Eurogamer preview

  • Thread starter PzR Slim
  • 42 comments
  • 3,633 views
Zer0
Seems you don't know all the history:

http://www.xbox360achievements.org/...on-the-Market-is-Within-Years-of-Forza-3.html



They are not different from all the game media. Check their FM3 review:


http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=17987445&postcount=5682

Call it bias, blinded hype or paying sponsors but that is not professional journalism, just spreading disinformation like most sites did to hype even more the game. I hope that using quotes like "The King of Racers" or "The highest rated racing franchise of the generation" as the first words for the E3 FM4 presentation has nothing to do with that.
http://www.eurogamer.net/videos/forza-4-e3-2011-microsoft-presentation?size=large
Click to expand...

Written Sunday, September 27, 2009 By Dan Webb

GT5 release date is December 2010.

I suspect he is correct, since he didn't see anything released on the 360 or PS3 that came close Forza 3 (nor on PC with the plethora of FM3 features) when he was interviewed.

So, who do you trust to deliver a decent Forza preview and/or review?
Click to expand...

I am sure it would be any place that gave Forza a score lower than 84 ;)
 
Zer0
I would trust an independent knowledgeable source, difficult I know, but at times you can found some good reviews in the forums.
Click to expand...

Well... I, personally, wouldn't trust a review done by a single person if i have little to no info about that person. I know ISR is probably going to rate FM4 higher than what it deserves, but for most people, I wouldn't know whether they're being honest or biased towards or against the game...

And, as of late, there have been enough people biased towards GT in the Forza section to make me think twice about trusting a review that's being poseted here...

Bogie 19th
I am sure it would be any place that gave Forza a score lower than 84 ;)
Click to expand...
Well... There'll be enough reviews voting the game down, I guess.

For me, there's always one big problem: Aside from ISR, i don't know of any reviewer that's focusing a lot on the simulation side of things, and I don't think too highly of ISR.
I've got to admit that I'm usually more concerned about the game aspects than the simulation aspects, so reading reviews by IGN, Eurogamer, Gamespot and so on does cover that. It's just hard to get some reliable info on the simulation bit.

In this case, though, it's pretty simple. Forza 3 was one of the best games I've played on the 360 and after GT5 fell flat for me, it's the only enjoyable game of it's kind this generation so far, so it's a day one purchase for me. I'll be preordering the Limited Collectors Edition that's bound to be announced as soon as I can.
I'll be keeping an eye on what reviews I can agree with though.
 
Luminis
Well... I, personally, wouldn't trust a review done by a single person if i have little to no info about that person. I know ISR is probably going to rate FM4 higher than what it deserves, but for most people, I wouldn't know whether they're being honest or biased towards or against the game...

And, as of late, there have been enough people biased towards GT in the Forza section to make me think twice about trusting a review that's being poseted here...
Click to expand...
What I don't trust from ISR are their realism facts, in most cases they lack the real world experience to review a real car vs game. They seem to fill their RL gaps with the developers info of the physical engine, more numbers in screen = more realistic, and apply the formula to the whole game and all cars.

Anyway ISR reviews are ok to know features and things like that.

The good thing of a sim is that most of the points can be proved like facts, at the end of the day you are comparing games to real life no games vs games, so most times is easy to know when someone is biased or not.


Bogie 19th
I suspect he is correct, since he didn't see anything released on the 360 or PS3 that came close Forza 3 (nor on PC with the plethora of FM3 features) when he was interviewed.

I am sure it would be any place that gave Forza a score lower than 84 ;)
Click to expand...
Are not features what Dan is stating in the quotes.

I'm more interested in the facts stated in the review than the number they will give. ;)
 
Zer0
Anyway ISR reviews are ok to know features and things like that.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I've stated something like that sometime ago, that's exactly what I'll be doing with the ISR review (if it's out before I get the game, that is) 👍

Zer0
The good thing of a sim is that most of the points can be proved like facts, at the end of the day you are comparing games to real life no games vs games, so most times is easy to know when someone is biased or not.
Click to expand...
Well, I'm not too sure about that. There are some things that are plain as day to see when they're off (like no pit stiops in Shift 2), but stuff that's as subtle as the how the cars handle in a game, now that's a completely different ballpark.
I, for example, have absolutely no idea how easy it would be to catch an F40 once it starts to oversteer, so it'll be hard to tell whether they've nailed that or not. Most people haven't driven more than one or two of the cars that are replicated in the game at racing speeds, so it's always just a bit of guestimating. There are a lot of hints as to whether the game is indeed realistic or not, but seperating those from PR talk and bias is always tough, based on just a review.

And, lastly, it's pretty hard to tell how close the game is to the real thing if your yard stick is off a bit itself. For example, if people were to use GT5 as a reference, it might be possible that FM4 is replicating reality more accurately and would still be getting flak for it (which, I think, is happening a lot).
 
When is the next opportunity T10 get to show more info?
Is there another E3 type thing before release?

Can't wait.
 
