• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Forza 3 vs Gran Turismo 5 Comparison Thread of John, Chapter 11, Verse 35

Red Blaster said:
Trolling Forza isn't as fun without community manages declaring they don't do bullshots

I miss you che
on the plus side Che works in 343 now so I do expect him to randomly show up in Killzone 4 and Uncharted threads randomly trolling.



Granted I wasnt around here when Forza 3 was coming out but did Che even post in there? seemed like he spent 90% of his gaf time trolling GT5 before release and a bit after until he got a short ban... then he got a new job and hasnt really been seen since.


No wonder T10's new community manager hasnt come here. its probably a rule in turn 10 to stay away from gaf now.
 
Gek54 said:
In the FM4 demo you can pretty much shake the wheel side to side an inch or so and the car doesnt budge, if you had that much steering slop in a real car it would be in the shop.

Simulation steering with all assists off and automatic (these are my settings) you cannot do that ... at all. Hell, even with the Zonda that grips the best out of the demo cars you'll find yourself playing bumper cars moving like that.



Gek54 said:
Fanatec PWTS lastest firmware, no slop in any other game other than FM3 and FM4. Nothing wrong with my setup.

FM3 had the same problem.

Yeah .. no. GT2 with CSP's and latest firmware with the settings posted in the non-shit thread. I can easily fly out of control with the Ferrari and Zonda and the movement you speak of I don't see you have the deadzone at zero with sim steering.

And what does the firmware matter? What are your settings, SEN and DEA? Sounds like you have settings issues, not game issues.

If you move in a 2" sway like you say I'm all over the road. If there is a deadzone, I don't see it because it's turned off on my wheel.
 

pmj

Member
Gek54 said:
Fanatec PWTS lastest firmware, no slop in any other game other than FM3 and FM4. Nothing wrong with my setup.

FM3 had the same problem.
I just booted Forza 3 up to check and it has zero deadzone. You probably have to tweak the in-game settings in order to get it that way though. My deadzones were all set to off.

Edit: I checked the Forza 4 demo and it has the deadzone you're talking about. The wheel settings are locked in the demo so the deadzone is probably the default setting.
 

chubigans

y'all should be ashamed
Izayoi said:
That and deadzone are two entirely different things. It looks like it responds just fine when he moves the wheel, at least to a certain point (when the assist kicks in).
Ah, my mistake then.
 

Niks

Member
Ill just leave this here...
lucerne-chapelbridge_36kbo.png
 

Yoritomo

Member
Arklite said:
Mostly because this forum is a visual place and pics make an easy and quick comparison, and neither game is deficient in game modes to complain about, and the driving model isn't something that can be easily expressed in order to form a convincing argument for either game. Also, both sides keep bringing up the graphics of GT, from the rain effects to the shadows, to the standard cars. It's actually the best ammo for critics and fans.

But ultimately pointless when it comes to enjoyment of the game.
 

Arklite

Member
Yoritomo said:
But ultimately pointless when it comes to enjoyment of the game.
If visuals were pointless there probably wouldn't be so many people complaining about the inconsistencies in GT.There's definitely something to be gained from accurate visuals when the goal is to deliver something realistic, and when fans expect such efforts.
 

mrfolego

Banned
funkystudent said:
Granted I wasnt around here when Forza 3 was coming out but did Che even post in there? seemed like he spent 90% of his gaf time trolling GT5 before release and a bit after until he got a short ban... then he got a new job and hasnt really been seen since.

No wonder T10's new community manager hasnt come here. its probably a rule in turn 10 to stay away from gaf now.
lol what happened?
 

Yoritomo

Member
Arklite said:
If visuals were pointless there probably wouldn't be so many people complaining about the inconsistencies in GT.There's definitely something to be gained from accurate visuals when the goal is to deliver something realistic, and when fans expect such efforts.

Because people don't actually play the game. They've probably spent more hours analyzing some idiotic pictures on the internet than racing.

Visuals don't make you gold everything in the game, visuals don't keep you playing for 300+ hours.

I would gladly trade visuals for better force feedback, better vehicle dynamics, more accurate handling, better default setups, more accurate tracks, more consistent framerate (60 fps locked), better modelling of any and all control interfaces for the game, etc...
 

