and LOL dont give in to that PolyphonyDigital "perfectionist" crap. Polyphony shot GT5 Prologue out quick and it showed that they knew what they were doing with the ps3. i believe they were just riding out the whole Turn10's Forza 2 and 3. They looked at what Turn10 was doing and just simply out-did what they knew Turn10 could achieve on 360(1000 cars,weather,nascar,night/day cycle etc). Forza 4 proves what PolyphonyDigital was aiming for(seeing as how Turn10 was not able to outdo gt5 in those areas even though it came out later)
as far as sony making 2 dumb moves with PSVita.. okay tell me this, name 1 time that Sony released 1 of it's platforms before it's competitor? *crickets* exactly NEVER! They ALWAYS release IN competition!! I said it right there in the OP! On them missing the Na/Eu Holiday season i guess they dont want to "rush" anything like the way we seen Nintendo rush the 3DS
So your saying PD waits for Forza to make a move before acting? Thats not the behaviour of the supposed king of simulation......usually its they who should set the example. Thats why I don't buy it. Simply put, PS3 was a bitch to program for and they lost track of time, occasionally tweaking the game based on Forza 2 and Forza 3 features. But cmon there was little outdoing in the end. 3 Forzas, all 90+ on metacritic compared to one full GT game with a 84. They nailed some parts like the night and day cycles, but they still lacked a lot of features that Forza has. And cmon, 1000 cars. Its common sense 800 of them arent worth driving, even with the spec 2 update.
I think Sony should rethink their launch strategies. Launching after Sega and still winning just ain't gonna cut it anymore. Today, launching later = loose. I see no reason to not rush the Vita.....trading lack of launch games for a holiday launch. Like the 3d......launching rushed leads to a head start, and room to grow and improve. Nintendo ironed out most of the 3DS kinks..........before the Vita even released. Thats the magic of a head start, rushed or not
this has to be like the 5th time i've seen you make this claim but you never seem to be able to name them...
for gt5 i can think of dynamic weather - rain, snow etc, more race types like rally, F1, go karting etc, day-night transitions, course maker etc
for forza for the most part all i can think of is the livery editor, autovista and kinect integration
Oh please, don't make me your one stop source for Forza features. Try I don't know, wikipedia, the forza homepage, hell google "forza 4 vs GT5 features" and see what comes up :) Off the top of my head, its a lot of little things that make Forza a 90+ rated game. Simply put, Turn 10 makes a great sim AND a great video game, where PD neglects the video game aspect of their franchise, thus a 84 on metacritic.
Lets see.....more tracks, more detailed tracks, 500 "premium" (500 > 200) cars, autovista, livery editor, better damage, better top gear integration (including the voice that narrates Forza 4), arguably better car sounds, arguably better simulation (many Forza 4 reviews claim this to be so). But its the little things, video game aspect stuff. Better single player "campaign", seamless menus, better in game music, vast amounts of online modes, and extremely community oriented, and kinect integration. Also Forza games get a lot of dedicated DLC per game and they release much faster then GT5s did.
Does GT5 have rewind feature? Cause if not, then its another video game aspect that makes Forza better, for those looong races where one mistake leads to a loss and restarting is just too irritating.
If I had to pick the most important of the lot it would have to be Autovista, 500 premium cars, livery editor, and the community features. Again, Forza is a better package, combining simulation with being a fun video game. Hence the 90+ franchise that GT can't really touch.
... so you can't name any... i didn't really think so
one suggestion i have is to actually try playing a game before you compare it to another
NightDragon83 said: Wii U 2012 NextBox 2013 PS4 2014
That's the way it is. Sony can't afford to launch another system within the next 2 years yet when the PS3 is finally starting to turning a profit for them, and with the impending Vita launch which is going to drain more cash from Sony (they're selling it at a loss), and where the long-term success of the platform is still very much up in the air.
