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

[Terronium-12]

Again with the 'Ring?

Talk about flipping the same record...

 

[PzR Crazy]

I've driven 'round the Nordschleife in real life and Scaff's comments are on the mark. Gran Turismo has always had the most visually-accurate Nürburgring; GT4 wasn't quite right on some of the corners/elevation changes, but GT5's version is probably the best game rendition yet.

Honestly, FM4's Norschleife isn't just "not as good." It's one of the laziest efforts I've seen. Overhead bridges go nowhere at all, track graffiti is copy-pasted over and over, and if you drive backwards you might think your disc drive was failing, based on all the open areas and jagged/half-formed features. Obviously the track itself is most important but we all know that hasn't benefitted massively from the time saved on the scenery. Besides, FM4 is hardly a poster child for "gameplay over graphics."

We all agree the Nurb (A legacy track in FM) has much room for technical accuracy improvement and overall re-working, you are very much late to the Party on that one, but fair enough.

Your closing statement I can disagree with easily, I don't see how a game whose 1 well documented compromise is to maintain a solid 60fps is not really a poster child of gameplay over graphics..

And it's not like GT5 doesn't also suffer from 'variable' track quality is it? We all accept that each developer only has a limited resource, and that any track they 're-model' is going to detract from the addition of a new track we've never seen before..

 

[I'm Motarded]

The track never seems to have the right look to the elevation in GT5 either, you never get that wall of tarmac feeling from it, Forza doesn't get that right either but does do a bit of a better job with it.


Scaff

On that subject I often find games only ever show a good sense of elevation when you run the track in the opposite direction. Does any one else find this?

This works well at fm4's ring, run the steep uphill section then turn around and look, it looks way steeper than it does on the first journey.

Again with the 'Ring?

Talk about flipping the same record...

Maybe for the third or fourth time now

Your closing statement I can disagree with easily, I don't see how a game whose 1 well documented compromise is to maintain a solid 60fps is not really a poster child of gameplay over graphics..

I agree with this. Having silky smooth gameplay and controls > almost everything else

 

[imported_phillkillv2]

If you don't mind. Some more Forza Moments.

 

[imported_JJ72]

? On rivals mode the top time are most oftenly ran without aids?

It never occur to me FM4's traction control is too good.

 

[ChadSpeed]

? On rivals mode the top time are most oftenly ran without aids?

It never occur to me FM4's traction control is too good.

Only in cars that are PI limited due to so much HP, I.E. the PI goes down while power goes up because the launch is hurt by adding too much HP, mainly these are only for speed tracks.

I can personally vouch that A and S Class leaderboards are not full of assist users. The cars are very easy to control with out aids, as long as you can steer and accelerate smoothly, that is. I do struggle with the R class, traction control would improve my times, not sure about LB times though.

 

[Wolfe]

We all agree the Nurb (A legacy track in FM) has much room for technical accuracy improvement and overall re-working, you are very much late to the Party on that one, but fair enough.

There's no need to get defensively dismissive. Everyone leaps at the chance to admit the 'Ring is inaccurate in track width/length, but I have not seen anyone comment on how half-finished it looks. Turn 10 tried to sweep it under the rug with the track's foggy weather, but you don't even need to slow down or use photomode to see the gaps in quality.

It's not just technically inaccurate, it's sub-standard.

Your closing statement I can disagree with easily, I don't see how a game whose 1 well documented compromise is to maintain a solid 60fps is not really a poster child of gameplay over graphics.

Really? The game needs two DVDs to deliver all of its content, interiors are modeled to the point you can READ the text on windshield wiper stalks and radio buttons, Autovista mode allows you to explore nearly every part of an intricately detailed 3D graphic of a car, the IBL reflections were a highly publicized feature and are showcased by the Homespace options, and the engine is apparently so taxed already that T10 could not add night racing or weather (or open-wheel cars?) without compromising something else.

