Gran Turismo 6 vs Forza Motorsport 5-Test Drive SRT 2013@Bathurst

[lancia delta hf]

How have you arrived at this bold conclusion?

Its part of the final exam of "how to defend PD/GT no matter what", I guess he passed with flying colours.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

For the sake of realism, or for the sake of gameplay?

Don't get me wrong, I don't think iRacing is perfect. But it's a bloody good simulation, and they put more work into their tyre sim than anyone. It shows, and most of the time it's pretty excellent. As far as yardsticks for tyre simulation go, you could do a lot worse.

When it comes to comparison to GT, I get very wary when people say that it's the other games that need more grip. Most cars in GT come stock with significantly stickier tyres than they should. Racing tyres are almost completely unreal, and even sports tyres are way to sticky for a lot of road cars.

I wonder if it's not simply that you're used to the level of grip provided in GT, and are finding it tough to adapt. The levels of grip in iRacing, AC, Forza, pCARS, Race '07, Game Stock Car and most of the others are roughly similar. Similar enough that jumping between them doesn't feel like you're suddenly on ice*. GT is the odd one out. How sure are you that GT is right and everyone else is wrong?


*I spent the day playing Grid: Autosport and then jumped straight into iRacing a few days ago. Boy, was that an eye opener. Took me a good fifteen minutes to undo my Grid style and get back into braking and accelerating normally. Anyone watching would have sworn that the car had chronic understeer and no grip, but it was just me driving it wrong.

For the sake realism and gameplay.

I understand that GT has issues regarding its tyre model also and I'm intrigued what they come up with for the next GT game on new hardware and architecture.

iRacing and Forza 5 is a bit like you are suddenly on ice compared to AC, pCARS and Race '07 IMO and others. GT is quite easy to drive like them games too but probably a bit harder without ABS.

Regarding Grid Autosport, I find the physics quite good in that game, similar to RaceRoom Racing Experience in my opinion, the kind of feeling / way to drive in both games.

 

[Zer0]

Ah the ethernal physics discussion... always the same repeated song as in the past with every Forza title automatically fan-crowned as the new simulation king.

Some reminder of the Forza roots (FM3 and FM4).

This is from the CEO of Fanatec regarding FM4:

The steering mode "simulation" let all cars oversteer more easily. Even the slowest Nissan Datsun 510 going uphill on Fujimi Kaido will oversteer easily although the power of the car is not enough to go higher than second gear most of the time. Do an oval track with a Mercedes C63 and you will fly off in every corner. Tim Schrick mentioned the tendency to oversteer the virtual M5 already on his comparision to the real car and he was using the old simulation mode.

I think the problem is not the oversteering but calling the mode "simulation". If T10 would have chosen "drift mode" it would have been more appropriate and still makes sense as it is fun to play. Remember: difficult not equal to realistic.

If you want to have more realistic car behavior and be faster than in the old simulation mode, you need to turn the steering mode to "normal" now.

The same problem noticed by a real pro driver here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ENmnEd7EZd4#t=225


And this was from T10 regarding FM3:

In Forza 3, we refined a steering assist to the controller (and to a lesser extent for the wheel) that helped the player countersteer, drift and recover. It slightly modified the player’s steering angle input as well as the rate of steering wheel rotation based on the yaw of the car and the player’s recent inputs. I loved the system for drifting, as it made me feel like a driving god without actually sacrificing our physics accuracy. It made the game easier to drift and recover by just interpreting the player’s input.

And last a GT5 vs FM3 review from Car&Driver:

GT5 is marketed as a simulator, and its physics model is extremely realistic. The behavior of the cars is startlingly faithful to their real-life counterparts, so they respond accordingly to poor driving and when you miss critical braking and turn-in points. In contrast, Forza is extremely forgiving and provides a much larger margin of error.

Forza is much more of a game than a hard-core simulator, but for the impatient and those less interested in absolute realism, this is hardly a demerit. Forza might feel slightly less realistic than GT5, but that just means inexperienced players can dive right in,

Lapping Laguna in both games supported our conclusion that Gran Turismo 5 is the more challenging of the two, punishing players (especially the less skilled) with its slavish adherence to real-world physics and handling, and both drivers turned in higher lap times than in Forza. Forza, conversely, made us look like pros, its vehicle-dynamics model allowing for often unrealistic cornering speeds.

Road-Test Editor Mike Sutton: Forza’s physics engine, however, doesn’t feel as comprehensive, as if it were using the one that was employed in Gran Turismo 3 A-spec or GT4 (10 or so years ago!). The experience, to me, is more of an arcade game. It’s easier to jump in and start playing with less of a learning curve.

Overall, these are both great driving games. But Forza is a game, whereas GT5 feels more like an actual simulator, with a steeper learning curve, more opportunities for error, and greater configurability.