Apex

Member
shinnn said:
"more difficult = more sim"

shame PD did the same mistake =\
GT5 is marketed as a simulator, and its physics model is extremely realistic. The behavior of the cars is startlingly faithful to their real-life counterparts, and so they respond accordingly to poor driving and when you miss critical braking and turn-in points. In contrast, Forza is extremely forgiving, and provides a much larger margin of error.

the racing is excellent—credit the finely tuned physics engine and attention paid to individual cars’ handling characteristics—and isn’t that what the game is supposed to deliver?

And so Forza is much more of a game than a hard-core simulator, but for the impatient and those less interested in absolute realism, this is hardly a demerit. Forza may feel slightly less realistic than GT5, but that just means inexperienced players can dive right in

Lapping Laguna in both games supported our conclusion that Gran Turismo 5 is the more challenging of the two, punishing players (especially the less-skilled) with its slavish adherence to real-world physics and handling, and both drivers turned in higher lap times than in Forza. Forza, conversely, made us look like pros, its vehicle-dynamics model allowing for often unrealistic cornering speeds. In Forza, for example, the GTI absolutely refused to exhibit anything resembling bad behavior—you’ll notice our less-experienced player turned the faster lap in the VW—turning in crisply no matter the entry speed, while GT5’s VW faithfully recreated the real car’s penchant for tossability, responding to midcorner throttle lifts with a progressive rotation of the back end and a balanced feel. Cooking into corners with the VW in GT5 also sent us realistically understeering through them.

Forza’s physics engine, however, does not feel as comprehensive, as if it were using the one that was employed in Gran Turismo 3 A-spec or GT4 (10 years or so ago!). The experience, to me, is more of an arcade game; easier to jump in and start playing with less of a learning curve. With the GTI, you simply get somewhere close to your braking marks, turn in, and the car zips around the corner under throttle. GT5’s GTI is far touchier, with the front end washing out more dramatically if you carry too much speed. You must be much more precise and have greater finesse to master GT5. I noticed several corners that were particularly tricky in GT5, yet were surprisingly easy to ace in Forza.

Power oversteer, however, is much easier to manage and thus more entertaining in Forza. The M3 frequently slides around under power, but it was easy to catch and modulate. Again, more arcade-like. GT5, conversely, can get pretty wild if you like to go sideways; the drifting events are the most difficult in the entire game because it’s so easy to get crossed up. You really have to be on top of the car’s behavior and it can get away from you very quickly.

the properly warmed sport tires in Gran Turismo felt about the same as the normal tires in Forza.

Going off track in Forza was less detrimental to vehicle speed and control (less realistic) than in GT5.

Overall, they’re both great driving games. But Forza is the game, while GT5 feels more like an actual simulator, with a steeper learning curve, more opportunities for error, and greater configurability.

Forza is what you play with your friends when hanging out; GT5 is what you attempt to master in solitude—and what makes you end up throwing the controller across the room, because it’s more difficult than it looks.
Car&Driver
 
Yoritomo said:
But ultimately pointless when it comes to enjoyment of the game.
Except that GT5 has the visuals and the driving bliss.

I haven't given Forza 4 a shot yet (LE gets delivered soon), but after diving back into GT5 with the Vettel seasonal its just so damn good. Forza 4 is actually going to have to work at it to win my time and attention. Rivals mode may end up doing it though.

Edit: And on the visuals front, GT5's awesome cockpit view and lighting does add to my experience. I hear Forza 4 has improved things in that area though. Can't wait to see.
 
NullPointer said:
Except that GT5 has the visuals and the driving bliss.

I haven't given Forza 4 a shot yet (LE gets delivered soon), but after diving back into GT5 with the Vettel seasonal its just so damn good. Forza 4 is actually going to have to work at it to win my time and attention. Rivals mode may end up doing it though.

Visuals at times.

I don't know, I really tried to love GT5. I played Forza 3 up until about a couple months before GT5 then completely focused on that game and that game alone for my driving fix. Once it launched the graphical inconsistencies started pushing me away.

I did the exact opposite. I ended up stopping after level 30+ and buying the F1 Ferrari, with golds in all of the first 3 difficulties and going back to Forza 3, unluckily my save got deleted with the install of the UE so I was starting from scratch. But going back to try new seasonals and such in GT5 was just a pain. Some stuff looks so good but when you're in an intense race and the screen tears or the FR drops ... it just took me out. I ended up selling GT5 on Amazon for $35 about 2 weeks ago.

