Support NeoGAF

[Three]

The thing is linneman and his digital foundry have been known to fudge comparisons before in favour of PlayStation. He's been called out on this forum a few years back with undeniable evidence if you care to search back for it. It's never discussed though and swept under the rug. I mean this is a man who clearly stated he would be happier if MS never entered the video games market and in fact gamers would be better off for it yet he is judge and jury when it comes to fair unbiased comparisons.

Total joke.

Link and context please. If he was talking about the practices or policies they were trying to bring to PC or even xbox then that would be completely understandable a statement is about context. I don't even know why there is this discussion of the legitimacy of DF. DF was only brought up because a select few here have no respect for other peoples opinions other than their own, trying to group everyone who disagrees with them into some sort of 'crazys' yet their technical understanding is limited to almost nonexistent.

 

[thelastword]

Linneman fudged comparisons in favor of playstation? He hates MS, when he gushed over Gears of War 4 etc...and his company got technical reveal dibs on XBONEX hardware amongst other things....That's rich indeed......and I'm not talking Leadbetter...

In any case, do you guys have any high quality vids to post of Forza 7 or vs vids? Preferably many cars on screen in-game......Keep this on topic...


GTS is really impressive with it's lighting and detail as per the video I posted, we all know that, but it's sound is really much improved this generation, those gear changes, engine whine in cockpit mode and engine roar in chase cam is really impressive. GT7 on PS5 should blow eye+ear sockets out if this is anything to go by....

 

[LostDonkey]

Link and context please. If he was talking about the practices or policies they were trying to bring to PC or even xbox then that would be completely understandable a statement is about context. I don't even know why there is this discussion of the legitimacy of DF. DF was only brought up because a select few here have no respect for other peoples opinions other than their own, trying to group everyone who disagrees with them into some sort of 'crazys' yet their technical understanding is limited to almost nonexistent.

You can search for it yourself. I've not got the time to do it for you. Its a well known fact by now to anyone who's paid attention to these things over the years.

He is definitely not a trustworthy contributor to any kind of comparison involving PlayStation and its competitors.

 

[Three]

You can search for it yourself. I've not got the time to do it for you. Its a well known fact by now to anyone who's paid attention to these things over the years.

He is definitely not a trustworthy contributor to any kind of comparison involving PlayStation and its competitors.

I did a quick search and found nothing hence why I asked. Been on gaf many years and followed Eurogamer/DF even longer.

 

[Turk1993]

 

[LostDonkey]

I did a quick search and found nothing hence why I asked. Been on gaf many years and followed Eurogamer/DF even longer.

If my memory serves me there was one thread questioning whether or not the dream cast was actually more powerful than the PS2 and he's done a few of these comparison threads with the same equipment coincidentally. He was called out for using upscaled emulation shots that were run through some kind of scaler to favour the PS2. There have been plenty of times over the years though, like I said I don't have time to archive and list them all unfortunately but I'm not the only one who knows I'm sure.

 

[Three]

Still given no context to that post but it makes searching easier. If anything it looks like he is replying to someone who thinks he prefers the Xbox. He probably had an opnion piece about the policies or something and said something positive and he is completely free to think that if he can provide the reasons in an opinion e.g. paying to play online etc. Having an opinion doesn't make you some conniving person incapable of impartial analysis.

 

[LostDonkey]

Still given no context to that post but it makes searching easier. If anything it looks like he is replying to someone who thinks he prefers the Xbox. He probably had an opnion piece about the policies or something and said something positive and he is completely free to think that if he can provide the reasons in an opinion e.g. paying to play online etc. Having an opinion doesn't make you some conniving person incapable of impartial analysis.

I mean it kinda does. It automatically sways your opinion from the very start without even partaking in any analysis at all.

The fact he openly admits to not liking MS for whatever his reasons should be taken that he cannot be trusted in any comparison that includes them. Let alone pushed so hard as the final say in any argument involving PlayStation vs Xbox.

There is no way he can ever be neutral and unbiased however much he says he can put it aside.

It's exactly this same reason that they don't let referees who are a fan of a certain football team take charge of a match involving them.

 

[thelastword]

Wow, I don't see eye to eye with Dark-10x on many things, but even I have applauded good analyses from DF, even from Dark10x at times. I just don't appreciate some of the inconsistencies with some of the analyses, they missing obvious details, not testing mulitplats indepth enough and not doing stress tests past the first hour of a game, not provding a larger sample of data for a more accurate aggregate....Yet, I don't see how that statement he made makes him hate XBOX. If anything, I think DF very much loves MS going by their history. Perhaps Dark10x has issues with MS's monopoly, past practices and business style, it's his right to think so, in no way will I say he favored Sony in any video he ever did. Do you not forget all the articles on the balanced XB-ONE hardware from DF, the gushing over Gears from Dark. The number of times Tom Morgan says "XBOX ONE EX, the most powerful console" in any video he does, even videos that have nothing to do with XBONEX and where they have no XBOX copy to test at the time.

