bdbdbd said:
bbsin said:
Bitmap Frogs said:
bbsin said:
With that being said, lets get one thing clear.
Forza, as a series, is by no means "bad". No one is arguing against that it's a great franchise and worthy of living up to GT. But here's where YOU made a mistake.
"It's laughable seeing Sony fanboys argue that GT is the better series. If your comparing how "close" racing sims are to the real deal, Forza has always been the more realistic series in every way" - stickball
Do you really think that it's not arguable that GT is the better series? Tell me, do you know how a lancer Evo feels when the weight shifts at high speeds? Do you know that Nissan, Mercedes Benz, Mitsubishi, etc have all let PD and Kaz test their cars before they are even unveiled to the public? Or how about the fact that Kaz was the first person outside of Mitsubishi to test drive EVO X because they knew that no one else would spend that much time programming cars to be like the real thing? Did you also know that the best professional drivers and drifters in the world have given input to make handling as realistic as possible?
Honestly now. Why in the world do you think it takes so long to make a GT game opposed to a Forza game? the car models of Forza are built around an engine that calculates the physics and handling of all cars based on specs. GT has always done the details of every car based on each specific one and direct input from drivers/manufacturers. Just go to any popular autoshow event and ask some of the enthusiast what game is more like the "real thing", or find a television special about the franchise. The people that only base "realism" on crash effects are usually the ones that are ignorant and oblivious to what makes GT great in the first place.
|
Dude, I hate to burst your bubble but you've fallen prey to marketing. GT has never been made with the goal of simulating real car behaviour - there are several youtube videos you can check where the game's faulty physics are exposed. GT (and Forza) car behaviour models are made with the goal of being fun, accessible and provide a make-believe realism feeling to immerse you.
A real car simulator wouldn't sell half what those games sell because real racing simulators are difficult and frustrating. All those events you speak about are cross-marketing events set up by pr. The car maker gets exposure to the playstation audience, GT gets to mingle with the automotive industry, both brands score a win. Heck, Microsoft set up several of those as well back when Forza 2 was close to release. You don't need a "real driving simulator" for that to happen, just a competent PR team.
A twelve year old kid who's never touched a real car can load up GT or Forza and in a few months he'll be scoring top times. Real race drivers need years of practice to approach those times in real life. If you really think handling a two ton v12 is anything similar to what GT or Forza "simulate" I have a bridge to sell you.
If you want to play a much proper simulator, I'd suggest you check out ww.lfs.net. Gotta warn you, there are no marketing dollars spent on LFS to convince you that it's the real deal but it's closer than whatever you get to play on a console.
What GT has always gotten right while Forza still struggles with is in transmitting the passion of racing. Both Forza games are much drier than any of GT's iterations. Now that's a very important merit - but it has nothing to do with any supposed realism.
|
The entire point of this debate isn't to prove whether or not Forza and Gran Turismo IS just like real life, it's to figure out which game is MORE spot on in terms of car detail and accuracy. There are plenty of options in GT that can make the game as realistic as possible, but most people wouldn't have any fun because of the limits "realism" really offers. This is why the options in GT are always set as FAR away from "simulation" mode as possible. When GT is being developed, PD makes each cars' details as realistic and clean as possible, then they tweak the gameplay elements (such as driving aids) to make it accessible to the mainstream audience. With that out of the way. No, I have not fallen prey to marketing at all. I do realize that alot of the car manufactures let PD test their stuff early as a way to market their cars, it makes sense since GT has always sold the most. But what does that matter? This only that shows is that GT has better relationships than any other studio. Add it with the fact that PD spends more time and man power on their car models than anyone else and you'll have the most detailed/ realistic cars on the market. Also, I'm not talking about auto events where either Sony or Microsoft actually have their booths set up and running for marketing. Just talk to some of the fans there, the guys that are considered to be car enthusiast will typically recognize the accuracy of the subtle details that GT portrays for their favorite cars.
About LFS. c'mon. You really think I don't already know about this? LFS is basicly like GT4 with all the driving aids turned OFF. The cars themselves are NOT as detailed and accurate as GT's, they don't have the man power to get almost every detail right.
|
I believe the aspects of realism are a non-issue here in reality. Only thing that i can think of that would tick people off, is something called driving simulator not being simulator. The values of the games should be something completely different than the level of simulation.
You are basically just pointing out, that GT is merely a car simulator (and you're right in that one), not a driving simulator as it reads in the box.
PD does put effort into the game, but ther e have been better driving sims with more realism even before GT, but what was big with GT, was the scale and number of vehicles. If we would put driving games into the same line, in terms of realistic driving plus fun, Stunt Race FX leads by far.
|
