Forza 4 vs GT5 physics (read the first post before contributing)

Which game do you find has superior physics?

  • Gran Turismo 5

    Votes: 1,142 80.5%
  • Forza 4

    Votes: 167 11.8%
  • They are equal

    Votes: 110 7.8%

  • Total voters
    1,419

HighSeasHoMastr

Heel-Toe Hero
Premium
877
United States
Mill Creek, WA
HighSeasHoMastr
HighSeasHoMastr
Just ran a stock 2005 Honda NIX-R at Tsukuba in Forza 4 and got a 1:05.345 in a few laps. Could maybe get another 1-1.5 seconds out of it.

What's your point? This only proves that both games are a little too quick. Because lets be honest: if we can come within half a second of the record time for the car in only a few laps, the game is too quick. I doubt either of us are the absolute fastest guys in these games either, but I guarantee that the real time was set by one someone seriously quick, not just a track-day enthusiast.

Its been said before, but matching times to real life only really proves that you can match times to real life. It doesn't prove realism because it is far to manipulatable. I could match a real world time in Grid or PGR also, does that mean that those games are realistic?
 
374
Australia
mackay,qld
sik180_tR
HighSeasHoMastr
Just ran a stock 2005 Honda NIX-R at Tsukuba in Forza 4 and got a 1:05.345 in a few laps. Could maybe get another 1-1.5 seconds out of it.

What's your point? This only proves that both games are a little too quick. Because lets be honest: if we can come within half a second of the record time for the car in only a few laps, the game is too quick. I doubt either of us are the absolute fastest guys in these games either, but I guarantee that the real time was set by one someone seriously quick, not just a track-day enthusiast.

Its been said before, but matching times to real life only really proves that you can match times to real life. It doesn't prove realism because it is far to manipulatable. I could match a real world time in Grid or PGR also, does that mean that those games are realistic?

I'm obviously talking about pushing for a fast lap.Grid and PGR should not have even been mentioned,because anyone knows that if you even half tried you could easily destroy real world times.My point is that results and feel are what matter,regardless of how you get there.

I know for a fact the top gear test track times on forza 4 are rediculously fast compared to their real world counterparts.And i'm sorry but in my opinion,when driving a car to it's full potential or it's limits,matching real world lap times is realistic to me.

EDIT::also when i said squeezed i meant maybe a couple hundredths of a second,not a couple of seconds.
 
Last edited:

HighSeasHoMastr

Heel-Toe Hero
Premium
877
United States
Mill Creek, WA
HighSeasHoMastr
HighSeasHoMastr
You're kind of missing my point here man.

What places on the leaderboards (in either/both games) do you generally occupy? Top 100? Top 1000? Top 1%?

The guy that set the real time is the #1 in the real leaderboard for that car on that track. Are you #1 on any leaderboard? Even in the top 100? Because if you aren't, the fact that you can get that close proves my point: both games are too quick. Add to that the fact that you set your time in less than 10 laps and my point is proven even more.
Its not a slight against you by any means, so please don't take it personally. Im just trying to illustrate my point.

Also, just out of curiosity, does the car in question come with comfort softs stock or was it downgraded to them by you?
 

SlipZtrEm

GTP Admin
Staff Emeritus
27,384
Canada
Toronto
NewAesthetic
SlipZtrEm
Make of this what you will, but I have the sneaking suspicion that those who think matching real life lap times in games is a sign of realism are the same that put any weight in Nordschleife lap times in real life, too.

Back when I first got GT5, I did the Arcade Mode run in the GT-R to nab the PSN trophy. My very first clean lap was a solid few seconds under the requirement. I just ran the NSX-R at Tsukuba in FM4 and on my first flying lap, I'm comfortably under the real life goal time by slightly over a second (1:03.814). Popping over to GT5, buying a new NSX-R, giving it an oil change, and heading onto the track, my second flying lap produced a 1:03.423.

Now, if we want to operate under the idea that PD, working towards the goal of realism, stuck the majority of cars with tires too grippy... okay. I'll switch over to Comfort Softs. Eight laps in, my best was a 1:04.669. Still faster than the real life time, with minimal time spent on it (and I haven't even raced in GT5 for a serious amount in months). It also turned the car into a bit of an evil pig, really... understeery until you're about 3/4 around a curve, then it has no problems going into snap oversteer with no telegraphing of the impending hip-swing.