There are umpteen things T10 could have spent time on if they had focused a little less on trying to one-up GT5 with a disc-busting stack of slow-loading HD eyecandy. I'm not claiming they would all be better uses of time, but it's pretty clear where T10's priorities were. That FM4 is such an all-around good game speaks more for GT5's deficiencies than FM4's accomplishments.

In my opinion, 60fps is an obligation, not a sacrifice. If you can't render something without reducing the framerate, the hardware isn't ready yet!! It's a shame 60fps has become accepted as a "feature."

 

[artboy76]

There's no need to get defensively dismissive. Everyone leaps at the chance to admit the 'Ring is inaccurate in track width/length, but I have not seen anyone comment on how half-finished it looks. Turn 10 tried to sweep it under the rug with the track's foggy weather, but you don't even need to slow down or use photomode to see the gaps in quality.

It's not just technically inaccurate, it's sub-standard.

Really? The game needs two DVDs to deliver all of its content, interiors are modeled to the point you can READ the text on windshield wiper stalks and radio buttons, Autovista mode allows you to explore nearly every part of an intricately detailed 3D graphic of a car, the IBL reflections were a highly publicized feature and are showcased by the Homespace options, and the engine is apparently so taxed already that T10 could not add night racing or weather (or open-wheel cars?) without compromising something else.

There are umpteen things T10 could have spent time on if they had focused a little less on trying to one-up GT5 with a disc-busting stack of slow-loading HD eyecandy. I'm not claiming they would all be better uses of time, but it's pretty clear where T10's priorities were. That FM4 is such an all-around good game speaks more for GT5's deficiencies than FM4's accomplishments.

In my opinion, 60fps is an obligation, not a sacrifice. If you can't render something without reducing the framerate, the hardware isn't ready yet!! It's a shame 60fps has become accepted as a "feature."

I never understand what point your trying to make as it all just sounds so...hmmm... angry at Turn 10.... you moan and whine about so much I wonder why you just stop playing FM4 and walk away and get on with life, i mean its too short to be this bothered about a game right?
Like these folks who harp on about about iRacing and such and seemingly only buy GT5 or FM4 so they can coment on how off they get everything and how they are practically real race drivers cause they can drive a bunch of pixels round a bunch of pixels........

Turn 10 didnt bother much with Nurb'ring, i dont care, if i wanted to drive that track i could and risk my life against a bunch of staggers in £100 bangers and rich kids in exotica that they cant drive..........its rubbish!!! i hate that track!!

 

[Wolfe]

Artboy, why exactly are you offended by the notion that Forza is a very pretty game that lacks detail on a track you hate to drive...?

Or was it that the game loads slowly? Or that T10 could have used the time spent modelling accurate, readable HVAC switches to, I don't know, incorporate a "number of laps" option in Free Run races? Oh horror, what scathing criticism. I hope I didn't make Dan Greenawalt cry.

 

[Terronium-12]

There's no need to get defensively dismissive. Everyone leaps at the chance to admit the 'Ring is inaccurate in track width/length, but I have not seen anyone comment on how half-finished it looks. Turn 10 tried to sweep it under the rug with the track's foggy weather, but you don't even need to slow down or use photomode to see the gaps in quality. It's not just technically inaccurate, it's sub-standard.

It's also a model given to them by Microsoft, from Bizarre when the 'Ring was featured in PGR 2. At this point, short of actually going out to the track and re-appropriating the dimensions and what have you, all they can do is touch it up.

Really? The game needs two DVDs to deliver all of its content,

Which has absolutely nothing to do with gameplay nor graphics.

interiors are modeled to the point you can READ the text on windshield wiper stalks and radio buttons, Autovista mode allows you to explore nearly every part of an intricately detailed 3D graphic of a car, the IBL reflections were a highly publicized feature and are showcased by the Homespace options, and the engine is apparently so taxed already that T10 could not add night racing or weather (or open-wheel cars?) without compromising something else.

