Forza 5/6 vs GT6 (See First Post Before Posting)

[Ialyrn]

I remember the insidesimracing guy pointed this out in his Forza 5 review, and then when Horizon 2 launched the issue wasn't there, so we can hope they took that into FM6 as well.

I cant comment on FH2 with the TX unfortunately, as my wheel was dead by the time it released. But one thing I did note in FM5, is that the ffb deadzone was always worse when more wheel rotation was used. At something like 360° of rotation, there was barely any ffb deadzone. In FH2, I have seen the majority of people use around 360° of rotation. Even some of the drifters. I am still holding out hope that Microsoft will allow any USB wheel to work with the X1 come November when windows 10 drops for it, as I really dont like the idea of having to buy yet another wheel just for Forza 6. If I have to buy a new one though, I will drop my cash on the Logitech G920 wheel. Currently the G29 works with the G27's shifter, and I have a G27 which I use for my PC racing games. Though Logitech could stop that happening with a firmware update.

 

[azrael1965]

Forza, at least in terms of its physics, is not to far removed from something like Assetto Corsa in all fairness. I played both with a TX wheel. The main thing that lets forza down with a wheel, is a deadzone in the force feedback at the wheels center. But this exact same deadzone in the FFB can be there on PC also, I think it is just a settings issues. Hopefully T10 has sorted that for FM6. Just recently in Assetto, they released the Toyota GT86 for free (with a few other cars and a new track). And with that car on the Nords, I am always in the exact same gear around corners as I am in Forza 5, with the exact same corner speeds on the stock road tires, and get damn near identical times. I am slightly faster on Assetto than Forza, as my TX wheel broke a while back. I have been using a G27 on pc since though. I am fast with either a wheel or control pad, but I prefer the smoothness a wheel brings. And as such, I can edge out slightly faster times on a wheel.

I play both Forza 5 and Assetto Corsa as well and Forza 5 used to be my favourite race game, but after playing Assetto Corsa for more than 120 hours I can't go back to FM5 at all. (My X-Box One broke and I bought one again recently for FM6)
IMHO AC is far superior in the physics department, but I only drive race cars in AC which might be the reason. The M3 GT2 is a lot better to drive than it's counterpart in Forza and the Nord feels much better as well. I know both are supposed to be laserscanned, but they still feel very different. I prefer the one in AC. Sorry for my bad english but my first language is german.
I wished I had the same experience as you because there is so much more content in Forza than in AC but unfortunatly it just can't compare as a sim for me.
But I agree with you about what you say about Project Cars, but I still like it because it has a lot of motorsport features like qualifying, pit stops, dynamic weather and daylight.
And i already prordered the ultimate version of forza 6 and my plan is to play the career at least as the one in AC is abysmal and stick to AC for hotlapping and multiplayer.

 

[Ialyrn]

Given how powerful current gen systems are, we shouldn't have to choose

Unfortunately, the new consoles are not as powerful as they should have been. The sad truth of the matter is that both systems, although closed platforms, are running weak CPU's and GPU's. Both the PS4 and the X1 are running AMD jaguar based processing units, which where only intended for mobile computing. They was specifically made to be used in laptops and tablets. The PS4 will have a better time with things though, as it has a slightly better spec'ed GPU. Whatever we get in this console generation from both PD and Turn 10 needs to be celebrated, while also chastising Sony and Microsoft for some very stupid hardware choices.

(Moved to the appropriate "VS" thread)

It is very normal that with all that partycicle effects to stay at stable 60 fps. Remember that ps3 have only 256 mb
Imarobot i just asked to bring me a game with the same features and he bring me a game that just doesnt have at all 1440x1080p and doesnt reach 60fps and dynamic lights.

How about the shear amount of pc racing games over the past decade with night/weather that have been capable of running 1920x1080 (which is the full HD resolution by the way, anything higher is UHD) at frame rates above far greater than that of 60fps? Or how about GTA4, even though that is only 30fps on consoles. Still hugely impressive for an open world game with a ton going on. Not to mention the fact that you have disregarded my last post to you, a post that clearly shows without question that GT6 cant even run at 1920x1080p full hd. But rather a the fake 1080p resolution of 1440x1080 with a framerate that dips to 30fps. You do know that there is a difference right?

 

[ImaRobot]

What?... He said find him a game that runs at 1440x1080 at 60fps using only 256mb of RAM using dynamic lighting. (it's all there, go check!)

I just found it funny you offered up that, which bares no relevance to what he asked for. The smug tone in your post is what made me laugh the most.

Whether GT achieves all this is another question. A question I'll leave to you guys to slog out. 👍

He asked for features, not technical backings. I've never thought of a games resolution and fps as a feature, as it is something that is required for all games to have, otherwise we wouldn't have any. A feature is something added to the game as an extra, not a necessity. He asked for features, I gave him features. Still like I said, regardless of what I gave him, it proved no point for or against him because he is already ignoring the fact that the game he is asking about doesn't even achieve what he's asking, so why is it wrong to show him a game that isn't achieving exactly what he is asking either?