Matching times doesn't mean the game is more realistic. It means the times you're capable of hitting in the game match those in the real world. It means you've become adept at manipulating the (relatively, to real world) simplistic physics of a game to achieve a time roughly representative of a real world scenario, nothing else. It's marketing gold, of course, but the amount of variables present in the real world, and the lack of them in a game, should be the obvious sign it's not incredibly relevant. The Nordschleife, for example, can have wildly varying weather all within a single lap. No real life lap takes place on the absolute "perfect" track conditions, yet we enjoy them easily in a simulation (and really, why shouldn't we?).

Besides, intentionally handicapping a car to bring it closer to real life times sort of proves the idea bunk, anyways. I sure would hope the tires that come on the car would be the most accurate, wouldn't you?

Don't get me wrong, it's very cool to compare lap times from real life and video games, but I wouldn't put much stock in it as conclusive evidence of realism.
 

dylansan

Premium
4,814
United States
Massachusetts
GTP_dylansan
MINICOOPER120
All it means to get a similar laptime is that you traveled at the same average speed. It's the way the speed varies over a lap and the way inputs affect the speed that really determine how good a simulation it is. Otherwise you could program a car to move at a constant speed and claim it's the most accurate because the laptimes are the same.
 

HighSeasHoMastr

Heel-Toe Hero
Premium
877
United States
Mill Creek, WA
HighSeasHoMastr
HighSeasHoMastr
Thanks Slip, that's basically the point I was trying to make. You put it much more eloquently than I.
 
374
Australia
mackay,qld
sik180_tR
Yes i see what your saying,also no offense taken,but my point is that the two games are so close to each other,even in their laptimes.
So really they are both as realistic as each other(despite some flaws in both games,some bigger than others,all shown through prior evidence)but ultimately they are both as good as it gets on consoles.Preference and opinions is all it is going to be.

Also i do believe that pd put the wrong tyres on the cars from stock,maybe just so the casuals didn't get scared off when they heard from mates who had it,that it is "hard to drive".The pic they show for the sports tyres is a yokohama 048r,which is a street legal semi-slick tyre,90 percent of the cars fitted with sports tyres in gt5 did not get tyres like that IRL,they got high grade passenger tyres like comfort softs,which would be equivalent to say,a yokohama s-drive,v802 or bridgestone re050 adrenalins or similar.
 
I prefer GT5 and that's cause I've got a wheel for my PS3. I like Forza for their car selection, but I feel their Nordschleife is off. That's just me though. Like I said, I like Forza but GT5 is like my brother. The GT series and GT5 in particular is a bit of an underdog in this racing genre contest and they do quite a good job. It feels to me Turn 10 has a lot of money and they can pretty much license what ever they want. And they do a good job and turn out a quality and consistent product. Where as Polyphony is all about making the ultimate Nurburgring/Driving Simulator for a console unit. In which they succeed. Can't compare a tricked out IBM AS400 game server (if anyone comments on that one, don't) to a frikin PS3. Otherwise, it is my opinion that the graphics are somewhat more quality in GT5. Can't put my finger on it but I will, Forza looks to me plastic and shiny and not as sharp as the GT5 render. The GT5 graphics look more authentic and real. Not really real. Video game real. I'm just doing the Nurb endurance race, in a R35 TC. I've got all the on screen stuff off and I'm using the internal cabin view on Zoom and it's awesome. It's just morning now and hasn't rained yet after eight hours spent 4 minutes behind I caught up the 905 at around 11 hours in and now at the 15 hour mark I've three minutes on him and the R10 LMS. And you can't say that about Forza.
 

King1982

(Banned)
832
United States
90203
King1982
I prefer GT5 and that's cause I've got a wheel for my PS3. I like Forza for their car selection, but I feel their Nordschleife is off. That's just me though. Like I said, I like Forza but GT5 is like my brother. The GT series and GT5 in particular is a bit of an underdog in this racing genre contest and they do quite a good job. It feels to me Turn 10 has a lot of money and they can pretty much license what ever they want. And they do a good job and turn out a quality and consistent product. Where as Polyphony is all about making the ultimate Nurburgring/Driving Simulator for a console unit. In which they succeed. Can't compare a tricked out IBM AS400 game server (if anyone comments on that one, don't) to a frikin PS3. Otherwise, it is my opinion that the graphics are somewhat more quality in GT5. Can't put my finger on it but I will, Forza looks to me plastic and shiny and not as sharp as the GT5 render. The GT5 graphics look more authentic and real. Not really real. Video game real. I'm just doing the Nurb endurance race, in a R35 TC. I've got all the on screen stuff off and I'm using the internal cabin view on Zoom and it's awesome. It's just morning now and hasn't rained yet after eight hours spent 4 minutes behind I caught up the 905 at around 11 hours in and now at the 15 hour mark I've three minutes on him and the R10 LMS. And you can't say that about Forza.

