Forza 4 VS GT5 (read the first post before you contribute)

[t.o.]

If some feature like night diving or weather causes frame rate issues, don't play those courses. Simple solution for those of us that want realistic conditions.

Sounds like a great idea until your 2nd race in career it's a night race in the rain. Then what are you gonna do?

 

[slick1ru2]

Sounds like a great idea until your 2nd race in career it's a night race in the rain. Then what are you gonna do?

You can choose your career races, to a much better extent than FM3. Turn 10 could obviously make it so you can avoid them if you wanted to also. Then what are you going to complain about?

 

[Scaff]

The driving feel is a toss-up between both. GT5 has the slightly "weightier" feel, especially when using the controller as it has rumble, this is aided by the more pronounced weight transfer visually. FM4 has the better tyre feel, despite not having rumble, the audio cues are far better. However, both games are very nice to play, the differences are just differences, not in favor of one or the other. Overall i would have to put GT5 just a tad ahead in physics though, as far as i can tell, but this is a detail that only the hardcore players would notice.

While I do feel that most of your post is a balanced view (and very close to my own) one part did strike me as a bit odd, which is the section I've quoted.

Why do you have no rumble on your 360 controller?

I get plenty on mine, particularly from the tyre, when I get it from axle tramp under a WOT launch, heavy braking and loss of traction under cornering. Get a nice big drift happening and you get a load of feedback on both traction and load transfer via the rumble.

My opinion is almost the exact opposite of yours here, the feedback via the controller is (for me with the rumble) much more detailed that I get with GT5, which I find feels almost numb in comparison.


Scaff

 

[ChromeBallz]

While I do feel that most of your post is a balanced view (and very close to my own) one part did strike me as a bit odd, which is the section I've quoted.

Why do you have no rumble on your 360 controller?

I get plenty on mine, particularly from the tyre, when I get it from axle tramp under a WOT launch, heavy braking and loss of traction under cornering. Get a nice big drift happening and you get a load of feedback on both traction and load transfer via the rumble.

My opinion is almost the exact opposite of yours here, the feedback via the controller is (for me with the rumble) much more detailed that I get with GT5, which I find feels almost numb in comparison.


Scaff

This just baffled me, but it explains why i find the 'feedback' more precise on FM4 - The rumble is a lot more subtle, to my feel anyway. I didn't really notice it untill i started paying proper attention to it.

Only had the crosscube roundabout for 2 days now ;p

I honestly feel stupid now.

 

[t.o.]

You can choose your career races, to a much better extent than FM3. Turn 10 could obviously make it so you can avoid them if you wanted to also. Then what are you going to complain about?

All depends on how many events have night/weather. If over 3/4 are then avoidance would be difficult if not impossible. Furthermore I can almost guarantee that during the course of the career you'd HAVE to do a weather/night race. You'd think they'd program the path of a career and not have new features in there somewhere?

 

[slick1ru2]

All depends on how many events have night/weather. If over 3/4 are then avoidance would be difficult if not impossible. Furthermore I can almost guarantee that during the course of the career you'd HAVE to do a weather/night race. You'd think they'd program the path of a career and not have new features in there somewhere?

3/4? Really? You go through career once and you have only done like 5% of the races, Have you played GT5? I'd say that about 2% of the career races have weather and/or night racing. Its something encountered online more than in single player. Only a few maps even have a weather option and even less a night option. Night is only on the two 24 hour tracks, Nurburgring and Sarthe. Weather is on those two and a couple more. You said yourself in another thread you thought that weather was doable at 60 fps.

 

[t.o.]

3/4? Really? You go through career once and you have only done like 5% of the races, Have you played GT5? I'd say that about 2% of the career races have weather and/or night racing. Its something encountered online more than in single player. Only a few maps even have a weather option and even less a night option. Night is only on the two 24 hour tracks, Nurburgring and Sarthe. Weather is on those two and a couple more. You said yourself in another thread you thought that weather was doable at 60 fps.

Yep I said I THINK weather is doable at 60 fps. Again, as you stated, I didn't pass this off as FACTS I passed it off as my OPINION which is based off nothing but guesswork since I haven't programmed on a 360 ever in my life. I can name the computers that I KNOW can't do it since I've programmed on those computers and know their specs but since I never programmed for the 360 I don't know anything about. It just seems , through progression of the game and other stuff I've read that it may be possible to do it with the new lighting system they're using. Then again that new system may be the thing holding it back. I wouldn't know for certain.

