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

[Zer0]

I'm not convinced that what you see is what Gran Turismo actually sends through the physics engine. If it was really direct and instantaneous, the game would be pretty much undrivable with a controller...the inputs of the average player would result in monstrous understeer on every corner. Based on my play of GT5, I think Gran Turismo filters the steering like any other console racing game but animates the front wheels to reflect your joystick input.

The sort of input processing utilized by Forza, including "Normal" mode, is obligatory for providing adequate control with a joystick in any game that's even half-realistic. And it can be done without holding the player's hand. It's not a hardcore/casual thing.

I mean compared to the steering issue in Forza. Pad users will always have physics more restricted than wheel users. Force feedback aside, in GT6 and with no aids a pad still retain a car speed sensitive steering buffer (you can't force this, but with a wheel you can). With a pad you can't also lock the rear wheels at downshifting but you can with a wheel with clutch. Torque steer is also experienced by wheel users in situations that pad users don't. Etc. I have always ignored the GT test physics made with gamepads and defended the use of the wheel for that reason.

But said that, the steering angle seen in the replays is accurate to what the physics are doing and most of the time its visuals are instantly updated from the stick travel input. The fact that this is well translated to the gameplay and makes a difference is a good thing.

 

[Imari]

But said that, the steering angle seen in the replays is accurate to what the physics are doing and most of the time its visuals are instantly updated from the stick travel input.

If that's true then it's probably indicative of a flaw in the physics, because the vast majority of cars should not respond well to steering inputs that are either at zero or full lock all the time. You simply cannot go from 0 to 30 degree of wheel angle in a tenth of a second and expect a car to follow on smoothly, and you cannot oscillate from 0 to 30 degrees and expect it not to upset the car.

Try this thought experiment: There's a corner where you hold your wheel at 45 degrees to go through it smoothly. Now, instead imagine that instead of holding it at 45 degrees, you wobble it between 25 and 65 two or three times a second. With a wheel, that will upset the car. But when you do something much more extreme with a pad (flicking between zero and full lock) it really doesn't, as seen in your gif.

Wherever it's happening, either in filtering the controls or within the physics system itself, there's something that means that pad users can get away with extreme steering motions that a wheel cannot. As you point out, there are other things that pad users can get away with that wheel users cannot, I don't see why this isn't a fair candidate to be added to that list.

It's definitely very well done in that it's not visible to the player unless you actually go looking for it, and it almost always helps rather than hinders, but it doesn't mean that there's not something there. It's a good thing, it's important for console games to have at least one pad steering mode with this sort of assist available. GT's implementation happens to be a very good one, but let's not pretend that it doesn't have any sort of pad steering assistance.

 

[SlyNine]

http://forums.forzamotorsport.net/t...c-ally-slow-makes-very-poor-simulation.aspx?=

http://forums.xbox.com/xbox_forums/xbox_support/xbox_one_support/f/4269/t/1632113.aspx

My PC is high end with a 144hz Gsync monitor, 1ms mouse, and I set the frames to draw no more then 1 ahead. I understand the need to eliminate input lag.

However you need to use telemetry for testing that input lag. Because the input lag isn't anywhere near that. For instance when you look around you don't see near the delay. In Forza I cannot play in cockpit view because the steering wheel lag kills me. However comparing the steering wheel lag to the actual telemetry tells us the cars respond before they are represented graphically.

This is a game where the physics are decoupled from the graphics (fps=60, Physics rate is set at 360), so what you feel and how the cars respond isn't 100% in line with SOME of what you see(I think the suspension system does a good job)

Also there are many other sources of input lag. Was that display connected directly to the screen? Plus you are wrong, some screens add up to 100ms of input lag. Even some computer monitors for instance, the Dell UP3214Q adds 47ms on TOP of the reference monitor. That's 47ms plus whatever highend CRT monitor Anandtech used as a reference.

 

[Zer0]

If that's true then it's probably indicative of a flaw in the physics, because the vast majority of cars should not respond well to steering inputs that are either at zero or full lock all the time. You simply cannot go from 0 to 30 degree of wheel angle in a tenth of a second and expect a car to follow on smoothly, and you cannot oscillate from 0 to 30 degrees and expect it not to upset the car.