The traditional "5-year" console cycle is long gone as of this generation. And even when it comes to Sony, they haven't had to stick to the arbitrary 5-year cycle the way Nintendo, Sega, and more recently M$ did... PS1 was already out for almost 5-1/2 years before PS2 launched in Japan, and it took more than 6 years between the PS2 and PS3 launch. Sony is only going to make their move when M$ does, because they don't feel that the Wii U is as big of a threat to them, as it's only catching up to the 360/PS3 in terms of power and graphical abilities, and won't be leaps and bounds over the PS3 like the "NextBox" will be.
okay everybody seems to be pointing at the cost's/loss and what not and i can understand that BUT
how exactly do you know that Sony will make the move when M$ does? what if Sony just says "screw it" and decides to release there console before Microsoft does? what if they decide to roll with the weaker console? if Sony roles with the weaker console(which is pretty much what happened in the 6th generation) they will leave M$ in the dust HANDS DOWN and the console will for sure cost less to make because they wouldn't have had to outdo what M$ might bring next gen(not even mentioning that microsoft would try to outdo Sony resulting in them launching a year after them)
it would suck but hey as long as Sony brings the games then im cool :)
Wishful thinking, but not gonna happen. Sony would have had to do something like that by next year to steal Nintendo's thunder and get the jump on M$, who in all likelyhood will release the 360's successor in 2013. If they were to release a console alongside or after Microsoft's that is deemed to be "weaker" or less powerful (no matter how much cheaper it is), it would seriously hurt them with the "core" gaming audience and their fans who expect Sony to be on the cutting edge when it comes to console hardware, and the casual audience wouldn't care either way because they'd still have the Wii / Wii U and Kinect to play with.
Also don't forget, the PS2 being the "weakest" of the major consoles last gen (aside from Dreamcast) was less a byproduct of its design as it was the timing of its actual release... the PS2's design was pretty much finalized by the end of '99 and launched in March '00 in Japan, yet the Xbox and GC ended up being only marginally more powerful than it despite both launching almost a full 2 years later. Same thing with the PS1... it was finalized and launched alongside the Saturn in late '94 in Japan, and was still able to keep up with and easily outsell the more powerful N64 which came out 18 months later.
It's obvious that Sony isn't going to have the opportunity to get a jump on its competitors like that for the next generation, so best to allow the PS3 to continue to grow in market share and profitability for the time being, and then come out strong in 2014 with a console that's not only more powerful than its competitors, but also well designed and just as affordable (Sony should be able to match whatever price M$ is selling theirs at in 2014), while having a stacked library of AAA titles ready to go for launch, unlike the PS3's launch which stumbled out of the gate due to the high price point and no real killer app launch titles.
yea i know Sony wont release it's console a year before microsoft lol i was just trying to make a point
you are saying that 360's successor will be released in 2013 and i am saying that PS3's AND 360's successor will be released in 2013 :)
and you cant just shove Nintendo out of the picture because of the way this generation played out. It's not like Nintendo just shoved Sony out of the picture and focused solely on microsoft this generation coming off of last
so why would Sony just omit Nintendo? Nintendo is a competitor aswell as microsoft
man like i said before, Sony is NOT going to let Nintendo get a 2 year lead over them like that no matter what happened the previous gen
i see Sony releasing the PS4 right after Wii U in 2013 like they are known to do. I see PS4 and NexBox releasing in the same year
and for some reason everybody just magically thinks that if Sony and Microsoft launch in the same year that Microsoft will automatically have the more powerful product. I have no clue why people think this
it's 50/50
and also Sony will have time to profit with ps3 a bit before PS4 is launched. Dont forget that 2013's holiday season is about a good 2 years away
and LOL dont give in to that PolyphonyDigital "perfectionist" crap. Polyphony shot GT5 Prologue out quick and it showed that they knew what they were doing with the ps3. i believe they were just riding out the whole Turn10's Forza 2 and 3. They looked at what Turn10 was doing and just simply out-did what they knew Turn10 could achieve on 360(1000 cars,weather,nascar,night/day cycle etc). Forza 4 proves what PolyphonyDigital was aiming for(seeing as how Turn10 was not able to outdo gt5 in those areas even though it came out later)