The only good point you make is that gt does look a tad bit better and renders and shaders are more pronounced. And even then in motion F4 is ten times smoother and at least has a rock solid framerate wich i find mouch more important to a racing game. Again consistancy over graphics. 👍
 

Famine

GTP Editor, GTPEDIA Author
Administrator
72,951
United Kingdom
Rule 12
GTP_Famine
impossible to save Forzas physics mid stride. GT you can.

Any game with a pause button "saves" the physics mid stride.

Moreso any game with a mid-race save or a rewind feature...
 
3,997
United States
New Jersey
crash27wwjd
I have never played anything on the 360, but my son has one and has played fm2, fm3, and bought fm4 on release date. I have an account for him on my ps3 so he had played both after growing up with gt2, gt3 and gt4. After 1 week he traded game in because it was, in his words, "no better then fm3 and not even close to gt5".

For what its worth, just my $0.02.
 
118
netcarshowman
They both have good engines, but it depends on what you prefer, Forza feels more arcadey (like NFS), but GT5 feels much more realistic. For me Forza just isn't realistic enough
 
7,594
Canada
Ontario,Canada
macospet1
My What?
ghd765
They both have good engines, but it depends on what you prefer, Forza feels more arcadey (like NFS), but GT5 feels much more realistic. For me Forza just isn't realistic enough

Prepare to be asked a bombardment of questions to back up your opinion, oh and you'll need proof as well...
 
7,594
Canada
Ontario,Canada
macospet1
My What?
Toronado
Do you really need to start that again?

Start what? Sure my comment made me sound like a smart ass, but usually when someone posts like he did, they're asked to back it up and for proof. It's just an observation.
 

SlipZtrEm

GTP Admin
Staff Emeritus
27,384
Canada
Toronto
NewAesthetic
SlipZtrEm
sik180sx
Yes i see what your saying,also no offense taken,but my point is that the two games are so close to each other,even in their laptimes.
So really they are both as realistic as each other(despite some flaws in both games,some bigger than others,all shown through prior evidence)but ultimately they are both as good as it gets on consoles.Preference and opinions is all it is going to be.

Also i do believe that pd put the wrong tyres on the cars from stock,maybe just so the casuals didn't get scared off when they heard from mates who had it,that it is "hard to drive".The pic they show for the sports tyres is a yokohama 048r,which is a street legal semi-slick tyre,90 percent of the cars fitted with sports tyres in gt5 did not get tyres like that IRL,they got high grade passenger tyres like comfort softs,which would be equivalent to say,a yokohama s-drive,v802 or bridgestone re050 adrenalins or similar.

So you're saying any game is as realistic as FM4/GT5 as long as it hits the same lap times, regardless of how it gets there? Can I intentionally hobble the cars, like people will in GT5, so as to make its lap times closer?

Simplifying, of course, but if a physics engine in another game had the NSX-R much faster in the straights than GT5, but slower in the turns, yet the final result was a similar lap time, well... You see the problem. Again, real life lap time comparison is about as useful as real life Green Hell lap times: sort of interesting, but shouldn't be taken as gospel.

For the record, I've always believed that SH tires are too grippy in GT5, and usually will downgrade just as you suggested. It doesn't change the fact PD intentionally fit the wrong tires to the majority of vehicles in the game, stock.

ghd765
They both have good engines, but it depends on what you prefer, Forza feels more arcadey (like NFS), but GT5 feels much more realistic. For me Forza just isn't realistic enough

Oh dear, not this again :banghead:

If you haven't played FM4 (specifically, four) for a significant amount of time, then you don't know what you're talking about. Neither title is "arcade", but if GT's utterly simplistic tire model, absence of torque steer, and exaggerated slipstreaming is more realistic, I certainly wonder what your real life driving experience consists of.
 
