The Big Forza 2 Thread *

[Vic]

A little context would be helpful.

Have you personally played the game? "From what I hear" tends to indicate no.

The physics don't feel right compared to what? Real life? Other games? Your imagination of what it should feel like?

A lot of the rest is subjective and I wouldn't attempt to argue someone's opinion. But, "this isn't a true sequel." Where the hell does that come from? Even looking at it from your decidedly negative point of view, would you say that Forza 2 is less of a sequel than GT2 was to GT1? Seriously? I'm sorry, that crosses the line from a negative opinion to outright trolling.

Wow, did you help develop the game?

I've played the demo, and the physics dont feel realistic under damage, which kinda negates the point of having it in the first place.

One thing about GT2 was that it was a much bigger game than GT1. Forza 2 has a decent number of cars, but a fairly low number of tracks (in the full game).

As for the graphics? Meh. PGR 3 look better, and how old is that game?

 

[Cheezdoodles]

Can you show me a racing game, where the physics feels "better" under damage? I have never seen one tbh. Damage in car racing games have never been impressive for me thought

Its certainly better than just bumping off the wall like in GT.

 

[Paul_G]

Indeed. Its not as if GT:HD is something from outer space.

I thinks it fair to say that Forza 2 is disappointing based on the lack of significant improvements that have been made to it, and also on what we can expect from GT 5. Thats not say its a bad game.

I think it's fair to say that Call of Duty 3 is disappointing based on the lack of significant improvements that have been made to it, and what we can expect from MOH: Airborne. That's not to say it's a bad game...

Is it the best driving game of it's type on a console at the moment? I think most people would say yes. Then what does it matter what you expect from GT5? They've revealed very little about it, so i don't think you can make that sort of statement. Also it's a driving game of a very distinct type. What would you suggest they improve significantly?

It just bugs me when people make a comparison like that - you're comparing a game you know little about, since you've only played the demo, to another game you know little about, since no one does. How can anyone take you seriously?

 

[Vic]

Colin Mcrae Rally and TOCA Touring Cars.

Whats with the GT defensiveness? I personally think its the better game, but luckily the next one will have damage...

 

[Vic]

I think it's fair to say that Call of Duty 3 is disappointing based on the lack of significant improvements that have been made to it, and what we can expect from MOH: Airborne. That's not to say it's a bad game...

Is it the best driving game of it's type on a console at the moment? I think most people would say yes. Then what does it matter what you expect from GT5? They've revealed very little about it, so i don't think you can make that sort of statement. Also it's a driving game of a very distinct type. What would you suggest they improve significantly?

It just bugs me when people make a comparison like that - you're comparing a game you know little about, since you've only played the demo, to another game you know little about, since no one does. How can anyone take you seriously?

No offence, but the only comparison I made were the graphics and the fact that GT2 was a bigger game than the original (when pressed). Does anybody seriously doubt GT5 will have the better graphics? The other references to GT came from others who felt the need to bring it up.

 

[AlphaWolf]

No offence, but the only comparison I made were the graphics and the fact that GT2 was a bigger game than the original (when pressed). Does anybody seriously doubt GT5 will have the better graphics? The other references to GT came from others who felt the need to bring it up.

Its pretty easy to doubt products that don't exist yet. Why don't you wait for GT6 I'm sure it will be better than GT5.

 

[Paul_G]

No offence, but the only comparison I made were the graphics and the fact that GT2 was a bigger game than the original (when pressed). Does anybody seriously doubt GT5 will have the better graphics? The other references to GT came from others who felt the need to bring it up.

Did you read the post of yours i quoted? You never mentioned GT2.

I don't doubt GT5 will have better graphics, but most games released after the one you're comparing them to have better graphics. That's just the natural progression of things. It's just the principle of the thing. Why make the comparison when you can't prove it. We can say fairly decisively that Game B is better than Game A when it's out, or even when there are video's doing the rounds, GT5 doesn't even have a screenshot to it's name that I am aware of

Anyway I won't say any more on the subject. Lets not turn this into some sort of comparison thread

 

[Mintmaster]

The suspension animation in Forza 2 is very bad. I noticed this when I was playing one-handed (pizza in the other hand) and kept hitting the rumble curbs and occasionally going into the sand or grass. It's as though the tires have zero momentum. (In other words, zero unsprung mass.)

Anyway, Forza2 is growing on me, despite my misgivings about how it models the suspension motion.

Do you know any physics? Do some SHM calculations using the parameters of real cars (unsprung mass, spring constants, damping) and you'll see that the time constants are very short.

The spring strength needed to keep race cars weighing over a tonne in control will make wheels move very fast over bumps. In fact, the unsprung mass / tire momentum has almost nothing to do with visible wheel motion for this reason. The damping has much more impact unless the shock absorbers are really weak (i.e. the car oscillates a lot).

It doesn't look out of place at all to me. What are you comparing it to? Maybe the tracks have exaggerated bumps in the curbing or grass, but you're wrong if you think you can visually see that the physics engine has that particular flaw.

