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

[VXR]

One thing FM4 does well and GT5 has never done for me when playing it is a sudden loss of rear axle grip and the car spins out due to all the load going over the front. My best FM4 moment was this happening in a Ka and collecting the spin before it hit the Armco. Knowing this is in the model and the general way the FM4 cars tend to feel up on their toes and responding to weight shifting makes it so much more involved than 5. I like 5, but it's a lot more rigid in terms of car behaviour.

 

[SlyNine]

Then maybe the few points that GT score weigh more in the final experience?

Something does not compute in that realism score when you see this at 3:45 and find that what he is describing for the real car behaviour is almost exactly to how drives in GT5.

Comparing turns on the ring... FAIL!!. We know the turns on the Ring do NOT resemble, accurately at least, the real thing.

This guy is using subjective "feelings" to measure what he thinks would happen. There is nothing objective in that. So I'm not sure what you think this video proves.

What we know, a super cars street tires do not lose total grip when we pass the peak angle of slip. So it's not "all over" in fact I see professional drivers step out quite often and recover. Racing slicks react more in line with what he describes, but not street tires.

Besides that, the numbers disagree with him. Your video proves nothing, sorry try again.

 

[Scaff]

Then maybe the few points that GT score weigh more in the final experience?

Something does not compute in that realism score when you see this at 3:45 and find that what he is describing for the real car behaviour is almost exactly to how drives in GT5.

So the LFA in GT5 drives exactly like the real car in the video?

Interesting as the real car in the video is not a stock LFA, but rather an LFA Nurburgring, a point that has been dsicussed before and is a quite different car to the standard LFA.

It may well be down to the translation, but "When you do lose the grip, you're gone" doesn't come even close to "predictable and easy to correct", quite the opposite.

I also having looked at the video think I know why and am more than a bit disappointed in Autoweek.

From the video:





The car he was driving on the 'ring (as in the real car) is the LFA Nurburgring, a special edition that is 100 kilos lighter, has an extra 10bhp (which translates to 407bhp/tonne vs 372bhp/tonne), rides 10mm lower, has a totally different aero package (with increased downforce), a revised suspension set-up and runs on totally different tyres (Bridgestone RE 070 track tyres) to the standard LFA.

You can see the LFA Nurburgring here:

http://www.evo.co.uk/videos/supercarvideos/273850/lexus_lfa_nurburgring_edition_video_review.html

Notice the exact same registration plate.


To compare the LFA Nur to the standard car is absurd, of course they will handle differently, its a significantly different set-up and explains why it doesn't match the reviews for the standard car.

Sorry but for me that pretty much invalidates the comparison, particularly if you read the Evo review of the LFA Nurburgring, which is more akin to a race car than a road car (and that includes the standard LFA).

So the standard LFA in GT5 drives just like the heavily modified LFA Nurburgring and that to you is a good example of how good a job the physics engine in GT5 is doing.

 

[TRC GeorgiaDawg]

There are dozens of provable things regarding which physics engine is more realistic and moves more realistically. Cars behave in very specific ways in the real world; they're governed by the laws of physics like everything else, and the ways they can navigate their environment are limited to specific actions. These are objective things that you can easily demonstrate in any game or simulator. "Does this action follow the laws of physics or not?" It's a simple question.

If you count the number of things done right and the number of things that are wrong or missing, FM4 scores more points than GT5. That's what we mean when we say a game is more realistic than another.

I'm not Sheldon Cooper here, and I'm not looking to get into debates of quantum physics. As with most numbers, they can be looked at in different ways and different people can discern different meanings from them. Sort of reminds me of the sabermetric arguments in baseball. The numbers and equations tell a story, but they don't tell the full story.

The main point which I was chiming in on, was the guy referring to the smoothness of the tracks in Forza. Which others were acting like he was crazy for saying. As a hardcore hotlapper/racer since FM1, who has spent countless time running laps and races with and against many of the other long time veterans of the game, the complaint of the lack of feeling to the track and general smooth feeling of the surface is a opinion shared by many long time Forza players. I'm sure there are numbers somewhere that say that isn't so...doesn't mean that all those people who have had the same common experience are wrong.

 

[Wolfe]

It's not all complicated mathematics. There are certain things that are very obvious, and very easy to test, that GT5 just fails completely -- such as torque steer from a full throttle standing start. In GT5 (and the GT Academy demo, for that matter), if you drop the clutch from redline in a powerful RWD car and let the car go with the throttle pinned, it will sail perfectly straight forward, creating clouds of smoke. That's wrong. Very plainly wrong, if you know what's supposed to happen -- in real life, with no steering input, the car would swing to one side, spinning itself around. And that's what you get in Forza Motorsport 4. You don't get an exact simulation, but it's the right sort of response.