as far as sony making 2 dumb moves with PSVita.. okay tell me this, name 1 time that Sony released 1 of it's platforms before it's competitor? *crickets* exactly NEVER! They ALWAYS release IN competition!! I said it right there in the OP! On them missing the Na/Eu Holiday season i guess they dont want to "rush" anything like the way we seen Nintendo rush the 3DS
So your saying PD waits for Forza to make a move before acting? Thats not the behaviour of the supposed king of simulation......usually its they who should set the example. Thats why I don't buy it. Simply put, PS3 was a bitch to program for and they lost track of time, occasionally tweaking the game based on Forza 2 and Forza 3 features. But cmon there was little outdoing in the end. 3 Forzas, all 90+ on metacritic compared to one full GT game with a 84. They nailed some parts like the night and day cycles, but they still lacked a lot of features that Forza has. And cmon, 1000 cars. Its common sense 800 of them arent worth driving, even with the spec 2 update.
I think Sony should rethink their launch strategies. Launching after Sega and still winning just ain't gonna cut it anymore. Today, launching later = loose. I see no reason to not rush the Vita.....trading lack of launch games for a holiday launch. Like the 3d......launching rushed leads to a head start, and room to grow and improve. Nintendo ironed out most of the 3DS kinks..........before the Vita even released. Thats the magic of a head start, rushed or not
yea Forza got those 90+'s on metacritic easily early on because Turn10 had no competition earlier this gen
the best driving simulator that released before Forza 2 was *drumrolls* Gran Turismo 4(which was on a last gen console)!
and we all know that Gran Turismo 5 didn't release until after Forza 3 came out
look the only people who ever complained about ps3 being hard to develop for were people who had worked on 360(3rd party developers)
i remember 1 3rd party developer was explaining some things about ps3 and why it is more complex to develop for than other platforms
he was saying something about the ps3's divided ram and since it is divided into 2 parts that when you are using 1 section of the ram the other section will bite you in the a** if you do something specific but i cant really remember though
it kinda made sense because 360 has 1 whole 512 mb of ram and PS3 has 256 mb of system ram and another 256 mb of video ram
now if somebody like a Sony 1st party dev ONLY works on ps3 tell me how exactly would they find it to be hard to develop for if the ps3 is all they know? how would they know that ps3 is difficult to develop for if they never even worked on something like the 360?
you should think about things before you say them man
and also lets say a regular person who owns ps3 and 360 goes to the store and is browsing for a racing game. Lets say that they just so happened to pick up Forza and Gran Turismo,reads the back and goes off of that information(which most people do for all games). Which game do you think they would pick? would they pick the 1 that has Nascar, night/day cycle, track editor, dynamic weather or would they pick the other one that doesn't have that stuff? clearly they would pick the game with the most content
it is what it is, you can say what you want about GT and Forza but Polyphony outdid Turn10's Forza games this gen with GT5 *lifts shoulders*
For your other comment on this page, that wall of text lol, just screams to me that your trying very hard to justify Sonys fall from grace this gen comapred to the glory days of PS2. You like to talk excuses and what ifs but im talking results :) You seem to be the flip side to me and my bias so I can see where your coming from. But make no mistake don't underestimate Microsoft as competition, not to mention they profit 3 billion every 3 months compared to Sony which hasn't seen a cent of profit in 4 years :). Thats all ill say on that.
But as for this comment.....here we go.
Don't downplay Forza 2 and 3 getting 90+ cause they had no competition. There were multiplat sim games this gen, remember that. Forza get 90+ reviews purely on their own merits, especially Forza 4 when measured against GT5 :)
Actually.......Forza 1 released a few months after GT4.....and outscored it on metacritic but due to GT being an established franchise and Forza being a new IP, nobody really took notice. Who would have thought Forza would come such a long way since then.
