Quantcast
What is your honest opinion on the Forza Franchise? Compeditor to GT?

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - What is your honest opinion on the Forza Franchise? Compeditor to GT?

CGI-Quality said:
My opinion: Forza is a better modern racing game, but as a driving simulator, it has a long way to go before reaching GT levels.

Btw, I read that some think reviews should prove which is better. If that's the case, GTA IV should be considered better than almost any game on the market. Hint: reviews do not prove which is the better game. Forza will never have the expectations of GT and therefore will never be judged like GT.

Then what metric would you like to use to compare games?



Around the Network
daroamer said:
CGI-Quality said:
My opinion: Forza is a better modern racing game, but as a driving simulator, it has a long way to go before reaching GT levels.

Btw, I read that some think reviews should prove which is better. If that's the case, GTA IV should be considered better than almost any game on the market. Hint: reviews do not prove which is the better game. Forza will never have the expectations of GT and therefore will never be judged like GT.

Then what metric would you like to use to compare games?

My own experience. How exactly does Metacritic prove, indisputably, what game is better than another (especially when the individual reviews themselves prove nothing absolute)? Would you, then, agree that Uncharted is better than Halo or Gears of War? That GTA IV is better than Red Dead Redemption? That HEAVY RAIN is better than Alan Wake?



                                                                                                                                            

CGI-Quality said:
daroamer said:
CGI-Quality said:
My opinion: Forza is a better modern racing game, but as a driving simulator, it has a long way to go before reaching GT levels.

Btw, I read that some think reviews should prove which is better. If that's the case, GTA IV should be considered better than almost any game on the market. Hint: reviews do not prove which is the better game. Forza will never have the expectations of GT and therefore will never be judged like GT.

Then what metric would you like to use to compare games?

My own experience. How exactly does Metacritic prove, indisputably, what game is better than another (especially when the individual reviews themselves prove nothing absolute)? Would you, then, agree that Uncharted is better than Halo or Gears of War? That GTA IV is better than Red Dead Redemption? That HEAVY RAIN is better than Alan Wake?

Is Little Big Planet better than Sonic Adventure?  Is Killzone 2 better than Brink?  You can find just as many cases where metacritic is clearly right.  The point is if you're going to discount all measurable metrics - "Sales don't equal quality! McDonalds!"  or "Reviews don't mean anything!  Anomoly!" then what is the point having a discussion?

Then it boils down to "I'm right because it's my opinion!" and "No I'M right because it's MY opinion!".



daroamer said:
CGI-Quality said:

My own experience. How exactly does Metacritic prove, indisputably, what game is better than another (especially when the individual reviews themselves prove nothing absolute)? Would you, then, agree that Uncharted is better than Halo or Gears of War? That GTA IV is better than Red Dead Redemption? That HEAVY RAIN is better than Alan Wake?

Is Little Big Planet better than Sonic Adventure?  Is Killzone 2 better than Brink?  You can find just as many cases where metacritic is clearly right.  The point is if you're going to discount all measurable metrics - "Sales don't equal quality! McDonalds!"  or "Reviews don't mean anything!  Anomoly!" then what is the point having a discussion?

Then it boils down to "I'm right because it's my opinion!" and "No I'M right because it's MY opinion!".

So you don't disagree with the games I mentioned? Excellent, no double standards expected then.

On this end, however, Metacritic doesn't prove any of that to me (and it doesn't for millions and millions of other people either, despite the vice versa, meaning it will always be subjective).

For the record, I've yet to say that: "I'm right because it's my opinion". I said disagree with the idea that Metacritic proves anything without a doubt, which doesn't mean either side is "wrong". It means I contrast with that viewpoint. Simple.



                                                                                                                                            

CGI-Quality said:
daroamer said:
CGI-Quality said:

My own experience. How exactly does Metacritic prove, indisputably, what game is better than another (especially when the individual reviews themselves prove nothing absolute)? Would you, then, agree that Uncharted is better than Halo or Gears of War? That GTA IV is better than Red Dead Redemption? That HEAVY RAIN is better than Alan Wake?