374
Australia
mackay,qld
sik180_tR
SlipZtrEm
So you're saying any game is as realistic as FM4/GT5 as long as it hits the same lap times, regardless of how it gets there? Can I intentionally hobble the cars, like people will in GT5, so as to make its lap times closer?

Did i really say that or are you twisting my words?
What happens if a car is to grippy from stock in forza?It's stuck like that,what about gt5?You drop down a set of tyres and you drive just as hard as you did before,now i wouldn't say thats intentionally hobbling,i'd say thats a bit of player freedom to make the car handle realistically and get close to real life lap times.
 

xDriftzzinc

(Banned)
1,120
United States
United States
DriFtZz
Honestly neither game is all that realistic. Yes both have some parts of driving right but they both have a lot wrong. As you said slipztrem (Hope I spelled that right) GT5 has a tendency to understeer 3/4 of the turn the oversteer like never before. On the other hand, forza feels relatively close to GT5 in the sense that it does the same thing. Another thing on the wheels (G27, DFGT, Xbox 360 wheels) on GT5, you have a better feel for the game, I haven't played forza on a wheels so I can't go into detail about that matter. Furthermore the DS3's on GT5 and Forza both feel like 🤬. On GT5 you are able to turn your wheels lock to lock way to fast, and on forza the transition from lock to lock is too slow. Neither game trumps the other, both GT5 and Forza4 are at a stalemate. Only reason I like GT5 better is because of the fact that forza came out 11 months after GT5 and was no better than GT5 as a whole.
 

amar212

GTSurgeons.com
Premium
4,002
Croatia
Croatia
What a good example of the snobish attitude displayed all to often in this thread.......your basically saying if somebody hasn't dropped $1000 on thier racing rigg then they have no place being involved in the debate.
God forbid somebody who has just the console and a controller be allowed to express an opinion huh?

although I am not sure how that can be thought of as saying anything other than "If you don't have the $1000+ rigg mentioned above then dont bother us with your opinion."
I don't think limiting the debate on physics to the 0.05% of players that have a top end rigg has any value. The games physics are shared by everybody no matter if they play with a little old controller or a ultra high end wheel and pedals in a full cockpit and the merits of the games physics can be debated in all of those configurations. Just my opinion.

When we talk about the physics - and as I am aware this thread is about physics - we have to really take into account the *final* mode for experiencing physics. And either we like it or not, that *final* end is playing both games on proper wheel (I will highlight the importance of *proper* in later replies downthere) with proper pedal set and without any assists.

This is internet, everybody is right on the internet and everybody has a right to his own opinion. But really, this is a driving community and we are all here because of the same love - to drive virtually. Of course, not everyone is willing or capable to invest same amount of money/time into that love, but there is really no debate about the fact how proper hardware can allow for much better and complete experience of the software.

So, when I am somewhat sarcastically proposing investment into hardware in order to comprehend why the experience of the physics is drastically different if that prerequisite is not met, I am not snobbish or elitist. I just happen to be either lucky or crazy enough to invest into the option that allows to me experience the physics model of both games in the *final* end. And once done, that experience allows me to come here and say how it is really pointless to discuss about physics of both games if that *final* is not experienced by the both sides. I do not see anything snobbish or elitist there, but you're welcome to call me names - I have already used to that.

Also worth noticing is how I agree that using controllers on both games can give some idea about the physics involved beneath, but both games are also having invisible assists in controller modes that at the end results with somewhat dumbed-down sensation of physics. Forza 4 have steering buffer involved into controller even on Simulation setting, while GT5 goes even further and it *invisibly* recognizes input devices and alters the steering to the device selected. Thus both sensations on both games can't be on the *final* end because of that and experiences and sensations between the players who are using different devices are very different.

Even further, sensations of physics are also greatly different inside each of the games. You really can't discuss physics of the Forza without heading into the unforgiving world of full 900-steering in the Simulation mode which is the only mode that simulates the accurate tyre-thereshold, limits of suspension travel and realistic grip of the compounds. Also, physics of GT5 does not become fully released before you disengage the braking assist (arbitrary and wrongly named "ABS", although it has nothing to do with the actual ABS and it is nothing but supernatural braking assist) where actual characteristics of the particular vehicle become *alive*.