If someone is going to come in and throw around terms like fanboys, and ignore facts, why should I approach him genuinely?

GT does run with 1440x1080p and 60fps

No it doesn't. I guess you just purposely ignored this post?

So you are saying that GT6 isnt even running true 1080p, just a resolution that is close to it when displayed on a full HD screen? That is pretty bad considering the frame rate isn't consistent, even when everything is set to run at 720p on a basic HD ready display.






Neither does GT6, nor GT5 before it. As the frame rates fluctuate on a constant basis, even when rain and night racing isn't even a factor.

Also, if you can answer this question please.

I'll one up you; Show me a game that achieves 1920x1080p AND 60fps with these features, on any console to date.

 

[driver_34_]

Unfortunately, the new consoles are not as powerful as they should have been. The sad truth of the matter is that both systems, although closed platforms, are running weak CPU's and GPU's. Both the PS4 and the X1 are running AMD jaguar based processing units, which where only intended for mobile computing. They was specifically made to be used in laptops and tablets. The PS4 will have a better time with things though, as it has a slightly better spec'ed GPU. Whatever we get in this console generation from both PD and Turn 10 needs to be celebrated, while also chastising Sony and Microsoft for some very stupid hardware choices.

(Moved to the appropriate "VS" thread)

If downgrade gt graphics to rf or gtr2 graphics i think it could run at 120 fps with 1080p .

 

[Ialyrn]

If downgrade gt graphics to rf or gtr2 graphics i think it could run at 120 fps with 1080p .

I am by no means a graphics whore, but that would be a massive step backwards. 120fps isnt needed though, just a locked 30 or 60. Either of those will provide a good stable framerate.

 

[ChromeBallz]

GT6 is using a lot of tricks to get the effect that it does.... Rain isn't actually a particle effect for example, but (as far as i can tell) a clever post process effect. Day and night transitions are mostly done by altering the ambient light levels, which is technically a very cheap effect (in terms of processing power needed).

Do note, this is only my suspicions talking, though i'm fairly confident i'm right about this.

GT6 does run at 1440x1080 by the way, ImaRobot, when set to 1080p. It upscales the image to 1920x1080, but the actual game is rendered at 1440x1080.

GT6 looks pretty great for a game on a PS3, but it uses a LOT of technical shortcuts to get there, which are exposed when you take a closer look at the details. It pretty much is on the very limit of what the PS3 can do, using every trick in the book to get there.

That said, GT6 is the only AAA game which even attempted going 1080p on the last generation of consoles, unless you want to count Wipeout HD or RR7 (which do really look cheap). What polyphony has managed to do is pretty commendable.

I would say, a straight port of the game to the PS4 or Xbone would be running at a solid 60fps at proper 1080p very easily.

By the way: Dark Souls 2, 1080p, rock solid 60 fps (on PS4), dynamic lighting (sort of) and lots of particles.

 

[Ialyrn]

Seeing what they have done with gt5 and gt6 i think it's not a problem for Pd to reach that.
But anyway like a said in an other post for me it is not a problem a drop of 5 or 10 fps if have all the variables that could hapen during a race

~Snip~

None of us are saying that what PD has done isn't good, because it is. But they have only been able to do that because of how good the cell processor is in the PS3, as it afforded them a very good CPU overhead. And for what GT6 is, it looks pretty darn good by last generations standards. Credit where it is due, they did good with the hardware available to them at the time in terms of the graphics. It is a shame that it isn't a solid 60FPS, but at least it doesn't drop below 30.

 

[RacerPaul]

I am by no means a graphics whore, but that would be a massive step backwards. 120fps isnt needed though, just a locked 30 or 60. Either of those will provide a good stable framerate

So true. Always makes me chuckle when people get excited about getting >100 fps when pc gaming. If I had a good gaming pc I'd always cap the fps @60 so I could run better in-game settings

As for my pc at the moment? Well, I have to cap GT Legends, GTR2, rFactor and Race 07 @30fps. I can get 60 in practice or once the grid thins out, but fps fluctuation really irritates me

I wish my X1 had the ability to cap fps. Off the top of my head, RIDE really needs a 30fps maximum. Frate rates are all over the place in that one

pCARS is getting better fps wise with patches, but still a bit variable

 

[Imari]

That said, GT6 is the only AAA game which even attempted going 1080p on the last generation of consoles, unless you want to count Wipeout HD or RR7 (which do really look cheap). What polyphony has managed to do is pretty commendable.

Meh. They're still scaling it, just like every other PS3 game apart from Wipeout, RR7 and a handful of PSN titles. Polyphony just happen to be scaling less than most.

Is that commendable? If you're going to have to scale anyway, why not abuse that to the full amount possible and use the power somewhere it really matters?

I'd commend them a lot more if they'd fixed some of the graphical issues from GT5, rather than using whatever extra power they found on a trivial resolution increase that still needed scaling to reach proper 1080p.

I would say, a straight port of the game to the PS4 or Xbone would be running at a solid 60fps at proper 1080p very easily.

And a straight port would be a pretty average looking game by PS4/X1 standards. They need to do more than just port GT6.