Is Little Big Planet better than Sonic Adventure?  Is Killzone 2 better than Brink?  You can find just as many cases where metacritic is clearly right.  The point is if you're going to discount all measurable metrics - "Sales don't equal quality! McDonalds!"  or "Reviews don't mean anything!  Anomoly!" then what is the point having a discussion?

Then it boils down to "I'm right because it's my opinion!" and "No I'M right because it's MY opinion!".

So you don't disagree with the games I mentioned? Excellent, no double standards expected then.

On this end, however, Metacritic doesn't prove any of that to me (and it doesn't for millions and millions of other people either, despite the vice versa, meaning it will always be subjective).

For the record, I've yet to say that: "I'm right because it's my opinion". I said disagree with the idea that Metacritic proves anything without a doubt, which doesn't mean either side is "wrong". It means I contrast with that viewpoint. Simple.

"Then what metric would you like to use to compare games?"

"My own experience."

For the record none of the games you mentioned are direct competitors in the same way Forza and GT are.  Heavy Rain and Alan Wake are not similar in any capacity.  Why compare them?



Around the Network
daroamer said:
CGI-Quality said:

So you don't disagree with the games I mentioned? Excellent, no double standards expected then.

On this end, however, Metacritic doesn't prove any of that to me (and it doesn't for millions and millions of other people either, despite the vice versa, meaning it will always be subjective).

For the record, I've yet to say that: "I'm right because it's my opinion". I said disagree with the idea that Metacritic proves anything without a doubt, which doesn't mean either side is "wrong". It means I contrast with that viewpoint. Simple.

"Then what metric would you like to use to compare games?"

"My own experience."

For the record none of the games you mentioned are direct competitors in the same way Forza and GT are.  Heavy Rain and Alan Wake are not similar in any capacity.  Why compare them?

HEAVY RAIN and Alan Wake were compared all the way up to their releases,. Interesting how they now have nothing to compare.  To huumor you, I also mentioned Gears & Uncharted (which are very much comparable). If what you say is true, you conclude that Uncharted is better than Gears.

To conclude, no, Metacritic doesn't dtermine if Forza is better than GT or vice versa, at least not in my view. If that's the case, the people who proclaimed that Gears of War was better than Uncharted because it sold more (despite Uncharted's higher Meta) should be people you heavily disagree with, yes? Again, you must agree that Uncharted is better than Gears, because if not, you go against your very own argument in one fell swoop.

Since I don't see you letting up, while I'm certainly not moved (and this is getting off-topic), I'm fine with agreeing to disagree. Just keep that last sentence in mind.



                                                                                                                                            

CGI-Quality said:
daroamer said:
CGI-Quality said:
My opinion: Forza is a better modern racing game, but as a driving simulator, it has a long way to go before reaching GT levels.

Btw, I read that some think reviews should prove which is better. If that's the case, GTA IV should be considered better than almost any game on the market. Hint: reviews do not prove which is the better game. Forza will never have the expectations of GT and therefore will never be judged like GT.

Then what metric would you like to use to compare games?

My own experience. How exactly does Metacritic prove, indisputably, what game is better than another (especially when the individual reviews themselves prove nothing absolute)? Would you, then, agree that Uncharted is better than Halo or Gears of War? That GTA IV is better than Red Dead Redemption? That HEAVY RAIN is better than Alan Wake?

I agree with the bold statement, if you remove long. FM3 does a lot of simulator aspects better then GT5, but as a whole GT5 is a better sim then Forza 3.

However the difference isn't huge, you have to remember GT5 is a year newer then FM3, in a year the market grows significantly, look at the difference from FM2 to FM3, it's insane! Almost as if they were from different franchises, and that was only 2 years.

So when you realise GT5 is a year newer, they both perform as sim's about equally well.

What makes Forza a better game however is the structure of the game. GT1-4 almost never rewarded you with cars, you had to race a lot to get the cars  you wanted, and even then you needed to tune your cars to win races. GT5 is significantly more accessable, but you still only get about 1 new car for each hour you play, less when you get far into the game. Also, as realistic as the used car dealership idea is in GT5, this means that if you want to drive 1 specific car from the past in GT5, you may have to wait a long long time before it's available. In FM3, not only are all cars purchasable at any time, races generate more revenue, and you often get rewarded cars. This is done to the point where every race is almost completly different, since you have a new car, but I found in GT5 almost all my races were done with 3 heavily tuned cars (GT-R, C06 Race Car, and a Formula 1 car).