More details in the link:
http://www.caranddriver.com/feature...t-comparison-gti-and-m3-at-laguna-seca-page-2

 

[Tornado]

Ah, the eternal Zer0 posts, always bringing up flaws in Forza 3 in a discussion about Forza 4 and Forza 5.

 

[Zer0]

/smoke curtain mode on
/attack mode on

 

[Saidur_Ali]

I think this describes the simulation experience of FM5 quite well by CVG:

The main problem with Forza 5 lies in the core simulation. The cars slide everywhere - they understeer going into corners, they oversteer midway through, they have so much inertia it feels like you're running with a packed supermarket trolley and trying to stop before you crash into the frozen foods section.

 

[332i]

Did anyone say that you did? You said you'd never come across any, so @SlipZtrEm and I introduced ourselves to you.



If you'd like to hear it, sure. I wouldn't say it's a masterpiece, I've got a whole list of stuff wrong with it but I do think it does physics better than GT.

I find the way the tuning options (camber, ride height, etc.) in Forza change the car behaviour are more consistent with what I would expect a real car to do than GT.
I find that the weight transfer is affected by throttle position in a way that I feel is more realistic, and I think that's an important part of driving fast.
I find several aspects of the tyre model more appealing:
-The overall grip levels seem more correct for the type of tyres they're labelled as. Racing tyres in GT are nuts.
-The ability to adjust pressures is a big deal. If you go to a real track day with your own street car it may be one of the only things you're actually able to adjust easily, and it makes a huge difference to how a car drives.
-The way the cars lose grip in Forza feels better to me, particularly on lower grip tyres. There's more of an edge between grip and slip, and it's easier to ride it.
I find that having telemetry is really useful. Driving in a game doesn't give you a whole lot of feedback when stuff goes wrong, so being able to actually see what the important parts of the car are doing is great.

I find how I drive in Forza is more like how I drive in iRacing (which I consider to still be the leading publically available simulation) and how I drive when I go to a track day, although it's still got a fair way to go in my opinion. GT is pretty good, but less so than Forza.

If I had to describe my subjective experience of the difference in a short sentence, I'd say that Forza errs on the side of making the cars too frisky, and GT errs on the side of making them too stable. I find I really have to chuck cars around pretty violently in GT to get them to do what I want, where in Forza they're more responsive, possibly too responsive. As a keen driver with no real problems controlling an overly responsive car, I don't think it's surprising that I'd choose Forza.


But hey, if you just want to assume that I'm some troll with no idea what I'm talking about then go ahead. If so, let me know and I'll add you to my ignore list so I don't waste my time trying to converse with someone who has no interest in having a rational discussion.

You inferred it, of which you will obviously deny lol. Care I do not. This is a dead end topic I can see. No agreement.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Darin Gangi compares two identical cars in this video.

Not identical, they may have same make and model, but stock SRT Viper '13 in GT6 is not even accurate to the real counterpart ( most stock cars in GT6 as well ). The GT6 car has quite some error in specification, from as simple as spring rate that is too high, curb weight + distribution, wrong stock alignment and the usual placeholder LSD. Even the tire is wrong if wanted factory tire simulated, does Forza 5 accurately simulate real life stock factory tire ?. Sports Soft in GT6 has similar if not a bit more grip level than dry hard slick IRL , if a reviewer do not know this, I won't take anything he said seriously. The closest tire most likely will be between comfort medium and soft.

Did anyone say that you did? You said you'd never come across any, so @SlipZtrEm and I introduced ourselves to you.



If you'd like to hear it, sure. I wouldn't say it's a masterpiece, I've got a whole list of stuff wrong with it but I do think it does physics better than GT.

I find the way the tuning options (camber, ride height, etc.) in Forza change the car behaviour are more consistent with what I would expect a real car to do than GT.
I find that the weight transfer is affected by throttle position in a way that I feel is more realistic, and I think that's an important part of driving fast.
I find several aspects of the tyre model more appealing:
-The overall grip levels seem more correct for the type of tyres they're labelled as. Racing tyres in GT are nuts.
-The ability to adjust pressures is a big deal. If you go to a real track day with your own street car it may be one of the only things you're actually able to adjust easily, and it makes a huge difference to how a car drives.
-The way the cars lose grip in Forza feels better to me, particularly on lower grip tyres. There's more of an edge between grip and slip, and it's easier to ride it.
I find that having telemetry is really useful. Driving in a game doesn't give you a whole lot of feedback when stuff goes wrong, so being able to actually see what the important parts of the car are doing is great.

I find how I drive in Forza is more like how I drive in iRacing (which I consider to still be the leading publically available simulation) and how I drive when I go to a track day, although it's still got a fair way to go in my opinion. GT is pretty good, but less so than Forza.

If I had to describe my subjective experience of the difference in a short sentence, I'd say that Forza errs on the side of making the cars too frisky, and GT errs on the side of making them too stable. I find I really have to chuck cars around pretty violently in GT to get them to do what I want, where in Forza they're more responsive, possibly too responsive. As a keen driver with no real problems controlling an overly responsive car, I don't think it's surprising that I'd choose Forza.