I am saying all this because I want to explain why it is really pointless to ague about something without taking everything that both games offer/presents in full and than come with the conclusions.

I do not say how differences can't be debated and I would never think that. But it becomes really annoying to read thousands of posts where people come and brag about something they didn't experienced properly and once you try to explain why something they say is basically not accurate, you become "snob" or "elitist". Which is really not fair nor adds any value to particular discussion.

While adequate equipment is good to have it shouldn't be necessary to have the best possible wheel to tell the difference. For example the DFP I have had since the year GT4 came out has been more than enough to make it possible for me to tell the difference between different games.
Just in case no-one wants to read back,yes i have a wheel,fanatec porsche turbo s with clubsports and six speed shifter,i use the clutch on anything it allows.

Unfortunately, in order to experience physics of both games in their full potential, the best possible hardware is really necessary.

For example, older Logitech wheel family uses now very old FF technology and older versions of TouchSense software. Playing GT5 on DFP for example can never provide an actual sensation of the physics, because that wheel just can't transfer all details of physics provided by the game.

Same goes for Fanatec wheels. Unfortunately, only the latest CSR family of wheels are capable of simulating both physics complexity in full.

Please do not take this as an insult, I quoted your posts because you're both referring to the somewhat older wheels and I used your posts as an examples. I was lucky owner of all models of Logitech wheels and many Fanatec models through last decade. But complexity of the wheel support and new SDK libraries of both games are full generation ahead of those older models. I was blown-away by the difference of sensation between my Fanatec GT2 model and CSR Elite in both GT5 and FM4 - and those two models are separated by just one year. However, sensation feels like a different game. Same goes for GT5. And also there is a vast difference once we begin to talk about the brakes and feeling of braking, which is another lengthy subject...

And even then in motion F4 is ten times smoother and at least has a rock solid framerate wich i find mouch more important to a racing game. Again consistancy over graphics. 👍

A tad hyperbolic, yes? Going into graphics is not a subject of this thread, but to be as much polite as I can, what you've said is plain not accurate on too many levels. Both games are taking heavy compromises in graphical department in order to met goals of desired performance and you can find such "shortcuts" everywhere in both titles.

They both have good engines, but it depends on what you prefer, Forza feels more arcadey (like NFS), but GT5 feels much more realistic. For me Forza just isn't realistic enough

You should really try Forza on Simulation setting. GT5 is also very arcadish when played with the SRF/TCS/ABS assists (none of those assists are really a simulation of real-world traction control or ABS systems, they are just driving assists that dubms-down particular element of physics-complexity (either lateral/longitudinal movement of the suspension or real-time adjusting the tire-grip and limiting body-roll), same as Forza played on Standard physics.

Both games really becomes truly alive once you turn off all the assists and go into full simulation-setting.

To conclude on my personal stance of this matter, I find both games excels in their own area, with shortcomings in another. I will never agree with Scaff about the Forza's suspension-physics, because I personally find it very *dead* and not complex enough in terms of the actual sensation - although in basic numbers and variables it is probably more *accurate* than one of GT5.

For example, there is very interesting guy overthere on Gamefaqs forum who is using modded X360 console and he mods FM4 cars onthe same way we were doing backthan in era of GT1 and GT2 with Gameshark. For example he discovered how brake upgrades in FM4 affects total braking power, disc size, caliper size, number of pistons and drum to disc conversions - which is something you can never "see" in the game, but is very flattering to know the complexity of mechanics-philosophy that FM4 hides beneath the surface.

Latest patches of FM4 drastically improved force feedback sensation and finally allowed for a real experience that was lacking to FM series until now. But I have to say how actual *connectivity* with the car is still not on the level of GT5, mainly because of lack of HID-connection (X360 uses wireless-enabled XID protocol where there is not direct contact of the steering device and motherboard), and I have really high hopes how NextBox will finally come with ability to have our wheels connected directly to USB and experience a proper HID FF effects. But current level of FF sensation is almost perfect and both T10 and Fanatec have to be congratulated for the result we can experience at this point.