Maybe if this 2.0 patch fixes the games FR and tearing issue I'll pick it up again down the road. But I will take 60 FPS and no tearing any day of the week over either games bullshots. Over weather and night racing also.
 

Yoritomo

Member
Tearing, sub 60 fps gameplay, and last gen models for most of the cars in the game is not "visual bliss". Terrible default car setup on a lot of vehicles, horrible clutch modelling, and forcing on skid recovery force for some events and challenges is not driving bliss.

I don't give a shit about photo mode.
 

Arklite

Member
Yoritomo said:
Because people don't actually play the game. They've probably spent more hours analyzing some idiotic pictures on the internet than racing.

Visuals don't make you gold everything in the game, visuals don't keep you playing for 300+ hours.

I would gladly trade visuals for better force feedback, better vehicle dynamics, more accurate handling, better default setups, more accurate tracks, more consistent framerate (60 fps locked), better modelling of any and all control interfaces for the game, etc...
I think you're confusing my comments as a statement that visuals are the number one factor, which I didn't say. You said they were pointless and I disagreed. The visuals are part of the effort of making a realistic simulation game. Some projects focus their efforts on different areas and visuals were important to Polyphony. Whether that was a gain or a loss is more opinion based. I doubt they ignored the other areas you mentioned, like more accurate handling.
 
Yoritomo said:
Tearing, sub 60 fps gameplay, and last gen models for most of the cars in the game are not "visual bliss". Terrible default car setup on a lot of vehicles and horrible clutch modelling are not driving bliss.

I don't give a shit about photo mode.
I don't give a shit about photo mode either, and I only stick to the premium cars I like, on the tracks that I like. It means I'm not grinding through the career as fast as I could, but it also means my time with the game is almost always satisfying.

GT5 for me is all about driving amazing cars on beautiful tracks. When I have to diverge from that to acquire more cash that's where I sometimes run into problems (weak career and some horrible tracks, not much flexibility in which cars to use, etc.).

And yeah, I do see the tearing and the sometimes frame drops, and those are both things that would usually drive me nuts. I guess I'm willing to forgive it in this game for some reason - maybe its the sense of speed, the lack of jaggies and sweet sweet cockpit view. Like I said though, this is premium cars on the nice tracks. I've got no time for standard cars and weak, ported tracks.
 

Yoritomo

Member
Arklite said:
I think you're confusing my comments as a statement that visuals are the number one factor, which I didn't say. You said they were pointless and I disagreed. The visuals are part of the effort of making a realistic simulation game. Some projects focus their efforts on different areas and visuals were important to Polyphony. Whether that was a gain or a loss is more opinion based. I doubt they ignored the other areas you mentioned, like more accurate handling.

Based on this thread the only factor determining the "superior" game is the visuals... and the photo mode visuals at that.

Awesome. I can tell the biggest racing sim fans are obviously in this thread.
 

Raonak

Banned
Forza is better if you have a 360, GT5 is better if you have a ps3.
if you have both, you flip a coin.

/thread.



GT5 is better



Since i only have a ps3 :)
 

pmj

Member
Apex said:
I don't agree with what I think was shinnn's point, but I'd just like to point out that while more sim typically means higher difficulty, difficulty doesn't necessarily mean it's a better sim. An arcade game can be hard as balls and a sim can be harder than it should be due to something in the simulation that's off.

We need some new comparisons, because the one you posted isn't relevant anymore. Also, note how despite writing at length at the differences, his conclusion was that the differences are "slight".

Yoritomo said:
Based on this thread the only factor determining the "superior" game is the visuals... and the photo mode visuals at that.

Awesome. I can tell the biggest racing sim fans are obviously in this thread.
I'm pretty sure a lot of people on both sides are trolling.

Pretty sure...
 

lowrider007

Licorice-flavoured booze?
Apex said:

Thanks, these are the types of comparisons we need in this thread, rather than graphics battles, I love the feel of Forza but I agree that this in part due to it being a much more forgiving game imo, especially on cornering.
 
pmj said:
I'm pretty sure a lot of people on both sides are trolling.