But hey, if you just want to assume that I'm some troll with no idea what I'm talking about then go ahead. If so, let me know and I'll add you to my ignore list so I don't waste my time trying to converse with someone who has no interest in having a rational discussion.

You need to drive replicas in GT6, cars that are tuned to drive realistically, with closer tire grip level to real life. The common issue with GT6, too many tunes are built and driver preference of certain tire to make the car easier to drive, often forgetting what really matters, not lap time but realistic experience. I do hope most Forza 5 driver do not have this tendency. This should be a good start :

Chevrolet Corvette C5 Z06 Replica
Tuned to replicate Corvette C5 Z06
Andy Pilgrim World Record at Willow Springs International Raceway
Comfort Medium / Goodyear Eagle F1 SuperCar​

View attachment 234617
​

CAR : Chevrolet Corvette Z06 (C5) '04
Tire : Comfort Medium

Specs - Full Running Weight
Horsepower: 405 HP at 6000 RPM
Torque : 399.9 ft-lb at 4500 RPM
Power Limiter at : 99.9%
Weight: 1474 kg
Ballast : 60 kg
Ballast Position : -12
Weight Distribution : 53 / 47 - as in real life spec ( 53.5 / 46.5 C&D Test )
Performance Points: 502


Specs - Car & Driver Test Curb Weight
Horsepower: 405 HP at 600 RPM
Torque : 399.9 ft-lb at 4500 RPM
Power Limiter at : 99.9%
Weight: 1418 kg
Ballast : 4 kg
Ballast Position : -4
Weight Distribution : 53 / 47 - as in real life spec ( 53.5 / 46.5 C&D Test )
Performance Points: 505


GT AUTO
NO Oil change
Improve Body Rigidity ( NOT INSTALLED IN THIS BUILD )
Rear Wing : Custom Wing Type A ( OPTIONAL ) - INSTALLED.
Wheels : Standard or RAYS GTS
Car Paint : Torch Red or Black or Millennium Yellow or Bordeaux Red Pearl

View attachment 235587​

Tuning Parts Installed :
Adjustable LSD
Fully Customizable Suspension


Suspension - FE-4 C5 Z06 Corvette Suspension Package 525/714
C&D Test Ride Height
Personal Alignment
Front, Rear

Ride Height: 99 99
Spring Rate: 9.38 12.75
Dampers (Compression): 5 3
Dampers (Extension): 5 5
Anti-Roll Bars: 6 5
Camber Angle: 0.8 0.8 ( Front Camber : 0.70 +- 0.50 / Rear Camber : 0.68 +- 0.50 )
Toe Angle: 0.13 0.03 ( Toe In Front : 0.08 +- 0.20 / Toe In Rear : 0.02 +- 0.20 )


Alternative Stock Delivered C5 Z06 Alignment ( 2001 Spec )
Factory Setup more towards understeer
Camber Angle: 0.8 0.3 / 0.8 0.8 ( Most have 0.75 front and rear )
Toe Angle: 0.30 0.10

Alternative Street/Track Alignment
Camber Angle: 1.0 0.8
Toe Angle: 0.06 0.01

Alternative Aggressive Track Alignment
Camber Angle: 1.5 1.1
Toe Angle: -0.02 0.01


LSD - C5 Z06 GU6 LSD
Initial Torque : 18
Acceleration Sensitivity: 30
Braking Sensitivity: 13


AERO
Rear : 20 ( Max )

View attachment 235583​

Brake Balance:
4/5 ( personal BB) or for ABS 0 wheel : 3/4, for ABS 1 - feel free to use your preferred brake balance. I recommend to run 1 click higher at the rear.

Recommended setting for DS3 user :

Steering sensitivity at +1 or +2, all aids off, except ABS 1 ( if not comfortable with ABS 0 ) with 4/5 brake balance as starting point. Go higher if preferred, 5/6 for example.

Notes :

The C5 Corvette was one those cars that never gets old to look at I love the shape from the side, the curve of the hood, the short tailed rear end, the C5 just shows what a sexy woman can be in the form of a car

This replica is a stock car complete with stock tires replicated.

The power of the C5 Z06 was originally 385 HP when it was 1st released in 2001. Then the car went some changes from 2002 model year, the LS6 engine was upgraded and it grows in power to 405HP with 400lb ft torque, a good increase that also paired with lower weight than the base C5. The test curb weight of the car during Car & Driver Test was 1418kg, this will be optional. I used the heaviest running order weight at 1474kg, about 3250lbs. Weight distribution is at 53.5 / 46.5 as tested by C&D, this is reflected in ballast position.