You take a maneuver, you test it in each game, and you see if one game reacts in a way that's closer to reality than the other game. It's not open to interpretation. If something is wrong, it's wrong. If one game does more things right than the other game, it's more realistic.

 

[Com Fox]

If GT isn't very real then why do they have successful drivers from GT Academy (literal question)?

 

[C_Raccoon23]

If GT isn't very real then why do they have successful drivers from GT Academy (literal question)?

GT Academy is a marketing strategy. Plain and simple.

 

[Com Fox]

GT Academy is a marketing strategy. Plain and simple.

I know that, it is quite obvious.

I meant, how did the GT Academy drivers be successful when they were just playing GT which apparently is less realistic then Forza.

 

[Scaff]

I know that, it is quite obvious.

I meant, how did the GT Academy drivers be successful when they were just playing GT which apparently is less realistic then Forza.

Because GT is used only for the initial stages of selection and the final stages and all serious training is done in the real world. As such GT could be replaced with any sim you like.

If they only used GT and then went straight to a real race you might have a point, but they don't.

That a good number of the GTA winners have a background in competitive sport of some kind is actually much more interesting. Consistency, determination, fitness and the right mental attitude are what they are looking for and GT is just one of the detection tools used to find the right person. You talk add if it's the only tool used.

 

[SlyNine]

If GT isn't very real then why do they have successful drivers from GT Academy (literal question)?

We're not saying anything about how realistic it is, just that it's less so, in certain aspects (tire physics, suspension physics, aero physics) than Forza 4.

 

[Speedster911]

^^ Second that!

 

[King1982]

One thing FM4 does well and GT5 has never done for me when playing it is a sudden loss of rear axle grip and the car spins out due to all the load going over the front. My best FM4 moment was this happening in a Ka and collecting the spin before it hit the Armco. Knowing this is in the model and the general way the FM4 cars tend to feel up on their toes and responding to weight shifting makes it so much more involved than 5. I like 5, but it's a lot more rigid in terms of car behaviour.

This is something that makes 4 so much better than 5 to me. It feels like im really connected and 'One' with the car. I gives so much feedback. I've played GT5 on rig and i felt so dead to me. Making me spin at every corner. I was playing with the Mp4-12c with a G27 for about two hours and it did not get better. I was spinning every other corner due to a total lack of feedback and 'feel' for the car.

In FM4 i know exactly when my brakes are close to locking. when my tyres are a the point of adhesion (when i start loosing grip) or when my tyres suddenly grip the road. I can feel my tyres getting more grippy when the temperatures ar optimal.

In Forza the first lap the tyres are always cold and making a good start at the race can be a handfull, but as soon as they hit the perfect temp the car comes alive much more. Than is good physics to me. The way my car slides when i have torque steer at the stars. T10 also simulates Bodyflex, tyredeformation wich enables it to be much more realistic and lifelike than Gt5 could ever be to me.

I'm not a GT hater, i bought the Ps3 because i was hyped for Gt5 after all them slick as trailers they released. But as soon as i played it it was a massive dissapointment. It never got any better. The only thing i really enjoyed was the awesome graphics on some tracks and Premium cars. Especially the cockpit view is untouchable in GT5.

But for the sheer pleasure of racing and proper realistic physics (Trust me GT fans) Forza is the one.

 

[hennessey86]

Because GT is used only for the initial stages of selection and the final stages and all serious training is done in the real world. As such GT could be replaced with any sim you like.

If they only used GT and then went straight to a real race you might have a point, but they don't.

That a good number of the GTA winners have a background in competitive sport of some kind is actually much more interesting. Consistency, determination, fitness and the right mental attitude are what they are looking for and GT is just one of the detection tools used to find the right person. You talk add if it's the only tool used.

This is one of the things that really annoys me about GT loyalists, they always bring up GT academy as a reference to how realistic the physics are. But like you said GT could be replaced by any racing game including forza for the initial stages of the academy. If anyone's watched the fastest guys replays and see there driving style, they are sliding the cars round the corners exploiting GTs physics engine. They won't be doing that when they get in a real car or they would be spending more time in the gravel traps or the pits for new tires every 5 laps.

 

[Luminis]

This is one of the things that really annoys me about GT loyalists, they always bring up GT academy as a reference to how realistic the physics are. But like you said GT could be replaced by any racing game including forza for the initial stages of the academy. If anyone's watched the fastest guys replays and see there driving style, they are sliding the cars round the corners exploiting GTs physics engine. They won't be doing that when they get in a real car or they would be spending more time in the gravel traps or the pits for new tires every 5 laps.

