Forza Motorsport 5 |OT| Where dreams are Realised

[Minty]

The difference is incredible. The perception of depth is even better somehow.

 

[Kake Bake]

Forza 5 X Bathurst: Or, 6:05 minutes of Australians talking about Australia and 9 seconds of the Bathurst footage from the B-Roll video released after the launch trailer.



---------------------------------------------

Also, some news from the Gauls.

Bernese Alps6 plots
Circuit de Catalunya3 plots
Circuit de Spa-FrancorchampsTrack 1
Indianapolis Motor Speedway2 plots
Circuit des 24 Heures du MansThree tracks, including the Bugatti
Mazda Speedway Laguna SecaTrack 1
Mount Panorama Motor Racing CircuitTrack 1
Tour of Prague4 plots
Road Atlanta2 plots
Sebring International Raceway3 plots
Silverstone3 plots
Test Track Airfield12 tracks
Top Gear Test Track7 tracks
Yas Marina Circuit5 plots

I went to have a look at the editor delivered propose that total 11,000 layers . It will be possible to create 3000 layers on larger surfaces (both sides and hood / roof), and 1000 for smaller faces (front bumper and rear).

 

[King1982]

Forza 5 X Bathurst: Or, 6:05 minutes of Australians talking about Australia and 9 seconds of the Bathurst footage from the B-Roll video released after the launch trailer.

That London Challenge looks like fun. I hope they kept Autocross in 5. I loved improving my fastest times

 

[daspianist]

Today I had the opportunity to take a couple laps in Forza 5....

This is fantastic and thanks for sharing your experience! Were you at a Microsoft store when you got to try out the game? If you could share where you were able to try it out it'd be great - I am glad they are stepping up the PR machine for Forza 5

 

[dojOdRiFTeR]

^Random Google image.

Both games have questionable visuals at time, both look great most of the time though.

This is also how FM4 looks most of the time.

^Unedited pic by me.

I see no weather let alone any day/night transition.

 

[KreepaEvox]

But you'll actually hear cars racing without a sound engine from the PS1. Yes we wanted the features, no, they are not there yet... beat the old horse all you want, it won't stand up and walk away. The game's gone gold already. You don't like it, nobody is forcing you to buy the system/game. If you weren't even remotely interested to begin with, why try to derail the thread? there's a FM vs GT Topic for that

 

[dojOdRiFTeR]

But you'll actually hear cars racing without a sound engine from the PS1. Yes we wanted the features, no, they are not there yet... beat the old horse all you want, it won't stand up and walk away. The game's gone gold already. You don't like it, nobody is forcing you to buy the system/game. If you weren't even remotely interested to begin with, why try to derail the thread? there's a FM vs GT Topic for that

Forza is nowhere close to being better than gt . You're on a Pro GT site take it to Forza Planet. Last time I checked GT5 destroyed Forza's sales. The community knows GT is the better game.

 

[Terronium-12]

Forza is nowhere close to being better than gt . You're on a Pro GT site take it to Forza Planet. Last time I checked GT5 destroyed Forza's sales. The community knows GT is the better game.

I needn't involve myself in... whatever this discussion is because it's the same thing as always. What I do take issue with is coming here and telling people where to go, and for the record this is ForzaPlanet - the two merged into one a couple months back.

Now you're free to dispute Forza as often as you'd like as long as it's within the AUP, but telling anyone where they should and shouldn't post isn't going to fly.

 

[PzR Slim]

Forza is nowhere close to being better than gt . You're on a Pro GT site take it to Forza Planet. Last time I checked GT5 destroyed Forza's sales. The community knows GT is the better game.

Would you say GT models torque steer better than FM?

 

[HAL20XX]

Forza is nowhere close to being better than gt . You're on a Pro GT site take it to Forza Planet. Last time I checked GT5 destroyed Forza's sales. The community knows GT is the better game.

Do us all a favor and visit www.forzaplanet.net. Just then you might see how annoying you are being.

