wow..this had gone extremely well.
[end sarcasm]

lol ill admit forza looks better than gt5p but believe gt5 will prbly be better, cant wait to see :)

You make an argument about slowing down in GT then show all the Foza screen shots when they are travelling at speed.

You keep switching between GT5 and GT5:P. One hasn't released yet.

Other than that I think Forza 3 looks better than GT5:P. But this thread isn't about which looks better.

@selnor,

You come with the argue that GT5 prologue superior tech are saved because of the use of 2D tree ?
but what about more cars on track in prologue ?

Perhaps the main question should be : 2D trees or less cars ?

Logical answer from gamers and racing fans : 2D trees AND more cars !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
all the material you will bring to us will only confirm us the following :

FM3 scenery is better but technically, the old GT5 "prologue" is already superior with more car and better lighting, higher resolution and better AA

See you in your the next thread !

Nobody knows how GT5 will be in the END. Even if it comes to Physics. Who nows maybe GT5 will have 360Hz physics too ? Or maybe just 200Hz but so greatly implemented that it will be better than the 360Hz of Forza ? or maybe it will be like Gt5:P with more Cars and Tracks ?


I think in the END GT5 will be the better game in the most aspects. graphically and gameplay wise. But if not then Forza will be the game which takes the crown.


The Cell Chip is THE Chip for Physics. I remember on the beginning everyone said OH the Cell its a bad decission the PS3 is inferior to the Xbox360. The Cell Chip is just able to handle Physics.


Now as the Graphical Superiority of PS3 is proved more or less. The people seem to forget that the Cell is the Physics king ad say even that due to the Cell the Physics in Forza will be better.

Thats simply not true the Cell is capable of Gpu Tasks and is the Physics KING.
The Cell can make Physics which the Xbox cant do. Everyone declared in the Past thats the reason why the Cell is inferior because it can do JUST Physics.

If they really push the PS3 Hardware then Forza will be inferior in all terms in terms of Graphic AND Physics.

Nothing can be said. To the Pics they prove nothing Forza in full Speed and Gt5:(P) standing ?


I hope that polyphony released the game later because they have learned of Forza. And now they try to make to the best Racing Game ever made.

They have the Chance and I hope they will do things like Tire Flex. But I hope they wont include a Replay Function and make it too mainstream because that sux.

With the Replay Function they pretty much hurt the game in my eyes. And the Physics are still not the level I want. Why its impossible to destroy a car completly. If you do big jumps the car could loose the exhaust or destroy the axle. And I would prefer it if they would make atleast a Hardcore Physics mode where a car is completly destroyed if it drives into a wall. Real Physics would people stop from bumping you away in the curve and stuff like that because the car would be completly destroyed.

I dont want terms like 360Hz physics I want reality like behaviour. Forza 3 made some good things especially Tire Flex is good. Still It would be cooler a flying metal piece could make your tire explode.


I still see hundreds of Ways to make the Physics of A racing game better then it is now and I hope really that GT5 will be the step I hoped for this Generation. Maybe the next Gen will finaly deliever Reality. And GT5 wont be called The real driving Simulator but The Real driving Emulator.

Like I said, Selnor, let's agree to disagree.

I believe that for a racing game a higher res, better AA on the cars, better lighting and particle effects and transparency with more cars and simplified off track objects is a better rendering engine.

You believe a lower resolution, more jaggies on the cars, less cars, better off track objects, better motion blur, more detailed sky and less realistic lighting is a better rendering engine for a racing game.

We both seem to think it's a really good game, so no sweat.

I agree with this. Both devs seem to give different parts of the engine priority. We cant forget though that alot of 360 resource is taken up by the most important part the physics. It updates at 360 hertz while GT5P is at 120hertz. If FM3 was at 120 hertz I'm sure it would be 1080p 4xaa as well. Because we already know that FM3 is doing ALL the graphics on just the GPU with no help from CPU. Turn 10 explained that the CPU is doing all of the physics etc and the GPU is doing all the graphics. To me thats a better tech achievement. When you play it you can feel it. The elevations are so prominent, every bump is felt and affects how you drive unlike any other sim racer. It's a hard game to learn well.

@selnor

Whatever man. Some tech geeks just wrote up an article showing how GT5P looks better than Forza 3.. This thread wasn't about physics, it was about the graphics of both games.

by the way, even though Forza 3 is 360Hz or 120Hz, it wouldn't matter for graphics since as I know physics aren't a part of the graphics card.. LOL

MetalGearSolid_4ever said: @selnor Whatever man. Some tech geeks just wrote up an article showing how GT5P looks better than Forza 3.. This thread wasn't about physics, it was about the graphics of both games. by the way, even though Forza 3 is 360Hz or 120Hz, it wouldn't matter for graphics since as I know physics aren't a part of the graphics card.. LOL

Do you understand anyhting about how it all works? I dont profess to know everything, but this is fairly obvious. Almost all great graphics games have the CPU help out the GPU for graphics. My point was for FM3 they couldnt do that because they needed the CPU to do the wealth of calculations for the rest of the game. If you take the physics simulation down by more than half to GT5P level, that frees up alot of resources of the CPU. Obviously that means they could have had a higher res, more cars etc. When looking at tech of a game, certainly a sim you have to consider everything. Also is it more impressive that they achieved the level they did with all considered? When playing each yes GT5P is in a higher res and a more real coulor pallette, but it's obvious GT5P is bland in comparison and much less real in the physics department.

A tech achievement is what the console is doing as a whole. Becasue resources have to be shared.

selnor said: MetalGearSolid_4ever said: @selnor Whatever man. Some tech geeks just wrote up an article showing how GT5P looks better than Forza 3.. This thread wasn't about physics, it was about the graphics of both games. by the way, even though Forza 3 is 360Hz or 120Hz, it wouldn't matter for graphics since as I know physics aren't a part of the graphics card.. LOL Do you understand anyhting about how it all works? I dont profess to know everything, but this is fairly obvious. Almost all great graphics games have the CPU help out the GPU for graphics. My point was for FM3 they couldnt do that because they needed the CPU to do the wealth of calculations for the rest of the game. If you take the physics simulation down by more than half to GT5P level, that frees up alot of resources of the CPU. Obviously that means they could have had a higher res, more cars etc. When looking at tech of a game, certainly a sim you have to consider everything. Also is it more impressive that they achieved the level they did with all considered? When playing each yes GT5P is in a higher res and a more real coulor pallette, but it's obvious GT5P is bland in comparison and much less real in the physics department. A tech achievement is what the console is doing as a whole. Becasue resources have to be shared.

No, the CPU doesn't really help out with the graphics. Sure, the CPU will relay data to the GPU, but when it comes to triangles, pixels in a texture, and all the other things we associate with good graphics... well, that comes down to the GPU. I can't say much about the PS3 since I don't understand how the SPE's work, and because it's so unusual to link a CPU to a GPU like the PS3 does, but other than animations and physics there really isn't much that the CPU does in terms of graphics.

For this reason, GPU's are always more important than CPU's when it comes to graphics. Better to have a high-end GPU and a run of the mill CPU than the other way around.