Suspension for C5 Z06 comes in FE4 Package, different than the FE3 Sports Suspension which was available for Z51 C5. The front transverse composite leaf spring is 525 lb/in in rate, similar to FE3 Z51. The rear transverse composite leaf spring is 714 lb/in, stiffer than the FE3 Z51 rate at 634 lb/in. The Damper and ARB has been setup to give neutral balance, with FE4 Sway Bars Package taken into consideration ( 31mm / 23.6mm ). My personal alignment is used, using the factory range as a base. I provided additional alignment setup, feel free to try them.

The C5 Z06 comes with limited slip differential ( GU6 ), I have used some preload and medium lock to simulate the LSD, this gives much needed traction and stability around Willow Springs ( Big Willow ).

The rear wing is optional, feel free to install it. I simply like the look of it.

The C5 Z06 was tested and tuned at Tsukuba, Silverstone GP, Willow Springs ( Big Willow and Streets ), Red Bull Ring and Laguna Seca. The main aim in this replica is to replicate the lap time at Big Willow that was done on stock factory tire - Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercar. This is comfort medium in GT6 The lap time was 1:30.6s on 4th lap by the legendary Corvette Race Driver, Andy Pilgrim. He also fitted Goodyear’s DOT-approved “S” compound version of the F1 and posted 1:28.3s on 3rd hotlap ( feel free to try replicate the time using comfort soft )

The real life race car driver of the C5-R Vette ( Andy Pilgrim ) pulled the magical lap on stock Z06 C5 on 4th lap with OEM Eagle F1 tire to prove his point to a motorcycle magazine that pitted the Z06 C5 against Suzuki GXR1000 - both were tested by Kevin Schwantz - a main feature article of the mag. The test run were heavily biased in favor of the bike and the Z06 C5 was driven with TC Competitive Mode enabled. The magical lap was close to 4 second quicker than the Schwantz manage to pull off. I managed to replicate the magic lap with the replica I think I had some slow section ( 2 corners were hairy ) that could shaved another tenths or two at the very least.

Here is a quote from the letter sent by Andy Pilgrim to the Editor of the Magazine in 2003 :



I have included the replay of the "magical" Lap at 1:30.6s ( Big Willow ) on CM tire + personal alignment setup. Watch it and Enjoy



ENJOY

View attachment 235586

View attachment 235589
​

ANDY PILGRIM :

Second from the left below, at ROLEX Daytona 24H, on the far right, the legendary Dale Earnhardt, 2 weeks before his passing, RIP.

Andy with his Speed World Challenge Cadillac CTS V and the hot Holly Sonders

I think this describes the simulation experience of FM5 quite well by CVG:

I think CVG is joking right there

 

[Exorcet]

...

The part about Forza 4 doesn't compare anything with GT. Forza obviously isn't perfect, it's just noticeably more realistic than GT.

As for FM3, that was about the last time GT was on the same level. It really has no relevance though unless you just want to score "points" for GT. Forza 4 was the leap where Turn 10 stepped up their game. PD is yet to attempt to follow as far as I know. They did announce partnerships with tire/suspension manufacturers for GT6, but I've yet to see anything indicating that they were seeking an end goal as high as was set in Forza 4. Really, PD seems to be milking their Real Driving Simulator title and it's a sad thing to see.

Not identical, they may have same make and model, but stock SRT Viper '13 in GT6 is not even accurate to the real counterpart ( most stock cars in GT6 as well ).

That's just another problem with GT though. They can't even be bothered to recreate the cars accurately. Forza has done this too, but overall they are much better, and I believe that they model more parameters with their cars. It was nice to be able to find evidence for positive lift in FM4. In GT, I think all cars are capped at 0 lift.

You need to drive replicas in GT6, cars that are tuned to drive realistically, with closer tire grip level to real life.

That only gets you so far if the tire model is wrong to begin with. It was certainly still wrong in initial GT6, I can only hope it's been improved by now. GT has traditionally left more than tires neglected though. Simple suspension and aerodynamic rules have been reversed or simply ignored game after game.

 

[Tornado]

So not worth his time he needs to keep going out of his way to say how not worth his time it is.

/smoke curtain mode on
/attack mode on

Curtain against what? Forza 3 is irrelevant to this thread, as are any issues with it. Forza 4's issue you quoted above is that the "Simulation" steering option actually lowers simulation accuracy; and contrary to the point you're trying to force about this conspiracy to always act as if Forza is automatically the unquestionably best physics in sims, was something that has been debated and lamented in the Forza forum. And is also, while unfortunate, is no more a smoking gun towards overall physics accuracy anymore than PD's repeated insistence that SRF is a driving aid like TCS, ASM and Abs.

 

[NixxxoN]

-PD's audience on the PS3 is getting smaller as well. A PS4 release would at least establish a good platform for PD to use in the future. Now they're even more behind on the sim front with various other games already having a good footing on the next gen platforms.

-Well, that's just how the community has shaped up to be. Can't do nothing about that I'm afraid.

They're out at the same time, aiming for the same market. They're bound to be compared. The PS3 and XBONE are not too different technically sans the better specs on the XBONE. Remember that FM5 vs GT6 photo mode thread? GT6 had the edge because of its great lighting engine.