Well, there's the gamescom in Germany from August 17th to 21st and Tokyo Gameshow in Japan (duh) from September 15th to 18th.
Those are probably the best opportunities fir T10 to release some info.
 
Luminis
Well, there's the gamescom in Germany from August 17th to 21st and Tokyo Gameshow in Japan (duh) from September 15th to 18th.
Those are probably the best opportunities fir T10 to release some info.
Click to expand...

Thanks Lumi. Germany it is then.
 
I think the reason the word 'sim' is often debated over because it can be judged in many ways, it seems there are two main measures,

1. How much is being simulated / How complex is the simulation
2. How close to reality are the things being simulated.

And there immediately is the issue, FM3 excels at 1., but is somewhat lacking a bit in 2.

ISR are exceedingly slanted to assessing complexity of physics and anything that gives good Tyre feel/feedback, if you listen to the initial FM3 review, where you hear the above quotes people have mentioned, they qualify it by saying its because its modelling a ton of stuff.. I've found they have got better and better at reviewing newer stuff, they scored GT5 ahead on physics for reasons I agree with, and nailed shift 2's handling issues, but you have to take their scores with a pinch of salt, trying to review the broad range of current games with 1 score for physics is impossible, so I just listen to the comparitive comments.

The bottom line is, bread/depth of physics and realism are too different things, iRacing is about the best overall similar that does everything well, our favorite console games are rather too biased one way or the other at the moment, so debate and dispute are expected IMO, until FM or GT improve to fulfill both measures, it will just keep this debate going.
 
Spagetti69
Thanks Lumi. Germany it is then.
Click to expand...

You're welcome.

Dunno, I've been thinking about attending gamescom again this year... If Forza is confirmed to be shown, I definitely will. I'll try my best to get some first hand impressions for everyone here at GTP if I do so.

phil-t
1. How much is being simulated / How complex is the simulation
2. How close to reality are the things being simulated.
Click to expand...

Yeah... I just think that nobody's that close yet, so there's always the fact that different developers go different approaches. So, let's say two get it 85% right, but with completely different approaches - so there's a difference of 30% between both games - so to speak. I really don't know how to phrase this any better.
 
See, I would take the opposite view in that in terms of depth of parameters, it's actually quite weak (rF 1225 for instance just destroys Forza 3 in terms of parameters simulated) but the basic accuracy of what they did simulate was (mostly) of a reasonable quality.

ISR - I don't like these guys terribly much and they have an awful habit of simply making stuff up, and putting this kind of pseudo-scientific veneer on it. It's pretty obvious they don't actually test or delve much into things before giving whatever game an adjusted 34523854 point realism scale. To the point where you would think if they were honest mistakes they would be quite embarrassed by it.
 
boxox
See, I would take the opposite view in that in terms of depth of parameters, it's actually quite weak (rF 1225 for instance just destroys Forza 3 in terms of parameters simulated) but the basic accuracy of what they did simulate was (mostly) of a reasonable quality.

ISR - I don't like these guys terribly much and they have an awful habit of simply making stuff up, and putting this kind of pseudo-scientific veneer on it. It's pretty obvious they don't actually test or delve much into things before giving whatever game an adjusted 34523854 point realism scale. To the point where you would think if they were honest mistakes they would be quite embarrassed by it.
Click to expand...

It is hard to tell, I know you are partialy basing your quite valid opinion on the amount of parameters in the various DB's found on the game disk, I think however that just from what can be seen in the telemetry and what can be empirically seen from driving, you can at least see that there is a reasonable amount being modelled reasonably well, pressures, temperature, wear, geometry, flex and how these are affected by things, and especially interaction with the surface (what little track bumps there are, kerbs) as well as other cars.

I do agree that rF is way ahead, when I say FM is quite complex, I mean this in terms of its console peers.

And to some extent I agree about ISR, they do seem to rely on developer rhetoric, and did sound out of place in how they described somethings, I have just found that lately, if you ignore the obviously fllowery bits, they do seem to give a more rounded and reasonable, if somewhat scientifically lacking, reasonable stab at the general traits of the physics, you can see they are slowly improving, but they are never going to be as analytical as we would like, they are a more mass apppeal orientated show afterall, with pretty average man off the street type people.... You just have to put it in context, as a cursory comparison site.
 
Well.... I dunno. On consoles you have Shift and Race Pro both using more or less exactly the same system as rF - and for that matter, both actually replace or compensate respectively for some broken stuff in rF. Go back earlier and you find pretty much identical ports of F1 2002 and Richard Burns Rally in the PS2/Xbox era.

So really, for about the last decade or so, the claims of the PC being inherently more powerful for sims are just pure crap - the PS3 and 360 are actually quite a bit ahead, in terms of computational power, of the kind of baseline PC spec originally targeted by most physics engines we see used on the PC today (~2002-2003 spec doesn't even extend to multiple cores, and 512mb non-unified memory was pretty reasonable). So to say there hasn't ever been a console racing game every bit as advanced as what you see on PC is nothing more than ignorant tribalism from nervous PC only folks IMO :)
 

Latest Posts

Back