This is fantastic and thanks for sharing your experience! Were you at a Microsoft store when you got to try out the game? If you could share where you were able to try it out it'd be great - I am glad they are stepping up the PR machine for Forza 5

Glad you liked it. It was at the Microsoft store at Somerset Mall in Troy, Michigan. According to Reddit, all Microsoft stores are now demoing the Xbox One.

 

[FosterG]

What did you think of the sound HAL20XX?

 

[phillgt2002]

Laughed.

 

[HAL20XX]

I honestly couldn't hear it all too well. Plus, they were only playing the audio through the TV, and a comparison wouldn't be fair when I have a nice mid-range 6.1 setup at home. From what little I could hear, it did sound good.

 

[Northstar]

I see no weather let alone any day/night transition.

Of course not, Autumn Ring doesn't have either in GT5.

 

[Jawehawk]

Fun little article where Creative Director tries to defend Turn 10's greedy business model.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/turn-10-we-re-not-holding-back-cars-for-forza-5-dlc/1100-6416129/

Day one DLC is an insult to anyone who's been following the gaming industry for more than a few years.
And I find it funny how he talks about the size of the game, disregarding the fact that previous Forza games had far more content.

 

[Minty]

And I find it funny how he talks about the size of the game, disregarding the fact that previous Forza games had far more content.

"I don't believe there has been a racing game at launch that has been this size."

That's a pretty relevant detail. He then went on to say: "I understand people being angry, because money is money...". So it's not like he's entirely oblivious to the fact some people were expecting a higher car count.


And while his reasons for Day 1 DLC seem a bit odd, if true it seems at least slightly more justified. Even if I would prefer that content finished after going gold but before the release date be free, it's not my content to make that call with.

 

[BoneSawTX]

Forza is nowhere close to being better than gt . You're on a Pro GT site take it to Forza Planet. Last time I checked GT5 destroyed Forza's sales. The community knows GT is the better game.

after playing GT since day one of it's original PS1 launch and FM4 since January 2013 and limited time on FM5, Forza does it better. Despite no Day/Night everything else is done better, I'll even say Le Mans 24 Hours on PS2 was better than the GT series.

 

[FosterG]

They know they are going to need to build more content into this game or it will have short playability for many gamers. It needs more than just cars. We know that with dlc the count goes up to 260, but is that it? And as for tracks, who knows.

 

[Jawehawk]

"I don't believe there has been a racing game at launch that has been this size."

That's a pretty relevant detail. He then went on to say: "I understand people being angry, because money is money...". So it's not like he's entirely oblivious to the fact some people were expecting a higher car count.

And while his reasons for Day 1 DLC seem a bit odd, if true it seems at least slightly more justified. Even if I would prefer that content finished after going gold but before the release date be free, it's not my content to make that call with.

Forza 4 had 500 cars at release, right? And it certainly had more tracks. Slightly disconcerning that he aparently just forgot about that. Or maybe he just has a very different understanding of the word "content" from what I do. I think 200 cars is perfectly fine. Just don't think the dev should say it's the biggest amount of content at release, when it clearly isn't. The track count is just bad. No doubt that the picks are nice, and that they'll probably all look and feel great. But the count isn't good enough. Just my opinion of course.

And as for the day one DLC, it shouldn't be legal. Simple as that. Any content that is finished before the game releases, should be in the game, either via an update, or on the disc. That's how it was before charging obscene amounts of money for DLC became the new trend.

I'd also like to point out the lack of logic in how DLC's are priced. If you buy Forza 5, you get 200 cars, 14 tracks and all the core game content. You get all that for 60 dollars. For 50 additional dollars, you get a total of 60 cars... How does that even begin to make sense? Where's the consistancy in value? (Note, this is of course not just a problem with the Forza franchise)

 

[SlipZtrEm]

And as for the day one DLC, it shouldn't be legal.

#firstworldproblems?