Please, just stop it....

GT7 and FM5 (or a possible future FM6 if you wish) WILL be compared because they will be in similarly spec-ed systems.

Compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges.

PS3 and XBone are soooo different for example in RAM memory which is an extremely important thing, its not even funny. PS3 is like a piece of crap compared to a good PC of today or a next gen console.

 

[Exorcet]

PS3 is like a piece of crap compared to a good PC of today or a next gen console.

Which is why PD gets flak for releasing a game on PS3. FM5 to GT6 is as apples to apples as you can get.

The only way you can get around that is if you're trying to compare what each dev can do to the best of their ability or something like that. But what point is there in asking such a question?

 

[TokoTurismo]

I've told you before, people on other forums have like-minded opinions on you, too. Even reddit. You quote my posts, expecting that I will address what you've written. We both figured out that was a waste of time a bit ago. Not even going to bother disecting the above. Your arguments turn into train wrecks lol.

And I don't care. As I said before, blindly believe anyone who tells you players who play Forza don't care about its physics. You should know by now that when it comes to racing simulation games, physics is the number 1 important thing. Oh wait, you don't believe me and others who tell you otherwise? Well thanks for wasting my time then...

 

[NixxxoN]

Which is why PD gets flak for releasing a game on PS3. FM5 to GT6 is as apples to apples as you can get.

The only way you can get around that is if you're trying to compare what each dev can do to the best of their ability or something like that. But what point is there in asking such a question?

Assetto Corsa and Project Cars are very comparable. Last gen and next gen console games arent.
PD did a very impressive job on GT6 for PS3 and I think GT7 will be astonishing.

 

[Tornado]

Then PD shouldn't have released the game after the generation changeover. GT6 doesn't exist in a vacuum just because it came out late

 

[NixxxoN]

Then PD shouldn't have released the game after the generation changeover. GT6 doesn't exist in a vacuum just because it came out late

I think PD did the right thing because from the PS3 experience its pretty clear that a next gen console takes a lot of time to "establish" within the consumers. I'm aware as a gamer/consumer that you should not buy a new gen console until at least 1 and a half or two years after launch - reasons are obviously price and game catalog.
And thats what I will do, I'll surely get the PS4 but maybe in summer of next year or a bit later.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I think PD did the right thing because from the PS3 experience its pretty clear that a next gen console takes a lot of time to "establish" within the consumers. I'm aware as a gamer/consumer that you should not buy a new gen console until at least 1 and a half or two years after launch - reasons are obviously price and game catalog.
And thats what I will do, I'll surely get the PS4 but maybe in summer of next year or a bit later.

You might save $50 ($0.10/day) waiting a year and a half and in the meantime you miss out on 18 months worth of high definition gaming. Doesn't seem like a good tradeoff to me.

PD had another choice as well. Don't waste time working on GT6 on PS3 at all, and instead develop it for the PS4 and release it in December 2014. Given what we now know about GT6 I'd venture to guess that a great many fans of the series would willingly have waiting a year and continued to play GT5, with continued updates. Continuing to work on things like Zahara, Course Maker, GPS Visualizer, Community Features and finding a way to squeeze them onto the already overcrowded and overworked PS3 has got to be chewing up a massive amount of resources for what is essentially an outdated game at this point.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Irrespective of personal preference around Forza or GT offering the least-bad-compromise in terms of physics (I just say buy everything and enjoy it all), I will say one thing for staying power:

I ran GT5 regularly for 3 years, and Forza 4 likewise regularly for 2 years. I clocked up around 10,000km per year per game according to their indicators. In that time (before Forza 5 or GT6 release) I saw Forza's rivals challenges dwindle from 200-300,000 entries per month to barely 15,000 entries. GT5, despite being a year older, was still pulling an easy 100,000+ on each biweekly time trial. Sure, it's just one metric, but it's an easy one to check.

That level of commitment from the GT gamers is seriously impressive, even when everyone will admit that PD doesn't make it easy to enjoy GT with all the clunkiness of the interface and gaps in functionality. It tells me that a whole bunch of people appreciate the core gameplay (buy car, tune car, drive car, enjoy physics/FFB and pretty pictures).


I do wonder how many people play Forza 5 regularly just 1 year after launch, as compared to GT6. Anyone?

It's an interesting point, absolutely. Of course, we'd have to look at it in terms of percentage of the copies out there; GT5's seasonals probably should've had higher numbers than FM4's, since the game had many more copies sold. Also, GT5 didn't get a sequel until December 2013; FM4 had a spin-off (FH1) and sequel on a new system.

I'll also agree that the core of the gameplay is the main draw for me with both games; I'm not that into full-on race cars, but prefer the massive road car list they provide, and the ability to modify them. The type of game, or at least the sub-genre that FM and GT occupy, is my favourite, and there's not really anything that competes on the same footing on either system. Which might explain both games' staying power; where else will you find hundreds of cars in a semi-realistic setting, without jumping to the other system (if you don't own both)?

