Forza 5 Review Thread

  • Thread starter HAL20XX
  • 114 comments
  • 8,614 views

McLaren

Premium
41,554
United States
Texas
Partyboy78
I briefly played it tonight at a friend's house. The first thing I noticed is just how much of a learning curve this game has. It doesn't take too long, but even though I played FM4 with no assists except ABS & auto-clutch, trying to do the same caught me completely off guard in the S2000CR. I found myself spinning around a couple times until I set the controls to Normal Steering & Stability Control. It definitely still takes some getting used to, but by Bathurst, I was able to finish 3rd, & 1st at Sebring. The cars feel like they have more weight to them & you can't throw yourself into corners expecting a quick recovery. And whilst I never experienced the "all cars understeer" comments about FM4, I see no way for that to ever happen in this game unless of course, it's a car with that tendency. The physics just feel amazing & I can not wait to work my way back to Simulation & no assists again. I also like the rumble when braking to let you know ABS is kicking in. Once I started paying more attention to it, I was able to judge my application of the brakes much better resulting in better results.

As for the AI, I don't know what to think of it yet. They are definitely different thanks to Drivatar. I think they brake too early sometimes, but I'm wondering if that's due to traffic ahead slowing down quickly as well. I was also able to really see just how much Drivatar works out at Sebring. After coming out of the hairpin at Turn 7, I noticed a couple AI went wide coming into Fangio dipping a wheel in the grass & 2 cutting the rumble strip on the other side. It's easy to tell that it's heavily people influenced & that should bring some real challenges out.

That's as far as I allowed myself to get, else I would have gone nuts. Very eager for my console to arrive now & start driving my F12, Fiesta, & another gift car. Probably won't pick the S2000 this time around, though.
 
620
I'm really enjoying the game, the leap in graphics is astounding to me. I can even be amazed, by looking at a Trueno in the garage. The tracks as well, all are lively, and look fantastic. For a team to build this from the ground-up and not port over any assets is amazing.

Some things I didn't like is the recommended designs, etc, only showing what's popular and not like a complete list, you can search for name, if you know any. In the main screen there is the marketplace, which says 'Coming Soon', so maybe there is where we can check out the community designs properly. Another thing is when you select a league, you have to select a car first, which then auto-upgrades to the restriction. I dunno why they took out the simple 'X' button to show the league restrictions, let me decide how to upgrade and not do it for me. So I take note of what the max restriction is, exit out and select a car based off those choices, then upgrade as appropriate, does it have to be this way? Did I miss something here?

I did like that when you complete a league, say 8 races, you get bonus races afterwards. This is telling to me because clearly there are plenty of squares for events, so (hoping), when they add track DLC, they will add to leagues/events, which is welcome and a big "finally". Pure speculation of course.

As a VIP, still didn't get the "2x reward accelerator", so I'm hoping they fix that soon. I got everything else including the rewards cars from Forza rewards, which everyone should join. If you consider the rewards, plus normal grinding and (assuming) contests, you should never really be in a situation when you would need to use the tokens, it's an option, use it if need be, I won't.

(Adam Sessler Voice) A 5 out of 5.
 
Last edited:
3,830
France
SoCal
GTP_MooCow
I am quoting an Autoblog reviewer who has been playing with FM5 for the past two weeks:

"Of course looking great and driving great are two completely different things. If there's one spot where Gran Turismo 5 still really had it over Forza Motorsport 4, it was in the more precise vehicle physics and faithful reproduction of the real world driving experience. With Forza 5, however, Turn 10 has taken quite a few leaps forward."
 

SlipZtrEm

GTP Admin
Staff Emeritus
27,384
Canada
Toronto
NewAesthetic
SlipZtrEm
I am quoting an Autoblog reviewer who has been playing with FM5 for the past two weeks:

"Of course looking great and driving great are two completely different things. If there's one spot where Gran Turismo 5 still really had it over Forza Motorsport 4, it was in the more precise vehicle physics and faithful reproduction of the real world driving experience. With Forza 5, however, Turn 10 has taken quite a few leaps forward."

I saw that, and my face did this:

ZgPul.gif


as I wondered how many times they've had powerful rear-drive muscle cars launch in arrow-straight lines in real life. Then I got to the final review score, and did the same face, though.
 