I really love the feel of tyre-grip and tyre-thereshold in Forza 4 and I somehow prefer it over GT5's. In GT5 you can keep the grip and speed of movement even once you go into drift, while Forza portrays the grip-slip more realistically. However, *dead* suspension (and lack of connection through FF effect) are hurting that experience and equalize result regarding actual feel of physics. From my personal perspective I conclude how there is no clear winner in this "VS" match. I would like to see many details from GT5 physics in Forza (suspension physics, non-ABS sensation, grip levels of *normal* tyres, wheel support and FF sensation..) and vice-versa (tyre-thersehold, tyre-grip slippage, low-speed collision physics, overall torque simulation, etc..). But both games are providing almost impossible level of accuracy in what they do and they're equally good. If I could travel to future from 1997 and experience what I am taking for granted today in 2012 in the genre, I would probably go crazy thinking what have I experienced and will never believe we will actually be where we are today in less than 15 years.

I would really love that as many people as possible have the time, funds or will to experience what I tried to highlight in above post so we can discuss it from the same perspective. Now it may sound snobbish or whatever, but that is just the way it is. You can watch Avatar 3D on the old black&white set and it will be a very good looking movie. But when seen on 60" 3D plasma it will become a drastically different experience. Same with this subject we're talking about, unfortunately.
 
When we talk about the physics - and as I am aware this thread is about physics - we have to really take into account the *final* mode for experiencing physics. And either we like it or not, that *final* end is playing both games on proper wheel (I will highlight the importance of *proper* in later replies downthere) with proper pedal set and without any assists.

This is internet, everybody is right on the internet and everybody has a right to his own opinion. But really, this is a driving community and we are all here because of the same love - to drive virtually. Of course, not everyone is willing or capable to invest same amount of money/time into that love, but there is really no debate about the fact how proper hardware can allow for much better and complete experience of the software.

So, when I am somewhat sarcastically proposing investment into hardware in order to comprehend why the experience of the physics is drastically different if that prerequisite is not met, I am not snobbish or elitist. I just happen to be either lucky or crazy enough to invest into the option that allows to me experience the physics model of both games in the *final* end. And once done, that experience allows me to come here and say how it is really pointless to discuss about physics of both games if that *final* is not experienced by the both sides. I do not see anything snobbish or elitist there, but you're welcome to call me names - I have already used to that.

Also worth noticing is how I agree that using controllers on both games can give some idea about the physics involved beneath, but both games are also having invisible assists in controller modes that at the end results with somewhat dumbed-down sensation of physics. Forza 4 have steering buffer involved into controller even on Simulation setting, while GT5 goes even further and it *invisibly* recognizes input devices and alters the steering to the device selected. Thus both sensations on both games can't be on the *final* end because of that and experiences and sensations between the players who are using different devices are very different.

Even further, sensations of physics are also greatly different inside each of the games. You really can't discuss physics of the Forza without heading into the unforgiving world of full 900-steering in the Simulation mode which is the only mode that simulates the accurate tyre-thereshold, limits of suspension travel and realistic grip of the compounds. Also, physics of GT5 does not become fully released before you disengage the braking assist (arbitrary and wrongly named "ABS", although it has nothing to do with the actual ABS and it is nothing but supernatural braking assist) where actual characteristics of the particular vehicle become *alive*.

I am saying all this because I want to explain why it is really pointless to ague about something without taking everything that both games offer/presents in full and than come with the conclusions.

I do not say how differences can't be debated and I would never think that. But it becomes really annoying to read thousands of posts where people come and brag about something they didn't experienced properly and once you try to explain why something they say is basically not accurate, you become "snob" or "elitist". Which is really not fair nor adds any value to particular discussion.

Thank you for taking the time to clarify that. It had sounded like you were saying that nobody should comment at all unless they had a high end rigg so your clarification certainly helps.

I can see your point about using the highest quality wheel possible in order to experience the best that either game can offer. Although I do question how much of the difference you are feeling at that point is coming from the game and how much is just down to the fact you are using the best possible wheel in Forza vs a wheel pretending to be a Logitech G25 in GT5. It's not exactly a equal comparisson.

But my bigger issue is in comparing the physics using a setup that very, very few players will ever experience. Sure it may show you the best the game can offer but if 99.9% of people are never going to play the game that way then what does that comparisson actually prove. I would argue very little.

If most people are going to play the game using a standard controller then knowing that one game is slightly better than the other if you have a $700 wheel is meaningless.

I'm not saying that how it reacts with a ultra setup isn't important or shouldn't be debated.....but make it very clear that you are talking about the physics of the games under conditions that very, very few people will ever experience.