Lol I really don't even know how to respond to this. Plenty to say, but not worth the time to retort. I play GT6, but I'm not a GT franchise fan, let alone a fanboy before you outsmart yourself on that one. The upwards bit is true, because yes gt6 is it. I misunderstood, be cause I've never seen someone use the word upwards as a noun.

I can see from here that you just like to argue, so I'll let other people continue to remind that f4 and f5 can't take it to gt6. Looks and sounds. That's all it got on it's side over GT6. Any other train of thought is jaded.

I like to discuss. You've made it abundantly clear you'd rather do this:

That isn't a discussion.

noise

Here, I'll bring up all of GT3's (or especially GT4's) physics short-comings. As if they matter in a discussion about the most recent installment.

Please, just stop it....

GT7 and FM5 (or a possible future FM6 if you wish) WILL be compared because they will be in similarly spec-ed systems.

As a fun aside; I'm almost certain FM6 will release before GT7, so long as T10 stick to their two year schedule. But would you be so quick to insist on comparing same-gen-only if the tables were reversed?

Compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges.

Well now, that wouldn't be strictly true then, right? I mean, the XBOne and the PS4 don't have the same specs; the PS4 is more powerful. That's not faaaaaair.

PS3 and XBone are soooo different for example in RAM memory which is an extremely important thing, its not even funny. PS3 is like a piece of crap compared to a good PC of today or a next gen console.

And PD decided to release on that "piece of crap".

You might save $50 ($0.10/day) waiting a year and a half and in the meantime you miss out on 18 months worth of high definition gaming. Doesn't seem like a good tradeoff to me.

PD had another choice as well. Don't waste time working on GT6 on PS3 at all, and instead develop it for the PS4 and release it in December 2014. Given what we now know about GT6 I'd venture to guess that a great many fans of the series would willingly have waiting a year and continued to play GT5, with continued updates. Continuing to work on things like Zahara, Course Maker, GPS Visualizer, Community Features and finding a way to squeeze them onto the already overcrowded and overworked PS3 has got to be chewing up a massive amount of resources for what is essentially an outdated game at this point.

You know, it does raise an interesting point; this long, drawn-out delay of the Course Maker might be down to the relative lack of power the PS3 has, so yeah, why force themselves to release on something that can't even handle what they're trying to do. If GT6 had been developed for the PS4 from the get-go, would these things have come on-line sooner?

 

[Tornado]

Plus the multiple revisions of the reported size allowed for the course maker.

I like to discuss. You've made it abundantly clear you'd rather do this:

That isn't a discussion.

You're such a teenager

 

[Imari]

You need to drive replicas in GT6, cars that are tuned to drive realistically, with closer tire grip level to real life. The common issue with GT6, too many tunes are built and driver preference of certain tire to make the car easier to drive, often forgetting what really matters, not lap time but realistic experience.

Maybe so, but then to be a fair comparison I would also need to drive replicas in FM4 or 5. There's no point comparing cars that have been specifically altered to be realistic in one game with cars that haven't in another. You know what the result is going to be in that situation.

You inferred it, of which you will obviously deny lol. Care I do not. This is a dead end topic I can see. No agreement.

Understood. Welcome to the ignore list.

 

[GBO Possum]

I think PD did the right thing because from the PS3 experience its pretty clear that a next gen console takes a lot of time to "establish" within the consumers. I'm aware as a gamer/consumer that you should not buy a new gen console until at least 1 and a half or two years after launch - reasons are obviously price and game catalog.
And thats what I will do, I'll surely get the PS4 but maybe in summer of next year or a bit later.

It also provides a learning curve for the developers.

In my opinion, we can expect a better GT7 in its time than if it were a PS4 near-launch title. Meanwhile GT6 continues to be engaging on my old PS3s.

 

[Exorcet]

Assetto Corsa and Project Cars are very comparable.
Last gen and next gen console games arent.

Why? There is literally no reason that you can't compare across consoles. If you wanted a racing game you'd figure out what your choices are and look at them side by side and decide what you want. GT6 isn't limited to competing with Forza (and vice versa), they compete with AC and PC as well.


GT is running on inferior hardware. This is a design choice. PD had as much freedom as Turn 10 in making a next gen game (not that this matters anyway when it comes to comparing consumer choices). They chose not to. Somehow this makes things unfair to you. So what are you supposed to do when shopping for a game? Ignore GT?

I suggested before that maybe you are looking at the comparison in terms of what each developer can produce given enough resources. In that case you might be able to say it's an unfair comparison because I'm sure PD can develop games for PS4, but this is a completely separate topic. It has nothing to do with the current selection in the sim racing genre.


Hardware isn't even a determining factor in game quality anyway. A next gen console does not make a better game. I've compared GT1 to much newer games, and in some cases I did not bother with those new games because GT1 was a better title. That it's an old PS1 game doesn't have any relevance to anything really.