Anyway, I'm dragging on, CGI I agree with you, and I also agree with you that metacritic shouldn't be an absolute way to rate a game. I want to add that JRPG's often get mixed reviews, and overall low scores on metacritics, but some niche, or small time JRPG's have managed to become my favorite. Metacritic favors the advertized big budget games more then the little guys, but in general for quality debates, people should refer to individual reviews. E.G. Infinite Undiscovery, a good JRPG with some flaws. Metascore 68/100, but Gametrailers gave it a 7.8/10, which I feel is much more reasonable. Non-JRPG fans will easily bring down the score because they focus on the flaws, but the game itself is fun.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Carl2291 said:
Michael-5 said:

If you add the sales of Forza 3 during the time of those bundles, Forza 3 sold about 3.5 million units (2 for ODST bundle, 1.3 for Alan Wake). Forza 2 sold 1 million units in the 3 months before it was bundled. If Forza 3 sold as well as Forza 2, that immediatly bring the number of bundled sales down to 2 million, but since Forza 2 was a July release and Forza 3 was October, I severly doubt that. Realistically Forza 3 sold 1.5 million units in the first 3 months on its own. As for the Alan Wake bundle, before and after Forza 3 was selling 20k weekly. Assuming it held those sales, and didn't go up in sales due to the holiday period, thats 400k natural sales. However holidays do boost sales, and an "Ultimate Edition" was released, where sales doubled the week of release. So realistically 600k or so units were naturally sold.

Do this math, Bundles actually added less then 1 million sales, but I was being lenient knowing most people would heckle me if I said otherwise.

Using the car analogy as well. Does it matter that Forza sells half as many games at GT? Is the Lotus Elise not a compeditor to the Porsche Boxter just because it sells less cars? What about the Masaratti Quatroporte compared to the Porsche Panamera, or the Aston Martin Rapide? Sales don't justify quality if you ask me.


Bundles really didn't add less than 1 Million to Forza. Seriously. Look at the actual charts, it's obvious and plain to see. When the Forza 3 Holiday '10 bundle was released, sales were spiked massively. 1.5 Million units added while that bundle was out, when the bundle stopped... Sales dropped again.

The ODST bundle. Again. Sales were spiked. It went from selling less than 20k weekly to hitting highs of 70/80k. It stabalised at around 30k for a few Weeks, when the bundle stopped... It dropped off the charts completely, selling less than 12k, if I remember correctly.

Forza 3 was hugely bundled. The bundled sales are somewhere between 1.5/2 Million units.

As for your analogy, if that's the case and we're just using it in a competing sense because it's another racing game... Then yes. It's a competitor. Just as ModNationRacers is on the PSP.

But sales didn't spike. They did jump, but Forza Motorsport always had strong weekly sales. In January this year, when the bundle was long over FM3 was still selling 2/3rds as well as GT5, a game 1 year newer. I've looked into it, for the Alan Wake bundle, sales grew from 3.3 to 4.6 million sales, and I doubt FM3 sold less then 500k in that 4 month holiday window, especially since sales spiked (and yes, they spiked here) when the Ultimate Edition released. A similar story goes for Halo 3: ODST bundle, if FM2 can sell 1 million on it's own before bundles in a quieter time, FM3 can sell 1.5 million.

It's not like you claim for FM only sells when a bundle is released, of course it sells higher, the bundles are limited time holiday bundles, but in the weeks approaching fall 2010, FM3 was selling around 20k weekly, not much less then GT5 is now.

I looked into this, just trust me. FM2 was heavily bundled (half or slightly more sales coming from bundles), but FM3 really did a lot of it's own leg work.

If bundles were 2 million, that would mean that FM3 sold only 500k of it's own sales during both holiday windows, that doesn't make any sense because that's how well the game sold in spring 2010, and a bit longer into 2010. How can holiday sales be the same as spring sales? You know sales inflate during the holidays for all games right?