How does any of this have any relation to FM4 not being a poster child for gameplay over graphics?

There are umpteen things T10 could have spent time on if they had focused a little less on trying to one-up GT5 with a disc-busting stack of slow-loading HD eyecandy. I'm not claiming they would all be better uses of time, but it's pretty clear where T10's priorities were. That FM4 is such an all-around good game speaks more for GT5's deficiencies than FM4's accomplishments.

There are at least two contradictions in this statement. I don't even know where you're attempting to sway this discussion at this point.

It's a shame 60fps has become accepted as a "feature."

I don't even know what that means.

 

[Luminis]

There's no need to get defensively dismissive. Everyone leaps at the chance to admit the 'Ring is inaccurate in track width/length, but I have not seen anyone comment on how half-finished it looks. Turn 10 tried to sweep it under the rug with the track's foggy weather, but you don't even need to slow down or use photomode to see the gaps in quality.

It's not just technically inaccurate, it's sub-standard.

Compared to what? GT5's Nordschleife? Well, yes, that would be true. GT5's 'standard' tracks, you know, the ones that look like they're the equivalent of the standard cars? In that case, I'd say that even FM4's Nordschleife looks better.

Really? The game needs two DVDs to deliver all of its content, interiors are modeled to the point you can READ the text on windshield wiper stalks and radio buttons, Autovista mode allows you to explore nearly every part of an intricately detailed 3D graphic of a car, the IBL reflections were a highly publicized feature and are showcased by the Homespace options, and the engine is apparently so taxed already that T10 could not add night racing or weather (or open-wheel cars?) without compromising something else.

There are umpteen things T10 could have spent time on if they had focused a little less on trying to one-up GT5 with a disc-busting stack of slow-loading HD eyecandy. I'm not claiming they would all be better uses of time, but it's pretty clear where T10's priorities were. That FM4 is such an all-around good game speaks more for GT5's deficiencies than FM4's accomplishments.

Those points are all nice and good, but you might want to look at what they actually did as far as gameplay goes. T10 implemented World Tour, integrated Top Gear rather well, added the Rivals Mode and AutoVista on top of the existing gameplay features. In addition to the great Force Feedback and the (in my opinion) very good physics.

Sure, you could say that T10 could've traded graphical quality to add more cars on a track or something along those lines. However, the way I see it, FM4 strikes a very decent balance between gameplay and graphics. Obviously not compared some imaginary, ideal game, but compared to the racing games that are currently available on consoles.

In my opinion, 60fps is an obligation, not a sacrifice. If you can't render something without reducing the framerate, the hardware isn't ready yet!! It's a shame 60fps has become accepted as a "feature."

That "obligation" seems to be getting ignored largely by racing game developers, lately. GT5's frame rate doesn't achieve a stable 60 FPS throughout and Shift 2, for example, went for 30 FPS straight away.

 

[artboy76]

Artboy, why exactly are you offended by the notion that Forza is a very pretty game that lacks detail on a track you hate to drive...?

Or was it that the game loads slowly? Or that T10 could have used the time spent modelling accurate, readable HVAC switches to, I don't know, incorporate a "number of laps" option in Free Run races? Oh horror, what scathing criticism. I hope I didn't make Dan Greenawalt cry.

Honest answer?
You offend me Wolfe, with your constant attempts to stick the boot into Turn 10. I mean the GT5 guys like Maxrelaxing are actually quite funny, but you are actually dangerous with constant inaccurate statements about lift off oversteer and such. You believe you ate the guru on physics and if you read between the lines and the OTT nature of your posts, you actually are proven wrong time and time again.....now I've not got a clue what your trying to say, but frankly I don't care. And no Dan won't be crying as he is creative director of Turn 10....what have YOU done today??? hmm?

 

[Terronium-12]

Leave the personal digs at the door.