 

[slick1ru2]

Well let me put it another way. Until Turn 10 figures out how to put weather, night and endurance racing in their game, they are going to leave a group of players turning to GT for those experiences. Pure and simple. Once they add those, its will make GT that much less attractive.

 

[Northstar]

I think there is one major fault with enduro's in GT5, it's great that there is day/night and weather, but the lack of multi class racing is disappointing, which is odd because Forza 4 has that, but no endurance racing.

I really do hope that they can bump up the car count to at least 24 next generation as well, would make Le Mans and Nurburgring races much more interesting.

 

[ChromeBallz]

I think there is one major fault with enduro's in GT5, it's great that there is day/night and weather, but the lack of multi class racing is disappointing, which is odd because Forza 4 has that, but no endurance racing.

I really do hope that they can bump up the car count to at least 24 next generation as well, would make Le Mans and Nurburgring races much more interesting.

You can try multiclass in multiplayer i guess.

Only 24 cars would be a letdown tbh, i'm counting on 48 at least (for the endurance races anyway). Taking GT5 as a benchmark for car detail, you don't need to make it any higher for in-race models (though they could do with some proper modelling of the underside), so they can focus on the tracks and higher car counts for the next generation - Or, god forbid, either company (Polyphony or Turn10) decides to make a PC version ;p

 

[hawkeye122]

At the outset i'd just like to say that
A. I know a trial doesn't present the full game
B. I know that FM4 is FAR better than Shift

Honestly, I played the trial a bit at my mates house, to see if I'd actually want to got to the hassle of buying an Xbox, paying for the Live subscription, and then buying the game.

Whatever the track was that it lets you drive on (A fictional Swiss track with lots of banking) seemed very... Not track-like. Reminded me a bit of NFS Hot Pursuit (The older one from like 2004)

Also, the Ferrari 458 looked fantastic, but it seemed like there was absolutely no mechanical grip. The back felt obscenely loose, and I ended up having to drive like I was playing Shift, trying really hard to go not spin the rears, or just get rampant oversteer.

"Well, noob, thas ust cuz u wuz drivng th 458. It MR"
Fair enough.

But then I switched to the Subaru Impreza, and it felt much the same. Loose, and slow to respond up front. The steering didnt feel as crisp or as precise as GT5.

The only other car it allows you to use is some sort of Chrysler Corp. (Could have been Dodge or Plymouth) 70's muscle car. I could tell that the problem was compounded when i switched to a powerful, heavy, muscle car with poorly designed suspension. But thats when the game began to grow on me a bit.

I was in love with the Higher frame rate than GT5's, and also I loved how nice the cars looked. Everything looked fantastic.

But then, on closer inspection, I find things that are alluded to above. PD took the time to put in individual stitches on the interior. Every little detail is there, and if you really look at it, you get a good idea of the depth of the graphical design and pride they take in making everything look realistic.

The panning shots on FM4 look simply amazing. But up close, the cars just don't have the same depth as GT5's(Excluding the standard cars, obviously.). Still photos on GT5 are eerily similar to the real thing, in fact I have fooled several people with shots such as this

I have yet to see a Forza photo look that real. But, I have yet to see a GT5 video that looks as nice or neat, or real for that matter, as ones from FM4. The lower frame rate really kills it.

All in all, I'd say they're different games for different people. But really, why can't you guys just be content? It's another great racing game for people passionate about cars.

 

[Skython]

GT5 = some cool things, Forza 4 has some cool things, but these are meant to be sims, and for sims, these days the PC dominates. GTR 2, Rfactor, Richard Burns Rally. The list goes on.

 

[Northstar]

You can try multiclass in multiplayer i guess.

I'm well aware of that option, unfortunately working retail means I'm rarely able to play at a consistent enough time to join a league and spot racing is just asking for problems.

Only 24 cars would be a letdown tbh, i'm counting on 48 at least (for the endurance races anyway).

If this generation has taught me anything, it's to not get your hopes up.

If I could have my way there would be a 56 car field with 4 classes at Le Mans as well as weather, day/night, temp changes having an effect on the car and full ACO rules.

I'll just be happy if a game has A.I. with actual intelligence though.

 

[ChromeBallz]

If I could have my way there would be a 56 car field with 4 classes at Le Mans as well as weather, day/night, temp changes having an effect on the car and full ACO rules.

I'll just be happy if a game has A.I. with actual intelligence though.

48-64 cars on the track with weather and day/night should be possible with current mainstream PC's (not high performance), given experiences with GRID and GT5. Temp changes might be omitted simply because they might make it a little obtuse, though they can be realized as it's a "simple" global variable as far as i know (programmatically that is).