I'd also like to point out the lack of logic in how DLC's are priced. If you buy Forza 5, you get 200 cars, 14 tracks and all the core game content. You get all that for 60 dollars. For 50 additional dollars, you get a total of 60 cars... How does that even begin to make sense? Where's the consistancy in value? (Note, this is of course not just a problem with the Forza franchise)

Of course the per-car cost is worse than the whole game; that's how it is with all add-ons, even outside video games. Tuning a car costs, comparatively, far more per horsepower (or second per lap) than the base car in most cases. You're paying for the early access; these are cars you'd typically have to wait for FM6 for, and people are all welcome to do so if they don't deem the DLC worth it. Or, if you want access to these cars ASAP for the game you currently own, you pays your money. Early adopters always pay more; this is not a new concept.

 

[PzR Slim]

Forza 4 had 500 cars at release, right? And it certainly had more tracks. Slightly disconcerning that he aparently just forgot about that. Or maybe he just has a very different understanding of the word "content" from what I do. I think 200 cars is perfectly fine. Just don't think the dev should say it's the biggest amount of content at release, when it clearly isn't. The track count is just bad. No doubt that the picks are nice, and that they'll probably all look and feel great. But the count isn't good enough. Just my opinion of course.

And as for the day one DLC, it shouldn't be legal. Simple as that. Any content that is finished before the game releases, should be in the game, either via an update, or on the disc. That's how it was before charging obscene amounts of money for DLC became the new trend.

I'd also like to point out the lack of logic in how DLC's are priced. If you buy Forza 5, you get 200 cars, 14 tracks and all the core game content. You get all that for 60 dollars. For 50 additional dollars, you get a total of 60 cars... How does that even begin to make sense? Where's the consistancy in value? (Note, this is of course not just a problem with the Forza franchise)

He's talking about the launch of a new console

 

[Brend]

Well, Gran Turismo 3 had 179 cars and 20 tracks. And Forza 3 had 400.

Not exactly the same case but still interesting to compare with.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Well, Gran Turismo 3 had 179 cars and 20 tracks. And Forza 3 had 400.

Neither of which were console launch titles, though.

 

[HighSeasHoMastr]

Allow me to quote myself from the last time the day-one DLC thing came up:

Anyways, I said that I would have a post with my thoughts on the Day One DLC, and here it is:
Basically, my main argument here is this: How does it follow that ready on day one means it was done when the game shipped?

In the past, Forza games have generally 'gone gold' roughly a month before the game comes out. That means that anything that will be on the disk needs to be done. In my mind, that means that the gold day is when any development of things that are intended to be included in the $60 game will stop. That $60 should cover everything that is developed before the game goes gold, and all of those things should go on the disk.

Here's the sticking point for me: Assuming that the game goes gold about a month before it releases, that leaves, for the sake of argument, 4 weeks from that day until the game comes out. Even if only 150 people work only 40 hour weeks for that time period, that's 24,000 hours of additional development that can happen between the gold date and launch. Now, we all know that T10 employs a lot more than 150 people, and we also know that working 60-90 hour weeks is not uncommon when it's crunch time in the video game industry, so it's probably a lot more than 24,000 hours of work that potentially could be done.

That work, completed after the game goes gold but before it comes out, could potentially have tangible assets ready on the day the game comes out. Like say, I don't know, a car pack? The other car packs for Forza are spaced 1 month apart, which means that it's fairly easy to assume that it takes roughly one month to create them. And how much time is there between gold day and street day? That's right, roughly one month.

Now, I can already hear the argument that “they have pictures so clearly it's done now” and that's total garbage. In video games, a picture is the equivalent (to borrow the earlier metaphor) of a concept car. Just because it's up on stage doesn't mean it's ready to sell. A picture is really easy, but that hardly means that the car is 100% done and fully usable in the game. It could mean that, but it could also not mean that at all. Assuming that it does mean that it's done is baseless (just as assuming that it isn't done is) and unless you have evidence, I see it merely as pointless speculation.

Basically then, the argument that the day 1 car pack should be free is an argument that the developer should not be paid for a month of work they did after the game went gold, and that's where it loses me. I'm all for free stuff, but let's face it, this is a multibillion dollar industry, and giving away free stuff isn't high on the list of good business practices. Some free stuff, sure, and T10 has given us some free stuff in other games, but on a consistent basis you need to charge people if you're doing work.

If the work is done after the game goes gold, why shouldn't they charge for it? How is using that month any different from using the month after the game comes out? Just because it's ready on launch day doesn't mean it's ready on gold day.