 

[JoeMaPampang]

But this is the thing, some people hark on about Nurb'ring, stick the little sticker on their chav mobiles, but for me its over rated. Certainly in game form, its the track i'd use least bar the fantasy ones in both games.....
It wouldnt even matter if i didnt have it in either game.....

Problem is certain folks beleive the hype and feel they arent petrolheads unless they treat that track like some kind of religion.....

Hahahaha my point exactly.

 

[Luminis]

But this is the thing, some people hark on about Nurb'ring, stick the little sticker on their chav mobiles, but for me its over rated. Certainly in game form, its the track i'd use least bar the fantasy ones in both games.....
It wouldnt even matter if i didnt have it in either game.....

Problem is certain folks beleive the hype and feel they arent petrolheads unless they treat that track like some kind of religion.....

For all I care, you can rant on about GT5 as long as you want. I am, in fact, with you on quite a bit of that. This part about the 'Ring, though? Personally, I have a nagging feeling that you dislike the track so much because it is the one thing where GT5 absolutely destroys FM4. It's just an assumption, of course, but still.

Anyways, there are people who love that track for what it is; a gruelling, tight, winding and generally very, very challenging track that alternates between high-speed parts and tight and technical corners. A track that actually forces a driver to their limits, moreso than, say, le Circuit de la Sarthe. There's something intimidating and special about that track, just as there is about, say, Bathurst. The kind of special thing that keeps F1 or LMP cars away from those tracks, for safety reasons. The kind of thing that makes all kinds of manufacturers test their cars on the 'Ring because it offers so many different and challenging bits...

Anyways, I'd give a lot to have a Nordschleife in the game that was as accurate as GT5's. It is the one thing that I really miss, the one thing that GT5 managed to drag me in with. Not enough to make it the better game, far from it, but it is nonetheless a huge thing to me.

Now, I'd appreciate it if you'd stop to try and make it sound like the only thing the 'Ring's got going for it was the hype. Seriously, watch some of the VLN races, if you get the chance. Or, better yet, the 24 Hours. It'll give you an idea on why it's called the Green Hell.

Anyways, rant over. Carry on

 

[ReincarnationB]

For all I care, you can rant on about GT5 as long as you want. I am, in fact, with you on quite a bit of that. This part about the 'Ring, though? Personally, I have a nagging feeling that you dislike the track so much because it is the one thing where GT5 absolutely destroys FM4. It's just an assumption, of course, but still.

Anyways, there are people who love that track for what it is; a gruelling, tight, winding and generally very, very challenging track that alternates between high-speed parts and tight and technical corners. A track that actually forces a driver to their limits, moreso than, say, le Circuit de la Sarthe. There's something intimidating and special about that track, just as there is about, say, Bathurst. The kind of special thing that keeps F1 or LMP cars away from those tracks, for safety reasons. The kind of thing that makes all kinds of manufacturers test their cars on the 'Ring because it offers so many different and challenging bits...

Anyways, I'd give a lot to have a Nordschleife in the game that was as accurate as GT5's. It is the one thing that I really miss, the one thing that GT5 managed to drag me in with. Not enough to make it the better game, far from it, but it is nonetheless a huge thing to me.

Now, I'd appreciate it if you'd stop to try and make it sound like the only thing the 'Ring's got going for it was the hype. Seriously, watch some of the VLN races, if you get the chance. Or, better yet, the 24 Hours. It'll give you an idea on why it's called the Green Hell.

anyways, rant over. Carry on

For one you didn't get to the point as i would have liked, in fact you didn't get to the point at all. Forza 4 did not inherently develop the "ring glitch" that if i recall occured on the other side of the fence albeit where you and your kind where holding your breath for removal.

That aside the 24 hours was not as challenging in GT5 as that compared to the elite challange in Forza taking AI and primary physics into consideration. Having said that it is not even worth racing what was 24 hours straight which evidently was not difficult but outright stupid and sad which consequented in game saves.

And like you have clearly said it does not improve the game because many other departments undermine it as you should be capable of understanding.