And when debating which game has the better physics in practice I would think that how the physics engine will be experienced by the large majority of players is at least as important as how the physics engine will be expereinced by the very few people that can afford a high end rigg.

I just think the debate should be open to anybody regardless of how they play the game. If you have a $1000+ setup then, hey, that's great for you. But that doesn't mean that the comments from somebody using just a controller are any less valid just because that is how they have to play.

And if somebody who is using a controller feels that the cars react one way in game then saying that is not an issue for the game since if they have a $700 wheel they would feel something different is a terrible none answer. They are in all probablility not going to drop $700 on a wheel so how the game feels with a controller is far more important to them than how the game feels to you with the best wheel on the market.

Just my opinion.
 

amar212

GTSurgeons.com
Premium
4,002
Croatia
Croatia
I full respect what you say and I have full respect to all type of players.

But again, discussion about physics can't be finite if almost all discussants are discussing something they have not experienced properly.

Again, I have nothing about anybody's opinion - everybody have a right to have one, no doubt about it - but too many players are coming here taking liberty to state some *conclusions* which are absolutely not accurate not based on real state of things.

Like I said above, it really comes down as hypothetical discussion about quality of video-effects and overall experience of the Avatar movie among people who watched in on B&W TV set from '63 and group that has watched it in 3D IMAX theatre. Both groups can somewhat equally discuss about storyline, narration or scrript-similarities between King of Lions and Pocahontas, but first group really can't discuss about overall experience because they absolutely lack one very important piece of experience needed for making any finite conclusions.
 

Spagetti69

Is not my real name.
Premium
10,403
GTP_Spag69
spagetti69
sik180sx
Did i really say that or are you twisting my words?
What happens if a car is to grippy from stock in forza?It's stuck like that,.

Hang on a minute mate, let me just stop you there a moment.

You missed the too grippy period a while back.
Currently we are at the driving on ice metaphor at the moment.

Next week is the too grippy week I think.
It recycles you see.

Carry on.
 
I full respect what you say and I have full respect to all type of players.

But again, discussion about physics can't be finite if almost all discussants are discussing something they have not experienced properly.

Again, I have nothing about anybody's opinion - everybody have a right to have one, no doubt about it - but too many players are coming here taking liberty to state some *conclusions* which are absolutely not accurate not based on real state of things.

Like I said above, it really comes down as hypothetical discussion about quality of video-effects and overall experience of the Avatar movie among people who watched in on B&W TV set from '63 and group that has watched it in 3D IMAX theatre. Both groups can somewhat equally discuss about storyline, narration or scrript-similarities between King of Lions and Pocahontas, but first group really can't discuss about overall experience because they absolutely lack one very important piece of experience needed for making any finite conclusions.

To continue the Avatar analogy. Imagine if Avatar had been released in 1989 instead of 2009.

The vast majority of people would have had no way to watch Avatar on a true 3D IMAX screen. Some people would have been able to, but it would be the tiny majority of people watching the movie.

So sure if you want to talk about the very best that Avatar has to offer you would need to have watched it in a 3D IMAX theater first......but since so few people would be able to do that then the discussion of what Avatar is like in a plane old 2D Dolby Digital theater is the more relevant discussion for the majority of people.

and if Avatar in 2D limits people's enjoyment of the movie then that is a serious problem for the movie no matter how amazing it is in 3D.

in 2012 the vast majority of people plaving Forza and GT are doing so with a controller and not a $700 wheel.
 

SlipZtrEm

GTP Admin
Staff Emeritus
27,384
Canada
Toronto
NewAesthetic
SlipZtrEm
Did i really say that or are you twisting my words?

Well, you did say this:

but my point is that the two games are so close to each other,even in their laptimes.
So really they are both as realistic as each other...

Which certainly implies as such. If you meant it in a different way, some clarification would be excellent 👍

What happens if a car is to grippy from stock in forza?It's stuck like that,what about gt5?You drop down a set of tyres and you drive just as hard as you did before,now i wouldn't say thats intentionally hobbling,i'd say thats a bit of player freedom to make the car handle realistically and get close to real life lap times.

The problem with this approach is that by sacrificing the performance to achieve closer-to-real-life lap times, you're typically ruining the accelerative stats of the car, moving it further from realism. I'll readily admit I haven't done a whole lot of testing on this in GT5 lately (was more concerned about it in GT4), but as GT5's tire model consists of simple multipliers for grip based on the compound used, I imagine it still holds true to a degree. I'll have to explore that some more this week.

