By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
AE101 on 21 September 2009
Edit Thread

This article is TERRIBLE.

1. WAY more information about Forza 3 has been released when compared to GT5.

2. Bias is notable, especially here "giving players the most beautifully detailed cars ever seen in a video game." Proof? How do they know they will be more "beautifully detailed" than even GT5?

3. Forza 2's customization was terrible, selecting 4 different types of f/r bumpers, a spoiler, sideskirts etc. is NOT good visual customization. The article claims it took customization to "new heights" despite the fact that a NFS game that came out on the PS2 had way more customization than Forza 2. Vinyls mean nothing, it's MUCH more difficult to fit a aftermarket body part than it is to slap on some stickers, especially in a game. When designing aftermarket parts it takes time and effort to make it look and fit right, vinyls are one size fits all so to speak.

4. GT has always had more than "spoilers and rims", "customization" covers all bases, not just visual, especially when they don't specify. Adding negative camber to a car or reducing its ride height greatly effect the way the cars appearance AND this also falls under mechanical customization which isn't even mentioned in this article. Gear ratios, ride height, spring rebound, etc. GT has also had aftermarket performance parts since its inception.

5. A large majority of Forza 3's tracks (if not almost all of them) are FAKE. It is incredibly easy to design a fake track, it is much more difficult to reproduce real tracks which is what every one of GT5's track is. I really don't know how they gave this to Forza.

6. This article is focusing way too much on numbers and not on details.

7. Community is completely debateable, GTTV, car world news, sharing replays, etc and all the other things mentioned in this article (and the things that haven't been announced yet) stack up quite well to what Forza 3 offers. This one could really go either way.

8. Bottom line, there is a fair bit of bias in this article, there is more info about one game than the other, the article is poorly written and the research was poorly done, and it was done WAY TOO EARLY.

I don't know what else to say, DON'T READ THIS ARTICLE.