 

[shawtyoner]

Nice response luminis, I agree. Which is why I wish T10 would scrap the version that was handed to them years ago and send a dedicated team over to Germany and properly recreate it for all of us to enjoy. It really is a shame. I know to some it really doesn't matter because, hey, when are most of us ever really going to drive there and compare it for ourselves. However, I want T10 to be as dedicated to track accuracy as they are to car physics.

 

[buickgnx88]

Heck, if they redid the 'Ring accurately, then that would be one less thing for the GT fanboys admirers to use as a negative for Forza.

 

[artboy76]

Luminis I just hate Nurb'ring in as a 7-10 min lap dosen't interest me. Also complete track accuracy dosen't bother me as much as some people cause I don't believe that me being good at computer driving games makes me a driving God in real life..... for me Forza Nurb'ring is long green grey and looks and feels a bit like the real thing.... that'll do for the ammount of times I'll use it... I have done the Nurb'ring in real life in an Alfa 75 and no game will ever give me that feeling, I say if you love it go do it, it's cheap and you can do it in literally anything.... it's fun in real life but in games it's dull and too long... games can't capture it's essence and point, your lying to yourself if you think it does...sorry.....

 

[Wolfe]

@Nordschleife: I've long accepted that Forza games will have an inaccurate Nordschleife. I'm just surprised how gutted the trackside scenery is in FM4's version, given the emphasis on high quality visuals. If it's all approximated anyway, they could flesh it out without flying to Germany. If you think I care deeply about trackside scenery, I don't. But I think it's a flaw significant enough to warrant a mention.

As for the question of "Why the Nordschleife?" You can drive for 7-10 minutes and not see the same corner twice; it serves the same purpose as a point-to-point track in a game. There are few long straightaways, and elevation changes galore. It's narrow and challenging, and resembles an actual road (technically it is one). It's a driving experience untainted by the safety requirements of modern racetracks, which are mostly irrelevant in a videogame (they help with online racing I guess).

It's hyped because it's one-of-a-kind, and it's fun.

@Gameplay & Graphics: The fact that FM4 is marvelous to look at automatically precludes the possibility of it being "gameplay over graphics." All of the examples I listed before illustrate Turn 10's commitment to the game's visuals. Describing something as "X over Y" means Y has been sacrificed or disregarded, and if you think the graphics have been sacrificed/disregarded in this game then I wonder what standard you expect from a 360 game. Sorry, 60fps is no sacrifice.

The gameplay is obviously pretty damn good, so "graphics over gameplay" doesn't apply either. This isn't black-and-white, so please don't assume I'm treating it that way. All that happened is I made a comment about FM4 not being a "gameplay over graphics" sort of game, and PzR Crazy disagreed. That's it.

There are at least two contradictions in this statement. I don't even know where you're attempting to sway this discussion at this point.

I don't desire to sway anything. I come here to share an opinion.

What contradictions?

1. Some of the disc space and development time spent on graphics could have been devoted to other features/cars/whatever.
2. I'm not claiming all other features/cars/whatever would have been a better use of time/disc space (eg. we don't really need working turn signals with accurate blinking frequencies). That's not the point.
3. It's evident Turn 10 made graphics a high priority. So it's not a "gameplay over graphics" game. That's the whole point.
4. Part of the reason FM4 seems like such a complete package is simply because it avoids some of GT5's shortcomings. It's not the most revolutionary racing game in the world.

I don't even know what that means.

Gamers have settled for 30fps as "good enough," allowing developers to tout 60fps as a "feature," when really (IMO) it should be the norm.

 

[Terronium-12]

The only gamers I know of that have accepted 30 over 60 are the same people that claim there's no difference between 30 and 60.