Well sir, about your PS3 hard to develop for comment, it is a known fact that many 3rd party developers had trouble with it, even in 2010 with games like Bayonetta. What you say about 1st party studios not having to worry about 360 versions is true.......but 3rd party studios make up for 90+ % of PS3 and 360s software library. Sony made a bonehead move making PS3 architecture different from 360s because they should have known that due to a head start the 3rd party industry would be using 360 for the lead platform, which many still do today.
Lol ok someone could pick GT5 for the night/day and weather........or pick a game with 500 premium cars (kinda overshadows GT5's 200 lol), autovista, and oh just read the other post I wrote to some other guy on what Forza has.
Your last comment really just confuses me. Its pure math here. 3 Forzas this gen on 360 vs one full GT game on PS3. EACH Forza scored above 90.....GT 5 scored an 84. Its extremely obvious that Forza games have better overall packages and GT5 lacks certain video game qualities that Forza has in spades.
If you make games at a weaker pace and professional reviewers don't like the one game they do make as much.......that isn't in any way "outdoing", thats just delusional spin on your part.
now it's time to break you down :)
that wall of text lol, just screams to me that your trying very hard to justify Sonys fall from grace this gen comapred to the glory days of PS2. You like to talk excuses and what ifs but im talking results :)
uhh *look's around* that's EXACTLY what i was doing! excluding the "trying very hard"part
and it's obvious that it was true seeing that you didn't even try to refute it because you CANT being that it was true ;)
In Sony's case, those "what ifs" have to be the most legit "what ifs" in any gaming generation. Sony did not drop the ball this generation, they literally THREW the b!tch at their competition with some of their decisions.
You seem to be the flip side to me and my bias so I can see where your coming from.
BIAS MY A**!!! im not bias at all! i was just simply telling the truth,thats all
don't underestimate Microsoft as competition
yes i know this and i was just trying to remind YOU why you shouldn't underestimate Sony. We've seen microsoft at it's PRIME this generation while we've seen Sony at it's COMPLETE DUMBEST!
not to mention they profit 3 billion every 3 months compared to Sony which hasn't seen a cent of profit in 4 years :). Thats all ill say on that.
I guess microsoft is just making up for all the money they lost on the original Xbox last generation lol which Sony can easily do next generation with PS4 and Vita
now GT5 got NO mercy because of how long it took to get to the market. and i dont blame them for not giving GT5 any slack on the review part and it was more understandable because Polyphony limited the customization in GT5 and made the damage unlockable. You can clearly tell that they didn't even want to add damage to GT5
now i honestly believe that Polyphony didn't expect Turn10 to make a 3rd Forza in a generation(i didn't expect it either) but GT5 still outdid the Forza series at the end of the day this gen. hell, Turn 10 can make a Forza 5 for 360 and it still wont outdo GT5
it is what it is, sorry
Well sir, about your PS3 hard to develop for comment, it is a known fact that many 3rd party developers had trouble with it, even in 2010 with games like Bayonetta
LMAO tell me why i knew that you were ONLY going to mention Bayonetta when you said "2010" LOL
man dont believe that bullsh!t, the whole ps3 being hard to develop for was mainly just a cover up. It's not as hard to develop for as they claimed
if a dev develops a game from scratch on PS3 and another on 360 then yes, the ps3 game would have been a bit more complex
now what these 3rd party developers REALLY do is develop the game on 360 1st, then they PORT it to the ps3 to avoid the time, effort and complexity of building the same game from scratch on the PS3(it's really the smartest thing any developer could do honestly)
a port is basically like a copy and paste(not as simple but you basically get the point). The PS3 has completely different architecture than the 360 so it's obvious that when you port a game built around specific architect to a system with different architect that the shaders and what not wont work correctly which will also give the game a washed up look. you just cant port the game to different architect like that man
now let me give you an example
Armored Core 4 was developed on 360 then ported to PS3