PD did a very impressive job on GT6 for PS3 and I think GT7 will be astonishing.

That doesn't make any difference. GT6 is hardware limited compared to the competition. If you're looking for games, GT6 is the "high end" of the GT series. It either meets your needs or it does not, and based on that you either buy it or get something else.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

The part about Forza 4 doesn't compare anything with GT. Forza obviously isn't perfect, it's just noticeably more realistic than GT.

As for FM3, that was about the last time GT was on the same level. It really has no relevance though unless you just want to score "points" for GT. Forza 4 was the leap where Turn 10 stepped up their game. PD is yet to attempt to follow as far as I know. They did announce partnerships with tire/suspension manufacturers for GT6, but I've yet to see anything indicating that they were seeking an end goal as high as was set in Forza 4. Really, PD seems to be milking their Real Driving Simulator title and it's a sad thing to see.


That's just another problem with GT though. They can't even be bothered to recreate the cars accurately. Forza has done this too, but overall they are much better, and I believe that they model more parameters with their cars. It was nice to be able to find evidence for positive lift in FM4. In GT, I think all cars are capped at 0 lift.






That only gets you so far if the tire model is wrong to begin with. It was certainly still wrong in initial GT6, I can only hope it's been improved by now. GT has traditionally left more than tires neglected though. Simple suspension and aerodynamic rules have been reversed or simply ignored game after game.

And, so far I have been able to build replicas that are close to the reference data that I used If you look at my recent builds, I have Camaro Z/28 that was built to replicate Laguna Seca lap record, it even get close to peak speed at braking points and the peak G's reading of the real car ( I included replay file of the test run and data of the speed/G's around the track for reference ) . I still have another car yet to be released with same close accuracy at Laguna Seca, Audi R8 GT replica, build with real life specs and alignment.

Granted, there are many aspects in GT6 that needs fixing, from ride height, tire model / parameters, spring rate range adjustments, camber still isn't properly modeled etc, but I have to make do with what I have. Building replicas means a lot of tuning inside a lot of limitation. I only wished more people drive replicas to appreciate how far GT6 can go if a car is built with simulation in mind.

Maybe so, but then to be a fair comparison I would also need to drive replicas in FM4 or 5. There's no point comparing cars that have been specifically altered to be realistic in one game with cars that haven't in another. You know what the result is going to be in that situation.

I was suggesting to try cars with closer specification to the real life version before saying GT6 is too stable. I'm sure when people comparing Forza to GT, they would want the cars compared also as close possible to the game ability to simulate the real car. They are not going to compare a car with racing tire using different suspension setup against one with road tires and stock suspension.

In GT6, the stock suspension alone has nasty placeholder toe and camber values that will make all cars drive unlike what the real car would drive, not including the stock tire the car came with, which is always 1 or 2 level above. A Ferrari 512BB in GT6 should have comfort hard NOT Sports Hard ( have stock car replica with corrections and Ferrari factory alignment - 1980 512BB and 1981 512BBi ). I really wanted a respected reviewer like Inside Sim Racing, do a comprehensive comparison, build the same car with same exact setup that replicate the real car, from spring rate, weight/distribution, power, and alignment. LSD, damper and ARB can be tailored to the driver. The Chevrolet Corvette C5 Z06 and Big Willow that I used above, if Forza 5 has it, would be great. It will be interesting to see the result

Is there replica builder in Forza 5 ?

 

[Imari]

I was suggesting to try cars with closer specification to the real life version before saying GT6 is too stable. I'm sure when people comparing Forza to GT, they would want the cars compared also as close possible to the game ability to simulate the real car. They are not going to compare a car with racing tire using different suspension setup against one with road tires and stock suspension.

I've built my real life '90 MX5 in both games, with correct everything to how I have it except damper rates, where I had to make an educated guess.

GT was far too stable. The real car moves around far more than that on the throttle, even when I had Comfort Hard on it.* FM was remarkably close, actually, but still less user-friendly than the real car is.

*Admittedly, this was done in the early days of GT6. I strongly suspect that one of the patches made a significant change to the tyre model, and we know that the camber model changed so that would have an effect too**. If I can be bothered putting GT6 in and waiting for it to update itself, I might give it another go.

**I have to say I'm not a fan of the ever changing physics system either. I far prefer that it stays as it is at release (bar fixing showstopper bugs), and any improvements get rolled into the next chapter of GT. I'd rather learn and work around any deficiencies in the physics than have it tweaked every other month.


Both FM and GT have nasty placeholder values. Comparing them head to head with untuned cars is still useful, because that's what the vast majority of players will do. They don't want to buy a car, get on the internet and research all the specifications, go back to Forza and tune it all correctly and then drive. They want to buy it and drive it. If the games aren't at least moderately accurate in that situation, I'd say they've failed.