The folks you're talking about don't bother with logic usually, do they? So, what did you expect? For that kind of people, GT5's physcs are good because they love Gran Turismo. It's not that they love Gran Turismo because of GT5's physics. And that's why you can bring forth well thought-out arguments and be screamed down. That goes for a lot of games with a large community, though.

Try telling a bunch of folks who are into League of Legends that it is a Dota clone. It's blatantly true, because Dota basically invented that sort of sub-genre, but they'll still hiss and fit about it.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

The folks you're talking about don't bother with logic usually, do they? So, what did you expect? For that kind of people, GT5's physcs are good because they love Gran Turismo. It's not that they love Gran Turismo because of GT5's physics. And that's why you can bring forth well thought-out arguments and be screamed down. That goes for a lot of games with a large community, though.

Try telling a bunch of folks who are into League of Legends that it is a Dota clone. It's blatantly true, because Dota basically invented that sort of sub-genre, but they'll still hiss and fit about it.

Exactly, dogmatic groups use emotion not logic.

 

[interpolfan11]

Exactly, dogmatic groups use emotion not logic.

So much this.

 

[Speedster911]

This is something that makes 4 so much better than 5 to me. It feels like im really connected and 'One' with the car. I gives so much feedback. I've played GT5 on rig and i felt so dead to me. Making me spin at every corner. I was playing with the Mp4-12c with a G27 for about two hours and it did not get better. I was spinning every other corner due to a total lack of feedback and 'feel' for the car.

In FM4 i know exactly when my brakes are close to locking. when my tyres are a the point of adhesion (when i start loosing grip) or when my tyres suddenly grip the road. I can feel my tyres getting more grippy when the temperatures ar optimal.

In Forza the first lap the tyres are always cold and making a good start at the race can be a handfull, but as soon as they hit the perfect temp the car comes alive much more. Than is good physics to me. The way my car slides when i have torque steer at the stars. T10 also simulates Bodyflex, tyredeformation wich enables it to be much more realistic and lifelike than Gt5 could ever be to me.

I'm not a GT hater, i bought the Ps3 because i was hyped for Gt5 after all them slick as trailers they released. But as soon as i played it it was a massive dissapointment. It never got any better. The only thing i really enjoyed was the awesome graphics on some tracks and Premium cars. Especially the cockpit view is untouchable in GT5.

But for the sheer pleasure of racing and proper realistic physics (Trust me GT fans) Forza is the one.

I purchased a PS3 just for GT5. I actually got tremendous fun and replay out of all 4 GT games. I hadn't driven many high speed cars IRL at the time, though. I thought GT4 was realistic back then. GT5 kept me busy for a while, but it wasn't until FM4, when I said to myself: Wow.. they just nailed it. I am ONE with the car. I can feel what it's doing or what it's about to do. The kind of reaction you'd expect in real life when you're pushing a powerful car to it's limit, is pretty much the reaction you can expect when you give inputs in FM4, be it the controller or a wheel. So far, FM4 has been my best X360 purchase, the most played game too, in my collection. Long time back, sold the PS3 and GT5. Started to miss GT's tyre smoke a little, but that became a thing of the past within minutes! You can just feel so much of the car in terms of physics and sound, that is sadly, missing from GT. Where GT got redundant, FM sprung into action, and capitalized. I don't know how far ahead of the competition FM5 is going to be, but the PD guys REALLY have their work cut out for them now.

This is one of the things that really annoys me about GT loyalists, they always bring up GT academy as a reference to how realistic the physics are. But like you said GT could be replaced by any racing game including forza for the initial stages of the academy. If anyone's watched the fastest guys replays and see there driving style, they are sliding the cars round the corners exploiting GTs physics engine. They won't be doing that when they get in a real car or they would be spending more time in the gravel traps or the pits for new tires every 5 laps.

Reminds me of this argument I used to have with a friend of mine, hardcore GT5 loyalist. He used to tout how good he was at drifting and how he could smoke most drivers on the road or track with his style of driving! I unveiled FM4 to him one fine day, and he was just bewildered! In utter denial I tell ya, but one of the first things he said to me: Forza rewards clean, precision driving. He's bought a X360 just to experience FM4, and says it has made him a better driver IRL. Oh well.

So much this.

Aa'second that too ma'man!

 

[HAL20XX]

For that kind of people, GT5's physcs are good because they love Gran Turismo. It's not that they love Gran Turismo because of GT5's physics.

Very well said.