now take a look at this 1 here. Iron man was developed on PS3 1st then ported to the 360
you just cant port a game to a system with different architect like that and expect the game to look the same. Now being that ps3 was the harder system to develop for it was obvious that the mandatory system to develop for 1st was the 360 for most developers(this is why most 3rd party games always looked and run a bit better on 360)
so what the smart developers do is after they port the game to the other system they go back and tune that ported version up a bit so it will look on par with the other version(which should not take long at all)
when all the ps3 ports looked washed up the developers just covered it up with the "ps3 is hard to develop for" line that they always used. It was just the perfect excuse really. Sony was already getting hammered by the media left and right so i guess people didn't really pay much attention to it but whatever
Sony made a bonehead move making PS3 architecture different from 360s because they should have known that due to a head start the 3rd party industry would be using 360 for the lead platform
this is kinda controversial because i see what you mean by this but at the same time Sony was just trying to be different from the Xbox. you cant blame them for trying to be different and it was the same story when PS2 launched with different architecture than the dreamcast. It only really proves my point that Sony was originally aiming to dreamcast the the Xbox 360 but we all know why that didn't happen :)
Lol ok someone could pick GT5 for the night/day and weather........or pick a game with 500 premium cars (kinda overshadows GT5's 200 lol), autovista, and oh just read the other post I wrote to some other guy on what Forza has.
i see what you mean but premium car or not, GT5 still has over 1000 cars while Forza has 500
Forza just simply got outdid *lifts shoulders*
and Polyphony can easily do anything with Gran Turismo that Turn10 does with Forza. It's just that Polyphony only make's 2 GT's for each PS home console(obviously not this gen though being that they only released 1)
EDIT: and yet i've made ANOTHER big a** wall of text -_-
HappySqurriel said: After Microsft releases their next system, and Nintendo releases the Wii U, there will only be a limited time where the PS3 is viable as a platform for game development. Essentially, third party publishers need to release their games to the PS3, XBox 360 and PC to get the sales to justify the high development costs of these games. While developers will continue to support the HD consoles until the next generation platforms are well established, if the Wii U and Next XBox have similar enough performance and developers can target the PC at the same time within 12 to 18 months developers may be able to target 50+ Million gamers on next-generation consoles; and with the userbase of current generation consoles falling, developers would rapidly be moving away from these platforms.
let's say that these developers do move away from the hd consoles
ps3 will still have the Vita keeping it alive for A LONG time because soon many PSVita games will be shared with ps3 with that cross platform play thing or whatever it's called
AND
the Wii U technology wont be that much bigger than ps3's. you can even see that all Wii U will be getting are ps3 and 360 games/slightly upgraded ports so when the new generation kicks this 1 out the door ps3 could also still be filled with life because it wouldn't take much time to make a Wii U game for the ps3 :)
ps3 isn't going anywhere anytime soon next gen ;)
You're delusional. I'm a huge PS3 fan, its the only HD console I own. But c'mon, it'll die as soon as the NextBox comes out. First off, the BluRay drive in it is anemic, 2x sucks in 2011 technology. The Cell is basically a single core CPU, not cutting it. The 6 SPU's are only used by Sony 1st and 2nd party and the big 3rd party titles. It's tough to develop for and takes a while to learn. Sure it give great return when you DO use it, but most developers don't want to learn and what makes you think they will learn when the NextBox is out?
Next, the GPU sucks. Its an Nvidia 7800. In the time since PS3 has been out, Nvidia has made the 8xxx, 9xxx, GTX 2xxx, GTX 4xx, and GTX 5xx series of GPU's. It doesn't have unified shaders like the 360 and ALL PC GPU's have now. It uses GDDR3, not the newer and faster GDDR5, and its on a 128-bit bus, not a 256 which cuts down on the VRAM bandwidth. It only has 256MB of VRAM. It can't render games in 1080p because the textures are too big.