Zer0

(Banned)
1,624
I saw that, and my face did this:
It happens when you weight the whole physics accuracy based on a single minor aspect that is not even significant in professional racing, except in drag racing... the autoblog quote regarding the driving model is not an isolated opinion for a reason. Will be great to read his GT6 review. :)
 

Terronium-12

The Man Comes Around
Moderator
27,217
United States
Brooklyn, NY
KR_Viper
I Renown I
"...is not even significant in professional racing, except in drag racing."

Is that why — you know what? You're just going to avoid the question anyway.
 
12,065
Australia
Melbourne
Neomone/GTP_Imari
It happens when you weight the whole physics accuracy based on a single minor aspect that is not even significant in professional racing, except in drag racing... the autoblog quote regarding the driving model is not an isolated opinion for a reason. Will be great to read his GT6 review. :)

You know quite well that the list of GT inaccuracies stretches well beyond just that. But I agree with T12, this is pointless when you'll never discuss these things rationally anyway (and it's a topic better suited to the Vs. thread).
 
1,789
United States
The Motor City
HAL20xx
HAL20xx
It happens when you weight the whole physics accuracy based on a single minor aspect that is not even significant in professional racing, except in drag racing... the autoblog quote regarding the driving model is not an isolated opinion for a reason. Will be great to read his GT6 review. :)
Unlike many of the fans of GT that base it on the premise of the game's tagline and not on the merits of the actual physics?
 
3,830
France
SoCal
GTP_MooCow
Thanks for the Gambino Gif, i love that guy lol

In regards to that review, and unlike you i dont think the reivewer meant any ill intentions against GT5 when reviewing FM5.

Especially if you read his summary.
The conclusion i am drawing is:
OVERALL, FM4<GT5<FM5

and it terms of physics, if you read the quote carefully, he is obviously saying : FM4<GT5 and FM4<FM5
but he is not necessarily saying that GT5<FM5.
The leaps made in FM5 are a huge improvement for the series (Bravo T10), but the question the reviewer is not answering is: are those FM5 physics improvements betterthat what is found in GT5?!??!

Wait and see ;)

I saw that, and my face did this:

ZgPul.gif


as I wondered how many times they've had powerful rear-drive muscle cars launch in arrow-straight lines in real life. Then I got to the final review score, and did the same face, though.
 
3,830
France
SoCal
GTP_MooCow
Back when FM4 came out , i had 2 reasons for why am not getting it.

Now with FM5, i only have one reason that is holding me back from getting it: money.

For sure i will still enjoy the GT series for the next two installments, unless FM6 can convince me otherwise.
 
1,789
United States
The Motor City
HAL20xx
HAL20xx
The guys at Inside Sim Racing seem to think that the physics are an improvement over GT. At least, that's their initial take on it. They still need to do a complete review.
 

SlipZtrEm

GTP Admin
Staff Emeritus
27,384
Canada
Toronto
NewAesthetic
SlipZtrEm
It happens when you weight the whole physics accuracy based on a single minor aspect that is not even significant in professional racing, except in drag racing... the autoblog quote regarding the driving model is not an isolated opinion for a reason. Will be great to read his GT6 review. :)

Right. Because having a tire physics model that isn't the definition of "basic" is a minor problem.

:rolleyes:

Tell me again how you prefer fact over opinion. It's Thursday, I need a good laugh.
 

McLaren

Premium
41,554
United States
Texas
Partyboy78
Thanks for the Gambino Gif, i love that guy lol

In regards to that review, and unlike you i dont think the reivewer meant any ill intentions against GT5 when reviewing FM5.

Especially if you read his summary.
The conclusion i am drawing is:
OVERALL, FM4<GT5<FM5

and it terms of physics, if you read the quote carefully, he is obviously saying : FM4<GT5 and FM4<FM5
but he is not necessarily saying that GT5<FM5.
The leaps made in FM5 are a huge improvement for the series (Bravo T10), but the question the reviewer is not answering is: are those FM5 physics improvements betterthat what is found in GT5?!??!

Wait and see ;)
I don't think that's what Slip is saying. If you read the rest of his post, he's wondering how the Autoblog reviewer came to the conclusion GT5 was a superior physics model to FM4, when FM4's tire model is what put it ahead of GT5's primitive one.