ACO rules i'm not sure about, depends on complexity.

AI? No chance unless they make an AI which doesn't overly rely on and reference the racing line.

 

[slick1ru2]

iRacing has dozens of cars in races and even announcers for the big races. Cautions, pace cars, etc.. No wonder real drivers like Earnhardt Jr promote and play it.

 

[Scaff]

Hawkeye - Must people are quite happy to acknowledge that GT5 premium models are simply stunning close up, but that's not to say you can't get some good looking shots closer in with FM4.





Scaff

 

[slick1ru2]

Hawkeye - Must people are quite happy to acknowledge that GT5 premium models are simply stunning close up, but that's not to say you can't get some good looking shots closer in with FM4.





Scaff

Yeah, I don't think anyone disagrees with that. The static shots look better than in race, I think though while in GT5, they are about the same.

Your photo looks a little like a model. I think the ones in the Top Gear set look much more real.

 

[I'm Motarded]

I have yet to see a Forza photo look that real.

Here's one or two I found

This photo was taken in race mode on location-not homespace

 

[slick1ru2]

The top one doesn't look real. The bottom one does and I think that's why the ones in the Top Gear studio look so good, the reflections on the painted surfaces look very realistic.

 

[imported_phillkillv2]

The top one doesn't look real. The bottom one does and I think that's why the ones in the Top Gear studio look so good, the reflections on the painted surfaces look very realistic.

Are these real enough ?

I think you get the point. Photomode doesn't mean ****.

 

[imported_FuzzyFassbender]

IMO, both can produce very realistic photos and I don't see one better than the other. Both are pushing the current generation of consoles to their limits.

The problem I have with GT photo mode is subject matter - the subjects are all predefined. With FM I am always seeing new content by some very talented painters/livery designers.

Both games IMO are pushing the current generation consoles, and while one may have an edge in one area or the other, FM4 is the more "complete" driving/racing console sim.. It is a much more immersive experience to where I rarely move my Fanatec setup over to the PS3 anymore.

 

[HBK]

FM4 can look pretty good in photomode, but there's no denying GT5 look insanely good in photomode most of the time (if you're not trying to take shots at glitches and/or technical limitations/trade-offs).

If I want to take a pretty and/or realistic picture in FM4, I have to work for it (which I don't, as I'm not really into "playing photomode" anyway). But if I want to take a pretty and/or realistic picture in GT5, I just pick a Premium car and a location and it just ... works.

Of course, whether or not this is important in the appreciation of the game is purely subjective.

But there's no denying GT5 photomode is pretty darn impressive.

 

[cuco33]

I don't want to get into another spout in the forever vs thread of console racing sims but I still enjoy both, just right now Forza 4 has me by the nuts. I got into picture taking not in GT4 but in Forza 2 when friends and I were making our own series and documenting the great races via pics (and vids, one buddy had a video capture card). I literally took like 2 pics in GT4. In Forza 2/3/4 and GT5 I've taken hundreds of pics!! Sadly many of the cars in GT5 that I want to take pics of are standards and can't go into photo travel nor look good up close. You see really poor quality models, textures, 2D textures slapped on, massive jaggies all over and filling issues with standards. I don't purposely go looking for issues in GT5's standards, they are as obvious as obvious can be because the issues in the modeling/textures are there. I love the mk1 Rabbit GTI and every single time I take a pic of it in GT5 I become a sad panda, but in Forza, I'm still wowed even if at times the tail lights look very strange (too transparent in my book) but I'm the most wowed by GT5's premiums. The premiums in GT5 look the best to me even if Forza 4's models look the best in the Forza franchise. But I don't race with only the 200 premiums in GT5 and like mentioned many of the cars in GT5 that I am into are standards. If discussing quality, you need to look at the standard cars (and to a degree the 'standard tracks' as well) because they make up the bulk of GT5, as in 80% of the cars are standards...

Another gripe I have with GT5 is the lack of consistency in features. Over the year since launch, GT5 has been patched up and plugged up to the extent that many issues regarding consistency in features has been resolved to an extent. We now have cockpit views on all cars, but majority of them are simple black silhouettes. We now have a fix for the short career races via online seasonals. We now have a fix for the UCD car buys via the OCD. But night shift is only present on 2 tracks and weather is only present on a handful (5?) tracks. The course creator was plugged up, at one point meant nothing really and now we have a means to race people's created courses. There's a lot more but I'll leave it at that. I still enjoy GT5 even with the faults, been playing GT since GT1 and I skip over the blasphemy Prologue 'games'.