 

[SimTourist]

Have to keep in mind that GT6 runs at a higher resolution than most Xbone games for example, so it's pretty impressive.

 

[Imari]

Have to keep in mind that GT6 runs at a higher resolution than most Xbone games for example, so it's pretty impressive.

GT6 also runs at a higher resolution that a lot of PS4 games.

Resolution all by itself isn't impressive. You can run pong at 4k on a potato, but that's not impressive because it's pong. Other games make the choice that resolution and/or frames aren't as important as other graphical or computational effects, even games on new consoles. Depending on what those other things are, their achievements in resolution may or may not be impressive.

Even if we're talking purely about graphics, numbers don't mean a thing unless it actually looks good. 1440x1080 with crap AA looks arguably worse than 1280x1080 with better AA. Or 720p with good AA and a more solid framerate.

You can't just wave the resolution e-willy around in a vacuum and say "look how big it is". That's exactly the problem Gran Turismo has, it throws around big numbers without actually addressing why those big numbers would make a game better.

To make a car analogy, you can have all the power in the world, but it doesn't actually make a car fast unless the rest of the components are of a similar calibre. Just saying your car has a thousand horsepower means nothing if it's on junkyard tyres, rubbish suspension, and weighs 8 tons.

 

[dice1998]

GT6 does run at 1440x1080 by the way, ImaRobot, when set to 1080p. It upscales the image to 1920x1080, but the actual game is rendered at 1440x1080.

Can you, like, provide evidence proving so?

 

[Imari]

Can you, like, provide evidence proving so?

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-vs-gran-turismo-6

As with the GT Academy demo released this past summer, GT6 operates using a 1440x1080 framebuffer; a 12.5 per cent gain over the 1280x1080 employed in Gran Turismo 5 and now matching the resolution used by the original Gran Turismo HD release - a single circuit demo released in tandem with the PlayStation 3. We also see the elimination of 2x quincunx anti-aliasing (QAA) in favour of a morphological (MLAA) solution, strongly reminiscent of the tech devised by Sony's Advanced Technology Group and integrated into a host of first and third-party PS3 games.

This frees up memory and resources on the RSX, allowing for a higher resolution, but the end results are mixed. While the increased clarity and lack of blur associated with multi-sampling definitely help produce a sharper overall image, the aliasing along finer edges such as trees and fences is increased, resulting in more noticeable shimmering. The higher resolution does at least help clean up some of the more glaring artefacts associated with the use of alpha to coverage on transparencies, however.

As with GT5, an optional, faster 1280x720 mode can be engaged by selecting this as the maximum supported resolution from the PlayStation 3's XMB. MLAA persists in this mode as well, however, failing to offer the same level of clarity afforded by the previously used 4x MSAA in Gran Turismo 5's 720p mode. In either mode, texture filtering is used well enough to avoid losing significant texture detail at steep angles - unlike the competing Forza 5.

You should really read the whole article if you're interesting in the graphical performance and technology behind GT6. Digital Foundry do very, very good work.

You can find similar articles for GT5 and the Forza games as well, should you wish to learn more about them.

 

[Speedster911]

I'm just waiting for Forza replays to look like GTs.

They have such a fantastic graphics engine... it would be an absolute treat to see all those beauties in action from the right angles.

 

[shved111]

I was waiting for that physics will fm6 in GT 6. But unfortunately the GT 6 still has more advanced physics of driving than F5, fm6.
In fm6 - physics slightly corrected relative to F5, but the suspension is still much worse than in the GT 6 in fm6 greatly reduced understeer, because of what the car's behavior - seems a toy.
However, I conclude by fm6 demo on the steering wheel - TX, and this is not enough to draw definitive conclusions.
Physics fm6 good, but not progressive.
But in GT 6 has two driving physics. In online and offline car behaves very differently, the two physicists.
Online physics more advanced and difficult, offline simpler and rail. And physics fm6 - similar to the offline physics GT 6, but a little worse.
However, online physics GT 6 unattainable better than fm6

 

[Demetrius 81]

I'm just waiting for Forza replays to look like GTs.

They have such a fantastic graphics engine... it would be an absolute treat to see all those beauties in action from the right angles.

Just to see them at 60fps rather than 30fps would be a huge improvement.

 

[Speedster911]

Just to see them at 60fps rather than 30fps would be a huge improvement.

I KNOW! That's the thing: car movement looks so believable and realistic at 60 fps. And it makes replay viewing satisfying as heck. I don't kill the lights every time and play in the dark just to make 30 fps games look smooth - try watching a 24 fps movie in a brightly lit room or a 30 fps game for that matter, it looks juddery.

Also for a fact, people having those TVs with frame interpolation will probably never complain, cos' it artificially ups the frames in 30 fps games. However, many of us are still on those good ol' 60 Hz HDTVs. And they work great too, since games are at their core, 60 Hz.

Back on topic: gotta have 60 fps.. I hope they make it possible one day. Even a Horizon game at 60 fps.

Slightly off-topic: replay angles have been improved in F6.. I like em' even more now.