Pretty sure...
Sucks that this is a troll thread, because its also the only place here you can honestly compare and contrast both games, even if you're not looking to dub a "one true winner". Its all comes down to what you personally value more in a game, and where your sensitivities lie. At least for those of us with both HD consoles we have a choice, or can't choose and get both :)

My friends are split 50/50 between the two games. Some wouldn't give up GT5's driving model for anything in the world, and others are all about custom liveries/marketplace/metagame community stuff in Forza. None of them are wrong.
 

Arklite

Member
Yoritomo said:
Based on this thread the only factor determining the "superior" game is the visuals... and the photo mode visuals at that.

Awesome. I can tell the biggest racing sim fans are obviously in this thread.
The first post I made that you commented to was about that:
Arklite said:
Mostly because this forum is a visual place and pics make an easy and quick comparison, and neither game is deficient in game modes to complain about, and the driving model isn't something that can be easily expressed in order to form a convincing argument for either game. Also, both sides keep bringing up the graphics of GT, from the rain effects to the shadows, to the standard cars. It's actually the best ammo for critics and fans.
Your response was that the visuals were pointless and now we're back here. If you want to talk performance we already know which game has the better framerate and which game sounds better, but proving GT's visual deficiencies seems to be more popular.
 

pmj

Member
NullPointer said:
Sucks that this is a troll thread, because its also the only place here you can honestly compare and contrast both games, even if you're not looking to dub a "one true winner". Its all comes down to what you personally value more in a game, and where your sensitivities lie. At least for those of us with both HD consoles we have a choice, or can't choose and get both :)

My friends are split 50/50 between the two games. Some wouldn't give up GT5's driving model for anything in the world, and others are all about custom liveries/marketplace/metagame community stuff in Forza. None of them are wrong.
Is there really that much to be said on the subject?

Despite being a troll thread, it has made me want to play GT5, something no other thread about the game has managed to do.

I'm not sure why that is, what with the thread being like it is, but I do know that I want to own my own Nürburgring simulator.
 
pmj said:
Is there really that much to be said on the subject?

Despite being a troll thread, it has made me want to play GT5, something no other thread about the game has managed to do.

I'm not sure why that is, what with the thread being like it is, but I do know that I want to own my own Nürburgring simulator.
Well then all is well with the world. If people can truly glean what they want from a thread like this I won't bitch.

And if there is one thing that GT5 excelled at in my eyes, it'd be it's use as a Nurburgring simulator. Worth the asking price alone for that imo. Create your own online lobby (Can't seem to do this in practice or arcade mode for some silly reason) and start the race in the very early morning hours and race through the sunrise. Absolutely brilliant.

Does any other racing sim on the consoles have not only night racing, but actual time transitions?
 

nib95

Banned
Apex said:
Interesting write up. Curious to see if their opinions change much with F4. Though I'm guessing not. Theres an improvement for sure, but still some omissions, though hard to tell with a controller. Only played the demo, but not even using a wheel (my stuff is all in storage till I move in to my new flat), but I still feel like F4 is more accessible or less realistic than GT5. Also feel that suspension and road feedback is not as accurate as GT5's either. Though to F4's credit, the car sounds are more realistic.

Lot of murmurs of forced steering assist in F4, but I also read they're patching it out. They better do, as that was one of the things that made F2 a better game than F3 imo, though you wouldn't know based on reviews etc.

Somewhere along the line, gaming journalism stopped giving merit to the 'sim' part in sim racers. F3 was a step backwards in that respect.
 

Gek54

Junior Member
flyinpiranha said:
Simulation steering with all assists off and automatic (these are my settings) you cannot do that ... at all. Hell, even with the Zonda that grips the best out of the demo cars you'll find yourself playing bumper cars moving like that.





Yeah .. no. GT2 with CSP's and latest firmware with the settings posted in the non-shit thread. I can easily fly out of control with the Ferrari and Zonda and the movement you speak of I don't see you have the deadzone at zero with sim steering.

And what does the firmware matter? What are your settings, SEN and DEA? Sounds like you have settings issues, not game issues.

If you move in a 2" sway like you say I'm all over the road. If there is a deadzone, I don't see it because it's turned off on my wheel.



Here you go, video: Forza 4's deadzone steering slop in the Zonda.


Deadzone setting is zeroed out on my wheel.
 

nib95

Banned
eso76 said:
it is, but using a wheel the difference with fm3 is huge.
I agree, using a wheel with any of the Sims dramatically changes things. Truth be told, I don't really enjoy GT5 or Forza (not nearly as much anyway) without using one.