EVEN if it cannabilizes the main RAM, it still isn't enough, it only has 256MB of that as well. Most PC's are shipping with 4GB of RAM now. When the GPU uses the CPU RAM, the CPU is now bottlenecked. The good news is that the RAM is XDR which is just phenomenally fast, but expensive.
HappySqurriel said: After Microsft releases their next system, and Nintendo releases the Wii U, there will only be a limited time where the PS3 is viable as a platform for game development. Essentially, third party publishers need to release their games to the PS3, XBox 360 and PC to get the sales to justify the high development costs of these games. While developers will continue to support the HD consoles until the next generation platforms are well established, if the Wii U and Next XBox have similar enough performance and developers can target the PC at the same time within 12 to 18 months developers may be able to target 50+ Million gamers on next-generation consoles; and with the userbase of current generation consoles falling, developers would rapidly be moving away from these platforms.
let's say that these developers do move away from the hd consoles
ps3 will still have the Vita keeping it alive for A LONG time because soon many PSVita games will be shared with ps3 with that cross platform play thing or whatever it's called
AND
the Wii U technology wont be that much bigger than ps3's. you can even see that all Wii U will be getting are ps3 and 360 games/slightly upgraded ports so when the new generation kicks this 1 out the door ps3 could also still be filled with life because it wouldn't take much time to make a Wii U game for the ps3 :)
ps3 isn't going anywhere anytime soon next gen ;)
You're delusional. I'm a huge PS3 fan, its the only HD console I own. But c'mon, it'll die as soon as the NextBox comes out. First off, the BluRay drive in it is anemic, 2x sucks in 2011 technology. The Cell is basically a single core CPU, not cutting it. The 6 SPU's are only used by Sony 1st and 2nd party and the big 3rd party titles. It's tough to develop for and takes a while to learn. Sure it give great return when you DO use it, but most developers don't want to learn and what makes you think they will learn when the NextBox is out?
Next, the GPU sucks. Its an Nvidia 7800. In the time since PS3 has been out, Nvidia has made the 8xxx, 9xxx, GTX 2xxx, GTX 4xx, and GTX 5xx series of GPU's. It doesn't have unified shaders like the 360 and ALL PC GPU's have now. It uses GDDR3, not the newer and faster GDDR5, and its on a 128-bit bus, not a 256 which cuts down on the VRAM bandwidth. It only has 256MB of VRAM. It can't render games in 1080p because the textures are too big.
EVEN if it cannabilizes the main RAM, it still isn't enough, it only has 256MB of that as well. Most PC's are shipping with 4GB of RAM now. When the GPU uses the CPU RAM, the CPU is now bottlenecked. The good news is that the RAM is XDR which is just phenomenally fast, but expensive.
Heck, the PS3 doesn't even have 802.11n yet.
You're delusional. I'm a huge PS3 fan, its the only HD console I own
umm.. and what exactly is this supposed to mean? Are you supposed to be gaining points by claiming this? Am i supposed to give you an award or something?? I dont care how "huge" of a fan you are to ps3. Hell, i wouldn't give a damn if ps3 was the 1st console you ever started gaming on so what was the point in even mentioning this? -_-
But c'mon, it'll die as soon as the NextBox comes out.
*FACEPALM!* SMGDH -_-!