Now, DG touched on that a bit in that article. He said:

Turn 10 designed and developed Forza 5 cars in waves, so that the final 200 could be ready in time to be included on-disc. Months later, the developer began work on the various vehicles that will be delivered as day-one DLC

So, basically, they are working on assets that are not going to be ready when the game goes gold, but will be ready on launch day, or a month after launch day, or 3 months after launch day. The important part is that they will not be ready for release on gold day.

The argument that day-one DLC be free, or that any DLC that had work done on it before the game went gold be free, is a little bit ridiculous to me. It makes the situation very difficult for developers; effectively it means that anything they worked on, at all, during development and were unable to finish by gold day has to go one of two ways: either they scrap it because it isn't ready in time, or they continue working on it after the game is 'done' and then effectively do not get paid for that extra work.

So would all the paid day one DLC haters prefer that those cars just never make an appearance instead? Because as I see it, that's the better option from a business standpoint; if you're not going to be paid for the work, why do it? And that's what the videogame industry is: a business.

The counter argument for this is that since they worked on it before the game came out, they got paid for it in the game sales right? And I don't totally disagree with that, but it does run into a bit of a problem. Pretty much any DLC that comes out within 6 months of the game had at least a rudimentary amount of work or planning done on it before the game came out. Therefore, by the above logic, those DLCs should also be free, even if the content wasn't finished for several months after the game came out, because it was started before the game came out.

I think that unless you are against paid DLC in its entirety, you would agree that developers should be paid for work they are doing after the game comes out. Saying you agree with that but have a problem with day-one paid DLC is a bit of a nebulous distinction; you're drawing an arbitrary line in the sand as to what you think it's ok to charge for. If day-one DLC isn't ok, what about week one? Month one? There's no way that any meaningful DLC released a month after the game didn't have at least some work done on it before the game launched.

There's no basis for the stigma beyond an arbitrary point where everything that's finished by this date should be free because reasons. That's what bothers me about the whole thing, the incredible double-standard of it. People are ok paying for DLC that they perceive as being developed after the game releases, but their perception of what constitutes that time period is arbitrary at best.

Personally, I see day one DLC the same way I see all DLC. If I think it's worth the money, I'll buy it. If I don't, I won't. And if you feel that it's been 'held back' from the game, then look at the game, ask yourself 'is this worth my money without X car?' and if the answer is no, don't buy the game. Just because X car is available to purchase on top of the game shouldn't really inform your decision on if the game is worth your money. It's not like you can't play it without that premium DLC, you just can't play it with that car without the premium DLC. It's up to you to decide if you think either one is worth your money or not.

 

[Brend]

Neither of which were console launch titles, though.

My mistake, could have sworn Forza 3 was.

 

[HAL20XX]

Forza 4 had 500 cars at release, right? And it certainly had more tracks. Slightly disconcerning that he aparently just forgot about that. Or maybe he just has a very different understanding of the word "content" from what I do. I think 200 cars is perfectly fine. Just don't think the dev should say it's the biggest amount of content at release, when it clearly isn't. The track count is just bad. No doubt that the picks are nice, and that they'll probably all look and feel great. But the count isn't good enough. Just my opinion of course.

Launch of a new platform (e.g. The Xbox One), not the launch of a new title. Massive difference.

I'd also like to point out the lack of logic in how DLC's are priced. If you buy Forza 5, you get 200 cars, 14 tracks and all the core game content. You get all that for 60 dollars. For 50 additional dollars, you get a total of 60 cars... How does that even begin to make sense? Where's the consistancy in value? (Note, this is of course not just a problem with the Forza franchise)

The logic is there, you're just not seeing it. It's bulk pricing. It's no different than buying 1 car from a DLC pack for $3, yet buying the whole pack gets you a bulk discount. Additionally, DLC won't have as far of a reach as the full game, so fewer units sold mean prices need to go up in order to stay profitable.

 

[BoneSawTX]

My first gaming experience was an Intelevision, I would have loved some DLC.