As for whether FM5's physics improvements are better than GT5's, that's a undoubted yes.
It happens when you weight the whole physics accuracy based on a single minor aspect that is not even significant in professional racing, except in drag racing... the autoblog quote regarding the driving model is not an isolated opinion for a reason. Will be great to read his GT6 review. :)
So then, you'll concede Forza has "finally" passed GT as the most realistic console sim at the moment?
I'm fascinated to see if Gran Turismo 6, running on Playstation 3 hardware, will be able to fully match the accurate simulation of physics here. Right now Forza is in the lead where GT has always hung its hat, and with no PS4 version of the Polyphony franchise in sight...
 
Last edited:

VXR

10,286
United Kingdom
Plymouth, UK
motorforum
Considering the improvements made to FWD and 4WD cars in FM5 and how the RWD cars were already ahead of GT5 in the last game, how can a car site like Autoblog feel GT5 is the more realistic representation? Even the sense of speed is wrong!
 
12,065
Australia
Melbourne
Neomone/GTP_Imari
VXR
Considering the improvements made to FWD and 4WD cars in FM5 and how the RWD cars were already ahead of GT5 in the last game, how can a car site like Autoblog feel GT5 is the more realistic representation? Even the sense of speed is wrong!

I think it has a lot to do with GT5 behaving as people expect it to, even if those behaviours are wrong. The simplified suspension means you don't have to deal with the delays in weight shifting and the wobbles to the same extent, and the simplified tyre model means that it's very easy to comprehend what's happening when something goes wrong.

In real life it's easy to deal with and understand these things too, but that's mostly because you've got seat-of-the-pants info helping you out, and probably a bunch of experienced drivers on the sidelines if you want to ask questions.

People find serious simulations hard because it's often not immediately obvious what they're doing wrong. People then often jump to the conclusion that the physics is wrong, simply because they don't understand it. It's much easier to blame the tool than yourself.

Sometimes the physics is going to be wrong, or at least incorrect in certain circumstances. But there is a bit of a skill to playing and understanding a complex physical simulation, and I think a lot of people reviewing and playing these types of games haven't spent the time with sims and RL track days to make the connections.

Driving is not the same when 95%+ of your information comes visually. Some games expect you to develop the skills to react and perceive that additional information with the sources you have available (visual, audio, FFB). Others simplify that additional information so that it's not as critical if you miss it. Unfortunately, to all but the most seasoned driver/sim racers the simplified approach will "feel" better.
 

Wolfe

Physics Critic
Premium
13,404
United States
Wisconsin
Wolfe2x7
Great post, @Imari. In terms of visual feedback, I've found that GT5 is particularly communicative compared to Forza, which is rather muted (moreso FM4 than Horizon; it's hard to tell how FM5 compares from videos). The last time I played GT5 I really understood how so many people come to the conclusion that there's a special "feel" to driving in GT5 that is missing from FM4. It doesn't really mean anything for the physics themselves -- to me GT5 offers a frustratingly unnatural and "wooden" driving experience, while all of the cars wobble like JELL-O -- but it's pretty easy to understand how they got the idea.
 

VXR

10,286
United Kingdom
Plymouth, UK
motorforum
I think GT5 allows you to drive quickly and neatly a lot easier than Forza does, but being quick and neat isn't easy. Lord knows I know how much smoother I've become on the road when pressing on. In my early days I'd not be happy if I wasn't jerking into corners and taking liberties with what was fortunately a very benign family car.
 
123
United States
Oregon
DD2Boys
Back when FM4 came out , i had 2 reasons for why am not getting it.

Now with FM5, i only have one reason that is holding me back from getting it: money.

For sure i will still enjoy the GT series for the next two installments, unless FM6 can convince me otherwise.
What are the next two installments ? I thought Pd is done with Ps3?
 

mister dog

(Banned)
8,396
Belgium
Spain
misterdog
misterdog7
I think it has a lot to do with GT5 behaving as people expect it to, even if those behaviours are wrong. The simplified suspension means you don't have to deal with the delays in weight shifting and the wobbles to the same extent, and the simplified tyre model means that it's very easy to comprehend what's happening when something goes wrong.

In real life it's easy to deal with and understand these things too, but that's mostly because you've got seat-of-the-pants info helping you out, and probably a bunch of experienced drivers on the sidelines if you want to ask questions.