It is player freedom (and if I'm honest, I wouldn't mind a bit more tire options in FM4), but it's the freedom to... intentionally hobble the car, since PD still chose to fit SH cars to most vehicles, when they're really too grippy in the majority of situations. I don't buy "making it easier for the casuals" as much of an excuse, either, since there's already the handy God Mode that is SRF, and all the other associated aids.

...

On Amar's points - first, let me say I'm jealous, since current situations get in the way of me having all the fun bits and bobs he has. But I will say users who don't have full-on rig setups still have vital info to share with others, as DaveS1138 points out - rigs, while excellent, are still the tiny minority. I had a wheel for GT5, it was good fun, but it died and quite frankly, there's other things that require more attention these days from me, so the CSR fund is very slowly amassing spare change instead of being irresponsibly bought outright. That said, I still got months out of GT5 with my old wheel, but as of now, I have to compare the two games the only way I can; through each system's respective controllers. At least that's a level playing field, and I can still get much of the info on the physics model, the recordable, hard numbers. What I can't speak of definitively is the steering feel - I can speak of it in relation to how it feels on the controller, but I readily accept that I'm missing out on a lot of the nuance a good wheel setup provides.

For example, however; I can experience something similar to Amar's experiences, with regards to the grip/slip equation. Taking that NSX-R around Tsukuba in both games last night, FM4 is decidedly more punishing when it comes to overwhelming the tires: you will lose speed, and you will not cut lap times. The first turn at Tsukuba saw me tip-toeing around, gently applying more throttle as I eased the steering wheel straight, much like a real car. My lap in GT, despite being a similar time, looks far more hooligan - you can get the rear to step out a bit with very little penalty, lap-time-wise. Certainly not as much as FM4, at any rate. Thinking about this interesting contrast, I think I've finally realized why drifting has always come incredibly easy to me in GT5, but I've had a hard time coming to terms with it in FM4.

I wish GT5's replays had as much control as FM4's do - I've been doing acceleration tests lately in the latter, and thanks to rewind/fast-forward in replays, I can get times down to the thousandth of a second, and the telemetry options are also extremely detailed. I'll have a fiddle at some point in the next few days and maybe take an iPhone video or two to explain it better to those who can't experience it, but I can't stress this enough - I've been a GT fan for nearly 14 years, and while I still absolutely enjoy aspects of it, there are some very important areas that T10 have improved upon PD's formula, and it'd be to everyone's benefit if the roles switched, and PD cribbed a few moves from T10's playbook :)
 
939
DaveS1138

I think this Thread should be called "Which Game Feels more realistic for you and which physic do you enjoy more"

But unfortuntly it isn't and if you want to compare the physics you Need a Great and New Wheel,... . And Play more Then Ten hour's with both games.
 
1,505
Uruguay
Assamstadt, Germany
Flaco__13
@scaff
Damper (shock absorbers) adjustment is done by 'clicks' and no actually agreement exists as to what a 'click' is.

As such neither GT or FM are right or wrong on that score.

024271-kl-ACE-HBD.jpg


This is what I meant, adjustable in 'clicks' from 1 -12, instead of 10 ok not 100% realistic I agree but its what is done in racing, they´d adjust say 12 expansion 6 compression, In GT you´d do 10 - 5, I mean it´s just better than an NFS-like bar that goes from soft to hard or something
 
1,505
Uruguay
Assamstadt, Germany
Flaco__13
I think this Thread should be called "Which Game Feels more realistic for you and which physic do you enjoy more"

But unfortuntly it isn't and if you want to compare the physics you Need a Great and New Wheel,... . And Play more Then Ten hour's with both games.

👍 plus some real life practice, how you want to compare if you don´t know how a real car feels on a track, but I agree, It´s your own feeling that is to be asked, my 12 year old cousin loves nfs never played anything else and haven´t driven a car in RL, to him it´s immensly REAL feeling, lol



...mentioned that other game in two post´s in a row lol
 
374
Australia
mackay,qld
sik180_tR
Yes slipz i can clarify,i was comparing the games to each other using a real world lap time,saying how similar the games are to each other,i'll do some testing and see if comfort softs actually hurt the acceleration on the nsx-r.