But some of these wheel prices are rather absurd imo.
 
Didnt I hear something about the Sauber F1 concept being free for download if Vettel becomes champion again? Anyone manage to download it? If true I just might dust off my GT5 for a while.
 
CosmicGroinPull said:
Didnt I hear something about the Sauber F1 concept being free for download if Vettel becomes champion again? Anyone manage to download it? If true I just might dust off my GT5 for a while.
Vettel doesn't drive for Sauber. It's the Redbull X2010 prototype and yes, it's free. There's also a new seasonal that is pretty easy and gets you 5M credits.
 
Yoritomo said:
Tearing, sub 60 fps gameplay, and last gen models for most of the cars in the game is not "visual bliss".

I don't give a shit about photo mode.
They concentrated on the blades of grass but forgot about the field as a whole. Thus the inconsistencies. Definitely not gaming or visual bliss unless you ignore the bad things, but only a fanboy would do that.
 

Snubbers

Member
Apex said:

Whilst I do actually agree that GT5 is much more edgier then FM3, that article has been banded around like some authoritative benchmark on a few forums and after reading it, it doesn't seem to all add up in places..

article said:
In Forza, for example, the GTI absolutely refused to exhibit anything resembling bad behavior—you’ll notice our less-experienced player turned the faster lap in the VW—turning in crisply no matter the entry speed

So I see form the article image they are sat down using a controller, and knowing that the controller is heavily filtered so you can't turn in too fast to induce understeer, then get nothing mentioned about the tyre feel through FFB etc, coupled with the fact, the grip levels contribute massively to how soft the whole car feels, which wasn't picked up on at all..

But the final nail would be
Forza’s physics engine, however, doesn’t feel as comprehensive, as if it were using the one that was employed in Gran Turismo 3 A-spec or GT4 (10 or so years ago!)

Did they use a wheel for FM at all? It really sounds like they didn't.. or it was a faux wheel like the Drive Fx or something..


But I do agree with them on some level, the cars are more forgiving in FM3, that's very much evident, but considering the stuff going on under the hood, it's all seemingly negated by the fact they don't make the cars harder to drive.. it's somewhat improved in FM4 in many many ways, but there feels like it's still too forgiving in FM4 (From my Demo impressions).. But damn, if the Zonda Challenge isn't an absolute massively rewarding and impressive experience..

I prefer the Inside Sim Racing stuff, where they test it using the best equipment and have the experience of the entire sim genre to relate to..
 

Snubbers

Member
SunhiLegend said:

That second gif, what is illuminating the rear of the car as it goes by? is it sunlight filtering through the trees? It looks really good!

I absolutely love the replays of the night/transitions, that is indeed GT's stand out feature for me too.., although I do enjoy the seasonals, I think a few are real peaches..
 

KKRT00

Member
Snubbers said:
That second gif, what is illuminating the rear of the car as it goes by? is it sunlight filtering through the trees? It looks really good!

I absolutely love the replays of the night/transitions, that is indeed GT's stand out feature for me too.., although I do enjoy the seasonals, I think a few are real peaches..
Sun is dawning.

CadetMahoney said:
They concentrated on the blades of grass but forgot about the field as a whole. Thus the inconsistencies. Definitely not gaming or visual bliss unless you ignore the bad things, but only a fanboy would do that.
Both games have inconsistencies like almost every console game. Looking at them in one game and ignoring in others is more unfair than saying that's 'visual bliss' or 'visual benchmark'.
If someone is judging compromises, he needs to get into an account whole technology around it, not just the most bad examples/moments.
 

Angst

Member
Snubbers said:
That second gif, what is illuminating the rear of the car as it goes by? is it sunlight filtering through the trees? But it isn't cast on the track/barriers? Maybe a tiny bug..?

I absolutely love the replays of the night/transitions, that is indeed GT's stand out feature for me too.., although I do enjoy the seasonals, I think a few are real peaches..
Either it's the setting sun or it's one of the barbecue fires along the track. Depends on if it's the 24 hour version or not. It looks a little bright for a barbecue, so I think it's the setting sun.
 

pmj

Member
Gek54 said:
Here you go, video: Forza 4's deadzone steering slop in the Zonda.