Mod Nation Racers is a compeditor to GT and Forza? Wouldn't Mario Kart be more appropriate? Mod Nation is a...fun racer, not a simulator. Just like a camry is a boring family car, and a mustang is all sports, can't compare those two.

Either way, sales aside, what's your opinion? Compeditor or no?



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

ethomaz said:

Michael-5 said:

No ethomaz. Even though the Forza 4 engine is based on the Forza 1 engine, it's not as if Forza 1 was a product of the Forza 4 development. If it were, all the cars, tracks, and features in Forza 1 would have been retained.

GT5 was in development 6 years ago (5 years before release), when PD announced they were developing GT5, and that they would completly rebuild the engine for GT5, throwing away all the data collected between GT1-4 (all cars were re-analyzed). GT5P was a product developed while making GT5, in order to satisfy the fan during the long wait to GT5. Every track and car from GT5P was retained, and well yea.

Even the definition of prologue affirms that it's the introduction to GT5. IMO it was a mass audience test of GT5's engine.

GT4P was released only a month before GT4, do you really think GT4 was entirely developed in 1 month? You're using this same logic for GT5.

What did you undestand for 5 years development before release?

In these five years PD worked in: Tourist Trophy, Gran Turismo HD, Gran Turismo 5 Prologue, Gran Turismo (PSP) and Gran Turismo 5... but forget that let's assume that they worked just in GT5.

GT5 = 5 years and 110 employees
F3 = 2 years and +300 employees

I can't see how people here thinks PD spended more time to develped Gran Turismo 5 than Turn 10 with Forza 3... the time is almost the same if you forgot the PD worked in others four games in parallel.

Or you think Tourist Trophy, Gran Turismo HD, Gran Turismo 5 Prologue and Gran Turismo (PSP) didn't use any bit of time from the development team?

The excuse that the game was in development for five years or more is ridiculous and a myth created by haters.

Polyphony Digital has 140 employees, but how do you know how big turn 10 is? I can't find anything ,can you show me a link?

Gran Turismo HD and Prolgue were released as they worked on GT5. They are projects released to generate hype for GT5, and to give fans a taste of what to expect for GT. The GT HD concept was PD's creation of the GT5 engine in it's earliest form, and GT5P was a progression of development to GT5. Notice that both combined still are not a full game?

Also GT HD concept is only 10 cars, and 1 track, and was given for free in Japan you know? This is far from a full game, more like a demo.

Turist Trophy also released in February 2006. The time between Tourist Trophy's release to GT5 is still almost 5 years (give 3 months).

So really in those 5 years, all PD did was release GT PSP (a game which imported a significant amount of data from GT4), and GT5 along with demo's of working models for GT5.

I'm not a hater, but GT5 was in development for 5 years. Yes they did release GT PSP, but that game was heavily based off GT4 (look at the car library, most cars are 2005 or prior). Also GT PSP was in development since 2004, so it's not as if the entire game was developed when GT5 was in development. I can even find quotes from Polyphony Digital director Kazunori Yamauchi that say GT PSP was delayed so many times due to the longer then expected development time for GT5, and that GT5 was a priority for those years.

Also, just to end this debate Kazunori Yamauchi stated in 2006 that GT5 was given the companies priority. It's been in development 5 years before release, Polyphony Digitals Director himself claims it. I mean Vision Gran Turismo was the original title GT5 was given, and that was in development since it's announcement at E3 2005. This was GT5 in it's earliest developmental form, when it still ran on the GT4 engine.

I'm not hater, I'm just damn impressed at what Forza 3 became. Before GT5 I knew so many people that thought GT5 would be a 10/10 game and blow FM3 out of the water, and it didn't. I'm no hater, GT5 is fun, Forza 3 is just damn impressive.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Honestly, I feel that with FM3, Forza has taken GT's former place at the head of the pack, moving the genre forward in the same way that GT1-3 did.

GT5 failed to be competitive; what remains to be seen is whether Forza 4 continues to trailblaze or falls into the trap of simply refining what came before, as GT4 did.