 

[artboy76]

It's easier to make 'normal' circuits relate in a game (still think people forget that's what these are..) it's for me impossible to give a track like the Nurb'ring ever a shred of its essence or feel or impending danger, it's a rather pointless track in real life really, too long and out dated but like the motor cycle TT on isle of Mann it has such an element of danger and craziness it almost renders a computer version pointless... you'll never ever capture it.. if you drove it in real life, you'll know it.

 

[MaDHaX]

For me Nordschleife is the best ever track I love it and I tune all my cars on that track. I never get bored of it and can drive on it the whole day without getting bored, I miss racing with all my PSN buddies on GT5 on that track lots of fun and many great races.

 

[I'm Motarded]

Gamers have settled for 30fps as "good enough," allowing developers to tout 60fps as a "feature," when really (IMO) it should be the norm.

Thing is Turn 10 hasn't touted it as a future, for them it is the norm now. Is not wanting to add other (framerate slowing) features considered a feature in itself now? Or is it wrong to point out why you're doing something most of others aren't?

If you look in the back of the box of any forza since fm2 the features do not include 'this game runs at FPS' but you can be sure others advertise the excess stuff that does drop the framerate as 'features'. T10 seem to be the only console developer that are valuing gameplay over snazzy game-selling features for framerate at the moment IMO.

I'm glad they stuck to their guns and made that sacrifice and even take the stick from some saying 'fm4 is just more of the same'. If they turn around and add night racing and weather effects and the FPS and general quality suffers I will be disappointed because that isn't what I expect from them.

 

[Luminis]

For one you didn't get to the point as i would have liked, in fact you didn't get to the point at all. Forza 4 did not inherently develop the "ring glitch" that if i recall occured on the other side of the fence albeit where you and your kind where holding your breath for removal.

If you want to get to a specific point, do it yourself. If you didn't notice, though, my point was neither about GT5, nor about the Forza version, it was about the real track.

That aside the 24 hours was not as challenging in GT5 as that compared to the elite challange in Forza taking AI and primary physics into consideration. Having said that it is not even worth racing what was 24 hours straight which evidently was not difficult but outright stupid and sad which consequented in game saves.

And like you have clearly said it does not improve the game because many other departments undermine it as you should be capable of understanding.

Oh, it does improve the game. If it wasn't for the 'Ring, I wouldn't have bothered at all. It's just not enough.

Luminis I just hate Nurb'ring in as a 7-10 min lap dosen't interest me. Also complete track accuracy dosen't bother me as much as some people cause I don't believe that me being good at computer driving games makes me a driving God in real life..... for me Forza Nurb'ring is long green grey and looks and feels a bit like the real thing.... that'll do for the ammount of times I'll use it... I have done the Nurb'ring in real life in an Alfa 75 and no game will ever give me that feeling, I say if you love it go do it, it's cheap and you can do it in literally anything.... it's fun in real life but in games it's dull and too long... games can't capture it's essence and point, your lying to yourself if you think it does...sorry.....

See, I'm fine with your opinion. It's just annoying to see someone go out of their ways to flame a track I quite like. Just because it doesn't suite your tastes (which is fine), it doesn't mean that the only thing it has going for it is the hype. That's all.

 

[artboy76]

Well im afraid luminis you just have to 'man up', no one is 'flaming' your favorite track, im just stating for me that no game can ever capture the Nurb'ring.... folk can stick the sticker on their 1.1 shopping cart, and then drive it in GT5 and believe they are great and have tamed the Green Hell and thus they are a petrolhead.............but alas its not as simple as all of that....
After driving this track IRL i can say any time i play it in a game however good it looks, it isnt even close so that makes for me the long lap in real life fun....in game boring..

 

[PzR Slim]

Gamers have settled for 30fps as "good enough," allowing developers to tout 60fps as a "feature," when really (IMO) it should be the norm.

Then you should be singing T10's praises for not doing anything to remove their game from the norm. They repeatedly said that 60fps is so important to them that they will not implement anything that causes that to suffer. If that is not an instance of gameplay over everything else I don't know what is. For me a high, stable framerate is an incredibly important aspect of gameplay, if not the most important.