People find serious simulations hard because it's often not immediately obvious what they're doing wrong. People then often jump to the conclusion that the physics is wrong, simply because they don't understand it. It's much easier to blame the tool than yourself.

Sometimes the physics is going to be wrong, or at least incorrect in certain circumstances. But there is a bit of a skill to playing and understanding a complex physical simulation, and I think a lot of people reviewing and playing these types of games haven't spent the time with sims and RL track days to make the connections.

Driving is not the same when 95%+ of your information comes visually. Some games expect you to develop the skills to react and perceive that additional information with the sources you have available (visual, audio, FFB). Others simplify that additional information so that it's not as critical if you miss it. Unfortunately, to all but the most seasoned driver/sim racers the simplified approach will "feel" better.
This might very well be true; i also had it that the car breaks away more suddenly and you loose more speed oversteering with FM4. then when playing the GT6 demo last summer everything was a bit more predictable and you had the feeling you could really play with the car and it's weight without any sudden surprises like in FM4.

I wouldn't be able to say which one is the most realistic, as both are very distinct and my only racing experience in real life is with karts (as i don't dare to push my old Volvo too much to the limit, unless i come home a bit tipsy :D)...

The conclusion should come from someone that races real cars regularly (which could be you i don't know).
 

Zer0

(Banned)
1,624
Right. Because having a tire physics model that isn't the definition of "basic" is a minor problem.

:rolleyes:

Tell me again how you prefer fact over opinion. It's Thursday, I need a good laugh.
This opinion sums perfectly the issue:
Forza 4 physics seem slightly too smoothed out to me.

It's hard to describe. It's like that juddering you get as you find bits of grip and loose them again. In Forza the process seems a bit too rounded off.

I admire the game and it's achievements as I've said before, but having owned a racing license in real life - I just can't get quite as lost in the experience of driving on the edge in Forza 4 as I can in GT5. To me that comes down to physics.

It's those little bits in-between corner entry and corner exit that feel more 'realistic' to me in GT5.

And a practical example of the above in both games:


But hey if some smooth steering wheel corrections when you look for a standing start burnout is your main driving reference, good for you... but thinking that with that detail you have the rest of the driving acomplished at the same level (and above others) is veeeery wrong. :)

There was any motorsport magazine that reviewed the driving in FM4 more realistic than GT5? and I don't meant time-laps comparisons vs real. There were some stating the contrary... a coincidence? :D


So then, you'll concede Forza has "finally" passed GT as the most realistic console sim at the moment?
GT is now GT6, will see what happens when handling reviews begin to appear. ;)
 

VXR

10,286
United Kingdom
Plymouth, UK
motorforum
If anyone can play both GT6 and Forza 5 and not realise one is going to punish mistakes way more than the other, or the way one's cars feel wooden and the other's feel alive, then they must not know what they're looking for or a liar.

All these praising FM5 aren't being paid to do so, and were also Gran Turismo fans before forza existed. People who generally play any game of this type, regardless of system. Don't think you can get much less bias than this. I can safely say if GT had felt like Forza did back when it was GT4 I'd probably still be a PlayStation only owner.
 
Last edited:
1,789
United States
The Motor City
HAL20xx
HAL20xx
This opinion sums perfectly the issue:


And a practical example of the above in both games:


But hey if some smooth steering wheel corrections when you look for a standing start burnout is your main driving reference, good for you... but thinking that with that detail you have the rest of the driving acomplished at the same level (and above others) is veeeery wrong. :)

There was any motorsport magazine that reviewed the driving in FM4 more realistic than GT5? and I don't meant time-laps comparisons vs real. There were some stating the contrary... a coincidence? :D



GT is now GT6, will see what happens when handling reviews begin to appear. ;)
WHOA! Some guy on YouTube who already didn't like Forza had something bad to say about it? I guess we have winner!

Edit: My favorite part about that comparison video is the note that the GT5 sound is "accurate" but it's just too quiet, whereas FM4 is inaccurate and just loud. Biased opinion is biased opinion.
 
12,065
Australia
Melbourne
Neomone/GTP_Imari
There was any motorsport magazine that reviewed the driving in FM4 more realistic than GT5? and I don't meant time-laps comparisons vs real. There were some stating the contrary... a coincidence? :D

Source for articles stating GT5 to be more realistic than FM4 please.

Not that it really has anything to do with FM5 and GT6, which are now the benchmarks for the two franchises.