Try this thought experiment: There's a corner where you hold your wheel at 45 degrees to go through it smoothly. Now, instead imagine that instead of holding it at 45 degrees, you wobble it between 25 and 65 two or three times a second. With a wheel, that will upset the car. But when you do something much more extreme with a pad (flicking between zero and full lock) it really doesn't, as seen in your gif.

Wherever it's happening, either in filtering the controls or within the physics system itself, there's something that means that pad users can get away with extreme steering motions that a wheel cannot. As you point out, there are other things that pad users can get away with that wheel users cannot, I don't see why this isn't a fair candidate to be added to that list.

It's definitely very well done in that it's not visible to the player unless you actually go looking for it, and it almost always helps rather than hinders, but it doesn't mean that there's not something there. It's a good thing, it's important for console games to have at least one pad steering mode with this sort of assist available. GT's implementation happens to be a very good one, but let's not pretend that it doesn't have any sort of pad steering assistance.

At those insane steering speeds and translated to a real car I will probably expect something like this but in slow motion due the mass:



Is not a secret that pad user have an advantage in GT6 in some stressfull steering situations thanks to the faster lock, it's very noticeable at the time of countersteering to recover a car or at drifting. Much easier to perform than in a wheel, but it's a physical advantage that would exist also in real life. It's always easier to move a little stick with a thumb than to use the two hands to rotate full turns in a steering wheel with force feedback.

 

[SlyNine]

At those insane steering speeds and translated to a real car I will probably expect something like this but in slow motion due the mass:



Is not a secret that pad user have an advantage in GT6 in some stressfull steering situations thanks to the faster lock, it's very noticeable at the time of countersteering to recover a car or at drifting. Much easier to perform than in a wheel, but it's a physical advantage that would exist also in real life. It's always easier to move a little stick with a thumb than to use the two hands to rotate full turns in a steering wheel with force feedback.

I doubt your concepts of scale hold up. Still setting expo rates and applying filters on RC cars and helis is very important.

 

[NLxAROSA]

Pad users will always have physics more restricted than wheel users.

I think physics are the same, just restricted/filtered/dampened input.

 

[Speedster911]

Right, so fellas, to sum it up.. does FM4 have better pad control/steering than FM5?

When using a wheel, there are zero issues with steering range and speed, correct?

I'd love to see FULL wheel rotation/animation is both games (GT and Forza). It should be the way it is IRL: road cars - 900 degs or less (depending on manufacturer and model), race, rally cars, open wheelers - 90 to 180 degs on either side, again depending on man. and model.

Thoughts?

For those of you who haven't tried out AC or PCARS.. please do. Those sims have properly animated wheels in cockpit. Adds to the experience and immersion 200%. 👍

GT does not have that problem, it's a game know for its linear and direct steering. Forza historically have been plagued with steering issues for sim players (hidden active steering aids, control buffers, and non linear steering angles). In GT the degrees of wheel rotation are accurately translated to the tyres, that's because pad players have replays with instant direction changes like you see in R.C. cars.

http://tinyurl.com/opxkxfz

Man.... I MISS GT's smoke effects. One of the best in the industry.

 

[NLxAROSA]

For those of you who haven't tried out AC or PCARS.. please do. Those sims have properly animated wheels in cockpit. Adds to the experience and immersion 200%. 👍

It also reflects the non-filtered input properly when using a controller in AC, you can see the driver going to full lock almost instantly when flicking the stick.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Right, so fellas, to sum it up.. does FM4 have better pad control/steering than FM5?

To answer this question, I went back and fired up FM4.
Performing the same test on the steering, the timing of steering inputs are half or a little less than FM5.
Or significantly faster.
Apparently, that is why I never noticed it when I played FM4.
When driving a car in FM4, the car responds to steering inputs noticeably quicker than in FM5.
Consequently, I have to say the steering aspect is much better in FM4 than FM5.

Something else I noted when doing this, is there is more spring tension on the 360 controller, which I also prefer to the XBone controller.

 

[Max911]

Considering the fact that I love racing in different conditions on different surfaces like rain, dirt, and snow, I still prefer GT6 because of it. I also like the idea of having every variation of every car in the game (although I miss the first-gen RX-7) and the fact that the tracks in GT6 are just so much better. Forza 5 has the sounds for sure and the graphics do blow GT6 away, but I find myself having 3 or 4 races and then get bored. GT6 also has the advantage of being able to be played with high-end wheels. In my case, the G27, and since I got it I can't play any racing game without it.