 

[scooby_dooby]

BTW Scooby thanks for the neoprene tip for the pedals, it makes a big difference.

Hey np, it's a great mod, makes a ton of difference. Makes you wonder why they would spend 10 pennies and include something like that in the box.

 

[scooby_dooby]

No offence, but the only comparison I made were the graphics and the fact that GT2 was a bigger game than the original (when pressed).

What a ridiculous point. GTA2 was a sequal on the same system.

GT3 on the other hand was way smaller than GT2, which was caused by the transition to the next generation. It went from 500 cars to 150.

The fact Turn 10 actually managed to increase the number of cars while transitioning to new hardware, all in the span of two years, is extremely impressive.

 

[infinity4]

and i remember GT3 had fewer tracks than GT2, and a lot of them were just reverse of a ribbon too.

What a ridiculous point. GT2 was a sequal on the same system.

fixed.

GT3 on the other hand was way smaller than GT2, which was caused by the transition to the next generation. It went from 500 cars to 150.

The fact Turn 10 actually managed to increase the number of cars while transitioning to new hardware, all in the span of two years, is extremely impressive.

agreed.

 

[SteveC]

Vic,

The Demo had damage turned OFF. So although you saw cosmetic damage to the cars nothing actually broke. In the retail version of the game stuff gets damaged when you crash and it has noticable effects on the cars ability to drive or even run.

 

[silhouette]

Wow, did you help develop the game?

I've played the demo, and the physics dont feel realistic under damage, which kinda negates the point of having it in the first place.

One thing about GT2 was that it was a much bigger game than GT1. Forza 2 has a decent number of cars, but a fairly low number of tracks (in the full game).

As for the graphics? Meh. PGR 3 look better, and how old is that game?

There is no damage on demo (except for cosmetic changes).. You should play the actual game to experience the effects of damage on physics of the car.

For the gfx, I spend countless hours on PGR3, and I can easily say that especially the environments look a lot better in Forza2 and cars definitely are not far behind as well.

 

[Vic]

Did you read the post of yours i quoted? You never mentioned GT2.

I don't doubt GT5 will have better graphics, but most games released after the one you're comparing them to have better graphics. That's just the natural progression of things. It's just the principle of the thing. Why make the comparison when you can't prove it. We can say fairly decisively that Game B is better than Game A when it's out, or even when there are video's doing the rounds, GT5 doesn't even have a screenshot to it's name that I am aware of

Anyway I won't say any more on the subject. Lets not turn this into some sort of comparison thread

But PGR3 has better graphics than Forza 2...doh

 

[Vic]

What a ridiculous point. GTA2 was a sequal on the same system.

GT3 on the other hand was way smaller than GT2, which was caused by the transition to the next generation. It went from 500 cars to 150.

The fact Turn 10 actually managed to increase the number of cars while transitioning to new hardware, all in the span of two years, is extremely impressive.

Mrcorbo was the one who first compared GT2 to GT1, and I responded, so you may want to consider that.

For me, the number of cars isnt a problem. Its the number of tracks (or lack thereof). And the lack of development in regards to graphics and physics.

 

[rbushner]

But PGR3 has better graphics than Forza 2

Not at all

FM2 New York > PGR3 New York

Can you stop this now? Pretty please?

 

[bangalter]

Mrcorbo was the one who first compared GT2 to GT1, and I responded, so you may want to consider that.

For me, the number of cars isnt a problem. Its the number of tracks (or lack thereof). And the lack of development in regards to graphics and physics.

The physics for car damage is turned off in the demo, damage is only presented graphically.

 

[scooby_dooby]

For me, the number of cars isnt a problem. Its the number of tracks (or lack thereof). And the lack of development in regards to graphics and physics.

The number of tracks is dissapointing, but the physics are excellent and greatly improved on what was already the most realistic console sim.

Graphics, well they leave a little to be desired, though calling it an up-resed Xbox game is fairly ridiculous.

Saying it looks worse than PGR is a matter of opinion I guess, PGR has some nice tricks it uses, like photo textures, but the ingame car models, reflections, AF and overall crispness of the graphics are all much better in Forza.

And if you want to speak about advancement, you must include things like tuning options, which expand on what was already the best tuning sim in the market, the possibilities are even greater now. As well as online capabilities like the auction house, organized tournaments, website integration with ingame photomode and auctionhouse, and even better AI topping an already excellent system.

The game has pushed many things forward, you just have to look for em, they're not gonna smack you in the face.

 

[scooby_dooby]

The physics for car damage is turned off in the demo, damage is only presented graphically.

Lol...ya you can't judge the damage physics from the demo since it's turned off. So much for that argument!

 

[Paul_G]

But PGR3 has better graphics than Forza 2...doh

The very post above yours disagrees. Clearly it is subjective, but my point was that generally, most games look better than games released earlier. This isn't always true, but it usually is.