 

[artboy76]

Then you should be singing T10's praises for not doing anything to remove their game from the norm. They repeatedly said that 60fps is so important to them that they will not implement anything that causes that to suffer. If that is not an instance of gameplay over everything else I don't know what is. For me a high, stable framerate is an incredibly important aspect of gameplay, if not the most important.

I agree with this and Forza 4 looks so smooth and i was playign last night and there are some jaw dropping moments in fact 90% jaw dropping compared to GT5's 35% jaw dropping.

But having said all of that, i kind of liked Shift 2's grittiness, it almost worked well in 30fps, gave it a rawness i felt it needed with its style. I basically cained FORZA 3 till GT5 came out, then stopped playing GT5 from disapointment and went to Shift 2 and cained that till Forza 4.....its weird playing Shift 2 made the first time i played forza again seem almost too clean and polished!

 

[Luminis]

Well im afraid luminis you just have to 'man up', no one is 'flaming' your favorite track, im just stating for me that no game can ever capture the Nurb'ring.... folk can stick the sticker on their 1.1 shopping cart, and then drive it in GT5 and believe they are great and have tamed the Green Hell and thus they are a petrolhead.............but alas its not as simple as all of that....
After driving this track IRL i can say any time i play it in a game however good it looks, it isnt even close so that makes for me the long lap in real life fun....in game boring..

As I said, it's your opinion and that's all well and good; if you can't, however, see that the track has a few things more going for it, at least for some people, than pure hype, than that, too, is just your opinion. However, not all of us who like a track that's both a bit longer and more challenging than most tracks in the game like it just for the hype.

I just am not all that fond of short tracks. Sure, I like stuff like Tsukuba for its simplicity, but, for me, Fukimi Kaido or the Green Hell are just a tad more interesting. With or without the hype, with or without feeling like a great driver or a petrol head.

Also, no track in a game will bring the same excitement as the real thing... I mean, that's obvious, isn't it?

 

[PzR Crazy]

@Gameplay & Graphics: The fact that FM4 is marvelous to look at automatically precludes the possibility of it being "gameplay over graphics." All of the examples I listed before illustrate Turn 10's commitment to the game's visuals. Describing something as "X over Y" means Y has been sacrificed or disregarded, and if you think the graphics have been sacrificed/disregarded in this game then I wonder what standard you expect from a 360 game. Sorry, 60fps is no sacrifice.

The gameplay is obviously pretty damn good, so "graphics over gameplay" doesn't apply either. This isn't black-and-white, so please don't assume I'm treating it that way. All that happened is I made a comment about FM4 not being a "gameplay over graphics" sort of game, and PzR Crazy disagreed. That's it.

I don't desire to sway anything. I come here to share an opinion.

What contradictions?

1. Some of the disc space and development time spent on graphics could have been devoted to other features/cars/whatever.
2. I'm not claiming all other features/cars/whatever would have been a better use of time/disc space (eg. we don't really need working turn signals with accurate blinking frequencies). That's not the point.
3. It's evident Turn 10 made graphics a high priority. So it's not a "gameplay over graphics" game. That's the whole point.
4. Part of the reason FM4 seems like such a complete package is simply because it avoids some of GT5's shortcomings. It's not the most revolutionary racing game in the world.

Gamers have settled for 30fps as "good enough," allowing developers to tout 60fps as a "feature," when really (IMO) it should be the norm.

there is no counter argument to your logic, you claim it's not black and white, but seem to not to be able to relate FM4 to the current genre at all, and seem to dismiss that fact it's the only game in the genre that is 100% committed to maintaining 60fps..

As for the logic that having any fidelity to the graphics automatically means it's graphics focussed, Basically what I'm reading from that is that no game every could claim gameplay over graphics unless it had graphics so bad it detracted from the gameplay..

You do realise that some graphic fidelity is part of the an improved gameplay?