Deadzone setting is zeroed out on my wheel.
Did you read my post on the deadzone issue? You may have deadzone at zero on your wheel, but Forza 3 has an advanced wheel settings menu where you can tweak in-game deadzones for both wheel and pedals. Turn them off and they should be completely off. I have a Fanatec wheel as well, and the tiniest nudge will translate into steering input in the game.

The deadzone in the Forza 4 demo is there for me as well. It's probably the default setting, a setting you can't change since there is no options menu in the demo. Someone who has the green disc should be able to clarify whether you can still change this in Forza 4, but it seems overwhelmingly likely to me that this is the case.
 

shinnn

Member
Apex said:

direct_comparison_gti_and_m3_at_laguna_seca2_cd_articlesmall.jpg


G25/G27 vs controller.. in the comments section he said they used a Madcatz wheel.

And again "GT5 more challenging", more difficult, "more opportunities for error". They said the car behavior are equal to real-life counterpart in both games. WRONG. The car behavior in both games are very different in most of the cars. One of them must be wrong. Where's the comparison to real-life? Get the car specs and test. 0~60, 0~100, braking, turns. A lot of GT5 cars is a pain in the ass to drive even in low speed, when they are not like that in real-life.

Some cars are wrong in FM3 too, but not like GT5. I wouldn't buy most of the GT5 cars based in the driving physics in the game.
 

kazinova

Member
shinnn said:
I wouldn't buy most of the GT5 cars based in the driving physics in the game.

Now I want to knoww hat actual experience people have behind a wheel. I'm fairly new to actual high performance driving, but I've got two summers of Autocross time so I'm really familiar with how understeer feels. Are half of the people talking about how "real' either game feels aware of what reality feels like or are they going off of what other people describe.
 
CadetMahoney said:
They concentrated on the blades of grass but forgot about the field as a whole. Thus the inconsistencies. Definitely not gaming or visual bliss unless you ignore the bad things, but only a fanboy would do that.
You clearly haven't done the 24 nurburg event on that game. You can take all standard cars and have that game just jizz all over your face. It is THE BEST recreation of the ring. Best.

EDIT: I hate being at work.. they block a lot of the image hosting sites...

Snubbers said:
I prefer the Inside Sim Racing stuff, where they test it using the best equipment and have the experience of the entire sim genre to relate to..

And they use multiple set ups... but, even they fall for hype... they even admit it for FM3. They later talked about it saying how the physics weren't that great, etc.

kazinova said:
Now I want to knoww hat actual experience people have behind a wheel. I'm fairly new to actual high performance driving, but I've got two summers of Autocross time so I'm really familiar with how understeer feels. Are half of the people talking about how "real' either game feels aware of what reality feels like or are they going off of what other people describe.

I go to IRP (Indy Raceway Park)...well... got changed to ORP....(O'Reily Raceway Park)... to... LORP (Lucas Oil Raceway Park)... anyway... there is a raceway park nearby... also... Indianapolis Motor Speedway is literally 5 minutes from my place, every once in a blue moon there are track days. There are also several amateur road courses around Indiana...
 

Snubbers

Member
phosphor112 said:
And they use multiple set ups... but, even they fall for hype... they even admit it for FM3. They later talked about it saying how the physics weren't that great, etc.

Source ? There are so many video's they do, I remember one after the GT5 review, where the subject of FM3/GT5 physics come up, and admit both games have issues but seem to be sat on the fence (Might have been an FM4 preview), but if there is something more critical of FM3, I'd love to see it.

And I do prefer the FM4 preview, you can tell they want to give the physics more of a go (hopefully patched for 900 degree wheels) before committing, defintely no hype going on there..
 
KKRT00 said:
Both games have inconsistencies like almost every console game. Looking at them in one game and ignoring in others is more unfair than saying that's 'visual bliss' or 'visual benchmark'. If someone is judging compromises, he needs to get into an account whole technology around it, not just the most bad examples/moments.
"Tearing, sub 60 fps gameplay, and last gen models for most of the cars in the game". . . can the same be said of FM3?

Both games have been compared to already on all levels i'm sure. The highs in GT5 are high but the lows are low, this is inconsistent. So you have to reach an overall judgement and the games are fairly compared if you ask me. This leaves us with FM3 being better reviewed than GT5 and FM4 looking even better.
 
Top Bottom