..(sigh).. Im not even going to bother with reading the rest of your comment now
and LOL dont give in to that PolyphonyDigital "perfectionist" crap. Polyphony shot GT5 Prologue out quick and it showed that they knew what they were doing with the ps3. i believe they were just riding out the whole Turn10's Forza 2 and 3. They looked at what Turn10 was doing and just simply out-did what they knew Turn10 could achieve on 360(1000 cars,weather,nascar,night/day cycle etc). Forza 4 proves what PolyphonyDigital was aiming for(seeing as how Turn10 was not able to outdo gt5 in those areas even though it came out later)
as far as sony making 2 dumb moves with PSVita.. okay tell me this, name 1 time that Sony released 1 of it's platforms before it's competitor? *crickets* exactly NEVER! They ALWAYS release IN competition!! I said it right there in the OP! On them missing the Na/Eu Holiday season i guess they dont want to "rush" anything like the way we seen Nintendo rush the 3DS
So your saying PD waits for Forza to make a move before acting? Thats not the behaviour of the supposed king of simulation......usually its they who should set the example. Thats why I don't buy it. Simply put, PS3 was a bitch to program for and they lost track of time, occasionally tweaking the game based on Forza 2 and Forza 3 features. But cmon there was little outdoing in the end. 3 Forzas, all 90+ on metacritic compared to one full GT game with a 84. They nailed some parts like the night and day cycles, but they still lacked a lot of features that Forza has. And cmon, 1000 cars. Its common sense 800 of them arent worth driving, even with the spec 2 update.
I think Sony should rethink their launch strategies. Launching after Sega and still winning just ain't gonna cut it anymore. Today, launching later = loose. I see no reason to not rush the Vita.....trading lack of launch games for a holiday launch. Like the 3d......launching rushed leads to a head start, and room to grow and improve. Nintendo ironed out most of the 3DS kinks..........before the Vita even released. Thats the magic of a head start, rushed or not
this has to be like the 5th time i've seen you make this claim but you never seem to be able to name them...
for gt5 i can think of dynamic weather - rain, snow etc, more race types like rally, F1, go karting etc, day-night transitions, course maker etc
for forza for the most part all i can think of is the livery editor, autovista and kinect integration
Oh please, don't make me your one stop source for Forza features. Try I don't know, wikipedia, the forza homepage, hell google "forza 4 vs GT5 features" and see what comes up :) Off the top of my head, its a lot of little things that make Forza a 90+ rated game. Simply put, Turn 10 makes a great sim AND a great video game, where PD neglects the video game aspect of their franchise, thus a 84 on metacritic.
Lets see.....more tracks, more detailed tracks, 500 "premium" (500 > 200) cars, autovista, livery editor, better damage, better top gear integration (including the voice that narrates Forza 4), arguably better car sounds, arguably better simulation (many Forza 4 reviews claim this to be so). But its the little things, video game aspect stuff. Better single player "campaign", seamless menus, better in game music, vast amounts of online modes, and extremely community oriented, and kinect integration. Also Forza games get a lot of dedicated DLC per game and they release much faster then GT5s did.
Does GT5 have rewind feature? Cause if not, then its another video game aspect that makes Forza better, for those looong races where one mistake leads to a loss and restarting is just too irritating.
If I had to pick the most important of the lot it would have to be Autovista, 500 premium cars, livery editor, and the community features. Again, Forza is a better package, combining simulation with being a fun video game. Hence the 90+ franchise that GT can't really touch.
... so you can't name any... i didn't really think so
one suggestion i have is to actually try playing a game before you compare it to another
Very disapointing response. Ignorance is bliss with GT fans it seems.
I mean that 90+ grades for 3 Forzas compared to a 84 for GT5 aren't going anywhere. Theres a reason for this. I mean Forza 4 must in theory have things over GT to deserve a 90+ grade after GT5s release???
Wake up.
Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles.
Nice response. I read all of it. Only the GT/Forza part and the developer part still intrigues me now.
The 3rd party response is just another giant excuse. No need for the history lesson im aware of what happened. But again I talk pure results. Despite the what ifs and excuses, the hard reality is that for approximately 4 years, we have seen better 360 multiplats then PS3 versions. Tis the magic of being out first, you get the 3rd party devs on your side. If Sony made the PS3 just a tad more like 360's architecture, then the embarrassing ports wouldn't have happened. Don't tell me that you know better then the many developers that choose to make early PS3 multiplats ports the way they did. They have automatically more credentials then you or me on what to do with their time and money.