Forza 4 isn't perfect either but the only real issue with lack of consistency is in AutoVista mode where you get a laughable 24 cars in the game in this mode. I dig this feature, but I have not gone back to it since I went through them all/unlocked them all. My only other issue right now isn't really related to Forza 4 but rather to MS's policies on 3rd party wheel peripherals, and we do have a lot more options now but I'm waiting to hear about this supposed patch to make my purchase for a Fanatec CSR and CSR-Elite/CSP pedals (still undecided on pedals but I'm leaning towards CSR-E)

 

[ShylockHolmes]

How many times do you need to wobble down a straight in GT5 before you realize which game is better? In racing titles it's all about the gameplay.

 

[Wolfe]

If we're focusing on photos and visuals for the moment, I'd like to put forward that GT5's Nordschleife shines over FM4's, hands-down. Both games have their corner-cutting and GT5 really struggled to meet its already-way-late release date, but if you slow down and look around, the 'Ring in Forza 4 is practically only half-finished. In Photomode you can find crappy textures, copy-pasted items, empty voids, and low-polygon scenery pretty easily, but on the 'Ring you can see these things while driving.

It's pretty clear why they made the track as misty/foggy as it is.

 

[shawtyoner]

(photo courtesy of Maverick)

I know this isn't in game but wow, doesn't get much real looking than this. GT5's photo mode is amazing, but FM's doesn't fall that far behind. I do like how GT gives you different aspect ratios to choose from however. They each have their pros and cons.

 

[I'm Motarded]

If we're focusing on photos and visuals for the moment, I'd like to put forward that GT5's Nordschleife shines over FM4's, hands-down. Both games have their corner-cutting and GT5 really struggled to meet its already-way-late release date, but if you slow down and look around, the 'Ring in Forza 4 is practically only half-finished. In Photomode you can find crappy textures, copy-pasted items, empty voids, and low-polygon scenery pretty easily, but on the 'Ring you can see these things while driving.

It's pretty clear why they made the track as misty/foggy as it is.

LoL. I knew it wouldn't be long before somebody played the "GT5 Epic Ring" card.

PD should have changed the cover to read "The Real Nordschleife Simulator".

It's a shame most of the other tracks are not up to that standard with the same faults you mention about FM4's version of the Ring i.e crappy textures. cut-&-paste etc etc. Laguna for example?

 

[Wolfe]

LoL. I knew it wouldn't be long before somebody played the "GT5 Epic Ring" card.

PD should have changed the cover to read "The Real Nordschleife Simulator".

You may slightly overestimate my experience with and/or affinity for GT5.

The Nordschleife's accuracy and scenery are just things I took the time to check in both games, given that I've been to the real track. I agree that it's clear Polyphony spent a lot of time on it. But even without comparing FM4's version to any others, is it too much to ask for the overhead bridges to, um, go somewhere? The one immediately after the start/finish is quick and easy example.

This might sound similar to complaints about interior seat stitches, but it's bigger than that, literally...digitally...in a digitally literal sense. The track drives fine, though, so I'm not really complaining.

It's a shame most of the other tracks are not up to that standard with the same faults you mention about FM4's version of the Ring i.e crappy textures. cut-&-paste etc etc. Laguna for example?

My case at the top, in point: I really can't remember much about the quality of any of the other tracks, aside from those generated ones and the Italian time-shifting one, to which copy-pasting and generic scenery are an intrinsic part of the concept. I know the Super Special Route strangely had less beyond-track detail than previous versions, and horrible light effects.

For the record, I've never owned GT5 or a PS3.

 

[rocketcaron]

Yeah the 'Ring is another reason why I still play GT5. Its a work of art really. I understand that T10 may have favored the other stuff that they wanted to implement in FM4 over this track but sooner or later (sooner T10, sooner...) they will have to get back there and make it better.

I still can enjoy FM 'Ring without afterthougts but its easy to recognize that PD are 2 steps ahead here.

Problem is, and I mentionned it before, track is more accurate but when I lap it in one of the cars with real bad engine sound (and in GT there are A LOT) it completely scraps the immersion. Not cool.

PD: Engine sound patch please!

T10: Better Nordschleife please!

 

[slick1ru2]

Well, I guess its not just me then. There are parts of Nurburgring in FM4 that I don't recognize from GT5 or even Shift 2. The track seems less complex in many areas and there is on big dip I don't remember in either of the other two versions.