To me, rain and dirt and snow, day-to-night transitions, and although underdeveloped, the damage system does add to the challenge. Forza 5 is a pretty good game, but it feels a bit rushed. So does GT6, but it has a lot more features that I actually prefer. Not really a big fan of photo mode although I used to be. And I agree with the above post, FM4 was way better driving-wise and in terms of sheer volume than FM5.

 

[Zelalem]

Considering the fact that I love racing in different conditions on different surfaces like rain, dirt, and snow, I still prefer GT6 because of it. I also like the idea of having every variation of every car in the game (although I miss the first-gen RX-7) and the fact that the tracks in GT6 are just so much better. Forza 5 has the sounds for sure and the graphics do blow GT6 away, but I find myself having 3 or 4 races and then get bored. GT6 also has the advantage of being able to be played with high-end wheels. In my case, the G27, and since I got it I can't play any racing game without it.

I don't want to sound rude, but how do tracks get better than laser scanned tracks?

 

[Tornado]

If you have a crapload more of them.

 

[Zelalem]

If you have a crapload more of them.

Do you think he meant more and not better? Well could be. My english isn't good and i could have misread his sentence

 

[Tornado]

I think he possibly could have meant either one. Or maybe he even meant the specific track selection rather than just the number or quality. No Nurburgring when FM5 first came out was certainly a dealbreaker for many until they announced it, for example.

 

[Speedster911]

It also reflects the non-filtered input properly when using a controller in AC, you can see the driver going to full lock almost instantly when flicking the stick.

THIS I want to see in GT and especially Forza (my baby..purr purr). Shouldn't be impossible with this gen hardware.

Also while we're on the subject, do you think the FM5 steering lag has anything at all to do with the hardware? Or is it just the game?

Maybe both? Eekh...!

 

[SlyNine]

THIS I want to see in GT and especially Forza (my baby..purr purr). Shouldn't be impossible with this gen hardware.

Also while we're on the subject, do you think the FM5 steering lag has anything at all to do with the hardware? Or is it just the game?

Maybe both? Eekh...!

Seconded, I want to see the steering wheel match what the real wheel would do. How they have it takes so much immersion out of the game. Also give us the option for cockpit view without a steering wheel. If I can see my real hands steering my "real" wheel, I don't need to see the virtual ones.

 

[Zer0]

I think physics are the same, just restricted/filtered/dampened input.

What I said.

Is not different than playing with aids and without, but switching the hardware (pad to wheel) to release the full potential of the game.

I don't want to sound rude, but how do tracks get better than laser scanned tracks?

24h, weather, night, larger selection, larger variety, layout/textures/surrounds acuracy, track "personality", etc.

And about the laser scanned tracks, read this:

FM5
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=81019677&postcount=455
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=77678865&postcount=410

GT
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=92507536&postcount=1772
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=92449147&postcount=1517
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=121733842&postcount=7246
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=118090193&postcount=7062

 

[ImaRobot]

What I said.

Is not different than playing with aids and without, but switching the hardware (pad to wheel) to release the full potential of the game.


24h, weather, night, larger selection, larger variety, layout/textures/surrounds acuracy, track "personality", etc.

And about the laser scanned tracks, read this:

FM5
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=81019677&postcount=455
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=77678865&postcount=410

GT
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=92507536&postcount=1772
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=92449147&postcount=1517
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=121733842&postcount=7246
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=118090193&postcount=7062

I'm unsure of what those links are supposed to prove? Two hand selected posts with skepticism concerning T10's Tracks, and 4 posts explaining how PD does it.

It just seems a bit biased to make a selection like that

 

[Zer0]

I'm unsure of what those links are supposed to prove? Two hand selected posts with skepticism concerning T10's Tracks, and 4 posts explaining how PD does it.

It just seems a bit biased to make a selection like that

That laser scanned tracks are not exclusive to Forza 5, that GT have been using the technology since at least twelve years (five years before iRacing existed) and that not all the tracks in FM5 have been laser scanned. So those points should be considered by everyone who think that having laser scanned tracks in FM5 makes them automatically better than in GT. Not counting missing features.

Just adding the info. If you have some "unbiased" link selection which differ with the above, post it.