"sony was just trying to be different from the Xbox"
It was never up to Sony and im sure now we all know that. 3rd party industry made sure they share almost exactly the same library, since exclusives are only a small fraction of it. So based on this knowledge, if PS4 launches after the next Xbox, they damn well make sure the architecture is similar, or here we go again :P
"Turn 10 can make a Forza 5 for 360 and it still wont outdo GT5" it is what it is, sorry.
So this is what it comes down to? Denial and ignorance? 3 Forzas. 1 GT. 3 90+ reviews. 1 84. It is what it is, sorry.
"i see what you mean but premium car or not, GT5 still has over 1000 cars while Forza has 500
Forza just simply got outdid *lifts shoulders*
and Polyphony can easily do anything with Gran Turismo that Turn10 does with Forza. It's just that Polyphony only make's 2 GT's for each PS home console(obviously not this gen though being that they only released 1)"
Yes but 800 of them have inferior interiors and exteriors. Kinda destroys the "best sim" argument if they don't look remotely close to the real world counterpart due to being upscaled PS2 models.
Actually no. Rsearch PD to Turn 10. Turn 10's big advantage is that they have a TON of staff, much more then PD. This explains how fast yet quality controlled every Forza is. If Sony cares to *take back* the sim crown, they should start hiring more people at PD, so until then, PD will work at a snails pace compared to Turn 10.
PD did technically make 2 GTs this gen, but one was actually for PSP. Turns out that was the worst thing they ever did. They should have focused their resources purely on PS3, coupled with that GT PSP is in the *70's* on metacritic, a stain on the franchise that won't go away :)
Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles.
as far as sony making 2 dumb moves with PSVita.. okay tell me this, name 1 time that Sony released 1 of it's platforms before it's competitor? *crickets* exactly NEVER! They ALWAYS release IN competition!! I said it right there in the OP! On them missing the Na/Eu Holiday season i guess they dont want to "rush" anything like the way we seen Nintendo rush the 3DS
Today, launching later = lose.
Not necessarily. The success of Vita, or any console for that matter, will be mainly dependent upon it's actual value, which will be determined by 1st party support, 3rd party support, features, price, etc. Launch time is definitely a factor, but it's certainly a small one when compared to the aforementioned. If you look at current and past gen market leaders, you'll see that the launch time in relation to their competitors fluctuates a fair bit, so it's really not an absolute factor in determining a console's success.
as far as sony making 2 dumb moves with PSVita.. okay tell me this, name 1 time that Sony released 1 of it's platforms before it's competitor? *crickets* exactly NEVER! They ALWAYS release IN competition!! I said it right there in the OP! On them missing the Na/Eu Holiday season i guess they dont want to "rush" anything like the way we seen Nintendo rush the 3DS
Today, launching later = lose.
Not necessarily. The success of Vita, or any console for that matter, will be mainly dependent upon it's actual value, which will be determined by 1st party support, 3rd party support, features, price, etc. Launch time is definitely a factor, but it's certainly a small one when compared to the aforementioned. If you look at current and past gen market leaders, you'll see that the launch time in relation to their competitors fluctuates a fair bit, so it's really not an absolute factor in determining a console's success.
Well in the handheld sector its fairly certain if you launch after Nintendo you will loose.
Home consoles is another story yes. In the case of PS3 vs 360, all though PS3 may very well pass 360, the damage has been done. Launching first allowed MS to corner the 3rd party industry for years until recently, but personally its too little too late.
Id also not count Sony launching after Sega Saturn and Dreamcast and still winning as valid points. Personally, Sega was terrible at managing all their consoles, totally unlike MS.
But agreed with you. Its a major factor yes but not a guarantee.
Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles.