That said, it's still also useful information to see how good they can be when they're fed correct data. You can see this with some cars in each game that have been given special attention as well. Kaz's Nurb GT3 Skyline, for example.

 

[MidNightGT]

PD had another choice as well. Don't waste time working on GT6 on PS3 at all, and instead develop it for the PS4 and release it in December 2014. Given what we now know about GT6 I'd venture to guess that a great many fans of the series would willingly have waiting a year and continued to play GT5, with continued updates.

From what I know and expect from PD, December 2014 for GT6 IF it were to have been released on PS4 is far fetched and a pipe dream. They would be foolish to release GT6 on PS4 vs developing the title specifically for the console as they are doing with GT7, that you can expect not for the first year, maybe 2, or are you guys really getting yourselves set up for disappointment already... GT6 was released to give them time to develop or finish developing GT7 for the PS4 without leaving us users sitting on GT5 arguably the worst GT title to date (game not sales) GT6 is too much more of a game to have been implemented into GT5 through updates. Most non Fan-Boys IMO stopped playing GT5 a long time ago, the physics were not worth wasting time on, a blunder by PD. GT6 IMHO is the delivery of what GT5 was supposed to be, but never was.

Continuing to work on things like Zahara, Course Maker, GPS Visualizer, Community Features and finding a way to squeeze them onto the already overcrowded and overworked PS3 has got to be chewing up a massive amount of resources for what is essentially an outdated game at this point.

This gives them time to develop GT7 into a title worth buying vs a PS3 title on a PS4 that you would probably be all over complaining about how its just recycled GT5 on PS4.

 

[synon]

Here, I'll bring up all of GT3's (or especially GT4's) physics short-comings. As if they matter in a discussion about the most recent installment.

There is a certain relevance though, if after 3 iterations of the series T10 were thinking like that, there is the possibility that they tailor the physics to be drift-friendly, less snappy as mentioned in the video.

 

[FoRiZon]

Hey, how about GT6 definitive edition? If PD were such a cash grabber they would publish that you know.

TBH I would make a joke about PD. But then again so does evolution (I played Driveclub on my rental. Its comparaison to Horizon feels like GT6 to FM4/5). Was expect to feature full livery editor, bodykits, and free roaming. Also its bias to euro cars is uncanny even by GT standards (double meaning lol).

Scarily this is prevalent in Sony as well as some of its games nowadays. Ex. PS4 offers is nice but now they wont even release a single patch for months while XBone which i was despised has been supportive. Support to many formats on media player was one.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

I've built my real life '90 MX5 in both games, with correct everything to how I have it except damper rates, where I had to make an educated guess.

GT was far too stable. The real car moves around far more than that on the throttle, even when I had Comfort Hard on it.* FM was remarkably close, actually, but still less user-friendly than the real car is.

*Admittedly, this was done in the early days of GT6. I strongly suspect that one of the patches made a significant change to the tyre model, and we know that the camber model changed so that would have an effect too**. If I can be bothered putting GT6 in and waiting for it to update itself, I might give it another go.

**I have to say I'm not a fan of the ever changing physics system either. I far prefer that it stays as it is at release (bar fixing showstopper bugs), and any improvements get rolled into the next chapter of GT. I'd rather learn and work around any deficiencies in the physics than have it tweaked every other month.


Both FM and GT have nasty placeholder values. Comparing them head to head with untuned cars is still useful, because that's what the vast majority of players will do. They don't want to buy a car, get on the internet and research all the specifications, go back to Forza and tune it all correctly and then drive. They want to buy it and drive it. If the games aren't at least moderately accurate in that situation, I'd say they've failed.

That said, it's still also useful information to see how good they can be when they're fed correct data. You can see this with some cars in each game that have been given special attention as well. Kaz's Nurb GT3 Skyline, for example.

Speaking of Kaz's Nurb 24H GTR GT3, I came across this alignment spec from a picture at this year Nurb 24H The front axle total toe out value is quite high : 1.53 degrees , not reachable in GT6 Rear at 0.70 degrees toe in. I'm guessing the machine uses decimal degrees not degrees° & minutes.

Higher than stock rear toe in on all cars in GT6, and people complain about stock 0.60 decimal degrees rear toe in

 

[MidNightGT]

Speaking of Kaz's Nurb 24H GTR GT3, I came across this alignment spec from a picture at this year Nurb 24H The front axle total toe out value is quite high : 1.53 degrees , not reachable in GT6 Rear at 0.70 degrees toe in. I'm guessing the machine uses decimal degrees not degrees° & minutes.

Higher than stock rear toe in on all cars in GT6, and people complain about stock 0.60 decimal degrees rear toe in

Thats total toe not individual toe

 

[MidNightGT]

-1.39 / -0.14 = -1.53 total toe, The rear is set 0.36 / 0.34 for a total of 0.70. I think they are still adjusting the angle of the front in that shot, seems like its in the process of being adjusted vs the set up finished.


sorry dup post