 

[ImaRobot]

That laser scanned tracks are not exclusive to Forza 5, that GT have been using the technology since at least twelve years (five years before iRacing existed) and that not all the tracks in FM5 have been laser scanned. So those points should be considered by everyone who think that having laser scanned tracks in FM5 makes them automatically better than in GT. Not counting missing features.

Just adding the info. If you have some "unbiased" link selection which differ with the above, post it.

Its just the way you presented it. Two links putting down T10, and 4 links putting good faith in PD. Going off your track record, its not like its a surprise though. Still, I'm not sure who was claiming only T10 laser scans tracks for its game.

I havent played any GT before 5, so I never really looked into it, or cared for that matter, but is every real-life track in GT Laser scanned? If so, good for them. Still, using the example you just used, Just because GT has been laser-scanning for so many years, doesnt make them better either. Not counting features.

 

[Zelalem]

So those points should be considered by everyone who think that having laser scanned tracks in FM5 makes them automatically better than in GT. Not counting missing features

You are jumping to conclusion here. I asked the question, because i knew both have laser scanned tracks and didn't unterstood how one laser scanned track could be just so much better/more accurate than the other.

So much better sounds like those tracks like nordschleife would have a huge difference, but thats not the case, because both developer laser scanned them to make them very accurate. The difference are minor details like a missing metal wall in GT6 vs FM/real life in one of the corners for example. Tracks evolve over time and developers can't intergrate every change all the time, since revisiting the tracks and take hundreds of pictures every year would be a huge untertaking. I can't blame them.

 

[Zer0]

I havent played any GT before 5, so I never really looked into it, or cared for that matter, but is every real-life track in GT Laser scanned? If so, good for them. Still, using the example you just used, Just because GT has been laser-scanning for so many years, doesnt make them better either. Not counting features.

At this time most of the real world tracks should have been updated with the help of a laser scanned data, which can be some years old since they scanned the track the last time. Any track compatible with the GPS datta logger and FIA aproved is for sure laser scanned, along with all the new GT6 tracks and future tracks that are being scanned. GPS real data is also recorded in the save games during the GT6 gameplay and later can be loaded in the Motec software.

Don't stress yourself, is just info for who don't knows. Interpret it whatever you want. I already explained what could make one track better than other but I don't force anyone to think different.

You are jumping to conclusion here. I asked the question, because i knew both have laser scanned tracks and didn't unterstood how one laser scanned track could be just so much better/more accurate than the other.

Because there are different grades of implementation, is not an on-off switch that you add to a track. There is an example of a raw scanned data in the link. You can have two games with a stated laser scanned track and be very different, both in the visuals and gameplay, depending of the scan resolution, the modelling work and the research put later on it. You have also tracks with better features and games with better track selections.

 

[ImaRobot]

At this time most of the real world tracks should have been updated with the help of a laser scanned data, which can be some years old since they scanned the track the last time. Any track compatible with the GPS datta logger and FIA aproved is for sure laser scanned, along with all the new GT6 tracks and future tracks that are being scanned. GPS real data is also recorded in the save games during the GT6 gameplay and later can be loaded in the Motec software.

Anywhere I can read up on that? I'm interested to catch up and inform myself.

Don't stress yourself, is just info for who don't knows. Interpret it whatever you want. I already explained what could make one track better than other but I don't force anyone to think different.

Yeah, but we weren't talking about features, remember? We are strictly talking about the laser scanned tracks.

Because there are different grades of implementation, is not an on-off switch that you add to a track. There is an example of a raw scanned data in the link. You can have two games with a stated laser scanned track and be very different, both in the visuals and gameplay, depending of the scan resolution, the modelling work and the research put later on it. You have also tracks with better features and games with better track selections.

So that makes one laser scanned track better then the other laser scanned track, how? Yes, its a no brainer that two different games are going to have different visuals and gameplay, but that effects a laser-scanned track how? Visuals and gameplay can be straight out of Diddy Kong Racing, but its not going to change the track. If they are using similar set-ups, then the differences are most likely going to be hardly noticeble, if that.

So those points should be considered by everyone who think that having laser scanned tracks in FM5 makes them automatically better than in GT.

This can be said again, except reverse the titles.

I guess what I'm getting at is that you shoot T10 down, mentioning that just because they have laser scanned tracks that it doesnt mean that its better, but it doesnt seem like you'd hold PD in the same regard.

