advocate here) so where does that say they didn't choose 8 over 12? In fact if you want to take it at face value, maybe what he said was accurate, maybe 12 were and are possible, but again, they just chose not to go 12 because it was too cluttered?

I highly doubt:

[youtubehd]xK-0UlwidNM[/youtubehd]

[youtubehd]db5W8cVhdm0[/youtubehd]