 

[FuzzyFassbender]

Would it be better if T10 created the 200 cars and 14 tracks, along the other game features, then considered FM5 complete and moved on to the next iteration (FM6)? Would that make everyone happy knowing that there isn't any more content that T10 has up there sleeve?
The value is somewhere between $0 and $??? - the beauty or asset value is in the eye of the beholder. Would I rather pay $60 for a 200 car/14 track FM5 or $120 for a 400 car/28 track FM5, of coarse I would rather pay $60 for a 600 car/35 track FM5. What is a next generation launch title like FM5 worth... it will be different to me than you. It takes X amount of man hours to produce FM5 and seeing that T10 is in the business to make money they will try to hit the sweet spot of value for the money - again a value that will vary widely depending on who you talk to. Sell a 200 car/14 track FM5 for $30 and they loose their talented designers , sell FM5 for $120 and they get very few sales and lose their talented designers.

Take the recently released Assetto Corsa, it has 11 cars, 5 tracks, no AI, no multi-player, no career, no livery editor, no leader boards, no damage, no controller button assignments, no car customization, ... I can go on, but it is selling for $40 US dollars and virtual racing enthusiasts are jumping for joy. True, the game is promising more down the road but it will never have the same scope as an FM game (that isn't a bad thing, just a narrower focus). And I bought it myself, as I did pCARS, as virtual racing is all I care to game.

In my estimation FM5 will raise the bar for a virtual racing title, a title that costs a ton to produce. With that said, I hope T10 makes a load of money as it will provide the capitol and incentive to keep doing what they are doing.

My $.02

 

[Jawehawk]

#firstworldproblems?

Wow, someone who lives in the "first world" has a problem that might not be applicable to people who live in "3rd world" countries! Hold the presses, this is surely news worthy material! Remind me to say this every time you complain about anything that doesn't involve getting shot at, or stepping on a landmine or something like that.

Of course the per-car cost is worse than the whole game; that's how it is with all add-ons, even outside video games. Tuning a car costs, comparatively, far more per horsepower (or second per lap) than the base car in most cases. You're paying for the early access; these are cars you'd typically have to wait for FM6 for, and people are all welcome to do so if they don't deem the DLC worth it. Or, if you want access to these cars ASAP for the game you currently own, you pays your money. Early adopters always pay more; this is not a new concept.

As I said, this complaint wasn't exclusive to the Forza franchise. None the less, I do see it as a problem. Not saying it has to be 100 percent accurate, but surely, 50 dollars isn't the equivalent to getting 3 times as many cars for 60 dollars. Surely, it could be priced more reasonable. And yes, people can choose not to buy them. But when you leave content out of the base game to sell as DLC, you are dividing the community out of pure greed. And some of the DLC cars fro mthe first DLC batch were clearly done before the game had gone Gold (not a fact, but it is likely). At least judging from when they could release detailed screens and info.

The main concern of course lies with more and more devs leaving out content specifically to charge for them as DLC. This might not matter to you, but some of us don't have a ton of money to play around with, and as such, we might miss the good 'ol days where devs didn't do this. Day one DLC is advocating this business practice...


On another note, I wasn't aware that the Dev was talking about the release in terms of new console generation. My mistake. Still seems like a silly thing to even bring out though...

 

[eSZee]

Fun little article where Creative Director tries to defend Turn 10's greedy business model.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/turn-10-we-re-not-holding-back-cars-for-forza-5-dlc/1100-6416129/

Day one DLC is an insult to anyone who's been following the gaming industry for more than a few years.
And I find it funny how he talks about the size of the game, disregarding the fact that previous Forza games had far more content.

"This process will continue so new cars can be delivered the first week of every month beginning in January and running through March as part of the $50 Forza 5 DLC Pass."
Car Pass is supposed to be 6 packs and since the first pack comes in Nov, 2nd dec(assumption), 3rd in January, 4th in Feb and 5th in March...what about the 6th?

""I don't believe there has been a racing game at launch that has been this size. By a long shot. 200 plus cars, tons of environments-- this is a huge game," he said. "If you play one car a day, let's say, that's 200 cars. That's a lot of value."
That's less value than I got with FM4.