 

[rocketcaron]

Yup. I do the occasional track day with a bunch of friends and when some of them come home and get on the rig its always the same conclusion: FM4 is what feels the most like what the real thing feels. Probably already 15 different people came to the same conclusion. I always get the ''But isn't Gran Turismo the better simulation?'' and they always get a change of mind after trying FM4.

I wish GT6 would close the gap because I love PD attention to details and the way they represent car culture. But from what I see and feel from the GTA demo I think they have a long way to go.

 

[Speedster911]

^^ You know, I can't help sometimes but think back to the good ol' GT days, when it had no competition. Back on the PS2. Have really fond memories from the last few years of GT. I also wonder how GT would turn out, if it had the sound design and physics "borrowed" from a Forza game.

 

[rocketcaron]

Yeah, I feel just like you. GT3 was awesome. I had so many epic split screen battle (best split screen ever by the way) with one of my friend, bumper to bumper from start to finish for 5-10 laps was fantastic.

I guess I just wish that FM5 can give me the same kind of epic fun I had with GT games of old, 'cause I don't feel good about what GT6 can deliver. BUT... come on PD. Surprise me!!!

 

[atf]

Let's just get along. We don't play these games to look at the cars. We play them because we love racing. Why don't we all shut up, make friends, and make PD/Turn 10 give us what we want. The greatest racing game they can give us.

 

[Imari]

We don't play these games to look at the cars. We play them because we love racing.

I'd be careful with that one. There's a non-trivial amount of people who essentially do play simply to look at the cars; the Photomode crowd. And if you want to extend it to FM, there's also the people who spend most of their time building liveries as well.

I'm sure these people race as well, and I'm sure they probably love racing. But if you're a photomode junkie or a livery guy/girl, then the racing is not the part of the game that is most important to you.

And not that having great physics isn't important, but I think people write off the importance of graphics in these games far too easily. rF2 is at or near the top as far as physics goes, but it's a chore to play because most of it looks like it's from 15 years ago.

Why don't we all shut up, make friends, and make PD/Turn 10 give us what we want.

Because it's a discussion board. Discussing things is what we do here. There's no such thing as a shutting up board.

 

[VXR]

For me it all feeds into each other. As a photomode guy, I want the graphics, but then I want the physics to make taking the cars out worthwhile and an event in itself and therefore sit afterwards taking photos. Games with poor physics and or photomodes don't hold me for long, such as the Shift series.

 

[KinLM]

I'd be careful with that one. There's a non-trivial amount of people who essentially do play simply to look at the cars; the Photomode crowd. And if you want to extend it to FM, there's also the people who spend most of their time building liveries as well.

I'm sure these people race as well, and I'm sure they probably love racing. But if you're a photomode junkie or a livery guy/girl, then the racing is not the part of the game that is most important to you.

And not that having great physics isn't important, but I think people write off the importance of graphics in these games far too easily. rF2 is at or near the top as far as physics goes, but it's a chore to play because most of it looks like it's from 15 years ago.

Because it's a discussion board. Discussing things is what we do here. There's no such thing as a shutting up board.

I disagree with this. rFactor 2's graphics may not be cutting edge but I've definitely never found it a chore to have to play it. It also has a few effects (tire deformation, tire surface damage, weather) that I personally think looks really good and is absent from some of the bigger games.

 

[hennessey86]

I disagree with this. rFactor 2's graphics may not be cutting edge but I've definitely never found it a chore to have to play it. It also has a few effects (tire deformation, tire surface damage, weather) that I personally think looks really good and is absent from some of the bigger games.

It's not the graphics that's the problem for me, it's the damn frame rates I'm getting. I'm struggling to maintain 60 and I'm sorry when a game looks as bland as rfactor 2 I expect a solid 60 like I get in the assetto corsa tech demo.

 

[KinLM]

It's not the graphics that's the problem for me, it's the damn frame rates I'm getting. I'm struggling to maintain 60 and I'm sorry when a game looks as bland as rfactor 2 I expect a solid 60 like I get in the assetto corsa tech demo.

Wouldnt call it bland but I will agree that I've had these issues. Annoys me quite a bit but doesn't make me feel the graphics are bad.

 

[Dooblewasur]

For me personally, I've just recently gotten 4za, as I call it, and after having not had GT5 for some time, I think the competition is harsh. I feel like Forza is better suited for the casual racer like myself, although I am most interested in the photomode options, in which case I prefer GT.

I really don't see how or why GT6 and Forza 5 chould be compared, belonging to two generations, however I think both of these games lack something in their current forms. They are rather sterile, being in pursuit of the perfect simulation.

 

[Earth]

Forza 5 Huayra

GT6 Huayra

 

[Tornado]

Not really the clearest of comparisons...