 

[Speedster911]

That laser scanned tracks are not exclusive to Forza 5, that GT have been using the technology since at least twelve years (five years before iRacing existed) and that not all the tracks in FM5 have been laser scanned. So those points should be considered by everyone who think that having laser scanned tracks in FM5 makes them automatically better than in GT. Not counting missing features.

Just adding the info. If you have some "unbiased" link selection which differ with the above, post it.

Er, would you be so kind so as to point out which ones aren't scanned?

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Also while we're on the subject, do you think the FM5 steering lag has anything at all to do with the hardware? Or is it just the game?

Maybe both? Eekh...!

Since the hardware should be more capable than the 360, I believe it is the game design.
As Max911 notes above, the game "feels a bit rushed".
Compared to FM4, it appears "very rushed" to me.


Speaking of tracks, I have noticed the new nordschleife in FM5 is now practically identical to GT's version.
This seems to indicate GT's nordschleife was more accurate to start with.
The other tracks in common also appear to be much more alike as well.
Then again if both dev's are laser scanning, then they should be.

 

[UKMikey]

Since the hardware should be more capable than the 360, I believe it is the game design.
As Max911 notes above, the game "feels a bit rushed".
Compared to FM4, it appears "very rushed" to me.

It's no secret that the game was rushed for the launch of the new console. I don't have a wheel but it sounds like it'd be a simple matter to compare the steering lag in FM5 with that in Forza Horizon 2 which had almost a year for the developers to get to grips with the new hardware.

Speaking of tracks, I have noticed the new nordschleife in FM5 is now practically identical to GT's version.
This seems to indicate GT's nordschleife was more accurate to start with.
The other tracks in common also appear to be much more alike as well.
Then again if both dev's are laser scanning, then they should be.

It's also no secret that previous versions of Forza Motorsport used the Nurburgring track from Project Gotham Racing that was way inaccurate. I wonder how Laguna Seca matches up on the two games.

 

[imported_Da-bomber]

Just adjust dead zone to zero for the controller.

 

[Speedster911]

Since the hardware should be more capable than the 360, I believe it is the game design.
As Max911 notes above, the game "feels a bit rushed".
Compared to FM4, it appears "very rushed" to me.


Speaking of tracks, I have noticed the new nordschleife in FM5 is now practically identical to GT's version.
This seems to indicate GT's nordschleife was more accurate to start with.
The other tracks in common also appear to be much more alike as well.
Then again if both dev's are laser scanning, then they should be.

Hmm, so as it stands, FM4 is prolly their best track game to date.

FM5's version of the Ring being accurate this time is a very positive direction for the series. I believe they could have made it more accurate even in the previous games, but probably redirected their resources elsewhere.

GT's track design and variety always had Forza beat. They really are that good.

It's no secret that the game was rushed for the launch of the new console. I don't have a wheel but it sounds like it'd be a simple matter to compare the steering lag in FM5 with that in Forza Horizon 2 which had almost a year for the developers to get to grips with the new hardware.

It's also no secret that previous versions of Forza Motorsport used the Nurburgring track from Project Gotham Racing that was way inaccurate. I wonder how Laguna Seca matches up on the two games.

Judging from the reviews and vids, H2 does not feel rushed at all. Could T10 have done better if they had an additional year to work on refining FM5? Perhaps.

Ah, them using the PGR version does not come as a surprise; they also hired one of the PGR guys to work on FM4's audio, didn't they?

Just adjust dead zone to zero for the controller.

THIS resolves a lot of issues. Much more direct and responsive control. And you need to master intricate inputs to get the car to behave as it would IRL with an actual wheel.

I've always keeps my deads at zero, no complaints about lag. Don't own FM5 though, so can't say.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Hmm, so as it stands, FM4 is prolly their best track game to date.

After playing both, IMO FM4 is far superior to FM5 in practically every way.
As a matter of fact, now that I've gone back and played FM4, to update the comparison, I don't really care to play FM5. I'd much rather play FM4. And the biggest reason is the steering response is noticeably much quicker in FM4.
That makes the driving aspect a lot better.

 

[Speedster911]

After playing both, IMO FM4 is far superior to FM5 in practically every way.
As a matter of fact, now that I've gone back and played FM4, to update the comparison, I don't really care to play FM5. I'd much rather play FM4. And the biggest reason is the steering response is noticeably much quicker in FM4.
That makes the driving aspect a lot better.

Hmm, interesting.

You're actually the first person who's said that since FM5 came out.