It's so strange that DF has been the defender of XBOX for so many years "900p to 1080, the difference is neglible", eh "they're pretty much like for like" and now since XBONEX..... "full fat 4k is all the rage" and yet the time they say GTS looks better, not even with any enthusiasm mind you, you believe they're bias in giving GTS the edge.....This is hilarious. I know for a fact that many Xfans stood by DF all those years, you remember that FF13 faceoff? Don't decry them now.....That's why I said "even DF corroborates", because if DF says GTS looks better, it just means it's unprecedented because their writeups and videos always glossed up MS much more...That's the only reason I put the DF bit in there....

Again, as I said before. The debate on GTS vs Forza 7 was over way before Dark10 did that video, right here on GAF, proper comparisons over at GT planet and Forza Net too. You take all reputable youtube sim racers online and concensus is that GT looks better, even in the video I posted above. DF is just one entity that agrees with what is pretty much fact, from the second you look at the TV screen or see these games side by side in motion....it's clear.

 

[TBiddy]

Again, as I said before. The debate on GTS vs Forza 7 was over way before Dark10 did that video, right here on GAF, proper comparisons over at GT planet and Forza Net too. You take all reputable youtube sim racers online and concensus is that FM looks better, even in the video I posted above. DF is just one entity that agrees with what is pretty much fact, from the second you look at the TV screen or see these games side by side in motion....it's clear.

I think we all agree that FM is a better looking game, yeah.

 

[Bogroll]

I like DF and really enjoy the stuff Dark10x does, but i was a bit shocked when i first got GTS on my Pro, as in basic things he didn't mention that are way worse in GTS compared to FM7. eg vehicle lod pop in is very aggressive, draw distance is lower, rear view draw distance is poor. And yet we know all the short comings of FM 7 in that video we didn't know all the short comings of GTS in the video I suppose we all make mistakes but i can't understand how he failed to see this and yet could see some crowd in the distance has better detail or whatever it was as it's been a long time since i watched the video. Either way i can look past it as i enjoy his work and i know the short comings and positives of both as i own both.

 

[Vtecomega]

I like DF and really enjoy the stuff Dark10x does, but i was a bit shocked when i first got GTS on my Pro, as in basic things he didn't mention that are way worse in GTS compared to FM7. eg vehicle lod pop in is very aggressive, draw distance is lower, rear view draw distance is poor. And yet we know all the short comings of FM 7 in that video we didn't know all the short comings of GTS in the video I suppose we all make mistakes but i can't understand how he failed to see this and yet could see some crowd in the distance has better detail or whatever it was as it's been a long time since i watched the video. Either way i can look past it as i enjoy his work and i know the short comings and positives of both as i own both.

Ive been calling out Dark10x for years for his biased and inconsistent comparisons. His tech analysis are usually way off base and inaccurate and he misses a ton of details. God of war in performance mode is a perfect example of this. He mentioned that there was no visual difference between performance and resolution mode but that is flat out false. Performance mode has ambient occlusion enabled, better reflections, more detail and vegetation and improved LOD. In resolution mode ambient occlusion might as well be disabled, its non existent.

This is just one of many examples why no should take dark10x seriously. Lets not mention is obvious bias towards sony. Hell, one developer attempted to sue him over it.

 

[freefornow]

....................., in no way will I say he favored Sony in any video he ever did. ...................

....it's clear.

Sure is.

 

[Three]

I like DF and really enjoy the stuff Dark10x does, but i was a bit shocked when i first got GTS on my Pro, as in basic things he didn't mention that are way worse in GTS compared to FM7. eg vehicle lod pop in is very aggressive, draw distance is lower, rear view draw distance is poor. And yet we know all the short comings of FM 7 in that video we didn't know all the short comings of GTS in the video I suppose we all make mistakes but i can't understand how he failed to see this and yet could see some crowd in the distance has better detail or whatever it was as it's been a long time since i watched the video. Either way i can look past it as i enjoy his work and i know the short comings and positives of both as i own both.

He mentioned most of the shortcomings on both sides and missed some on both too. He says in the end there is a lot more he can talk about but the video is already long. If people are concerned about impartiality they should be more concerned about this thread because I've not seen many post that aren't so obviously one sided, full of incorrect information and doctored shots. If dark10x entered this thread it actually will be infinitely more impartial than what we have here.

 

[Bogroll]

He mentioned most of the shortcomings on both sides and missed some on both too. He says in the end there is a lot more he can talk about but the video is already long. If people are concerned about impartiality they should be more concerned about this thread because I've not seen many post that aren't so obviously one sided, full of incorrect information and doctored shots. If dark10x entered this thread it actually will be infinitely more impartial than what we have here.

So what are the short comings on F7 that he doesn't mention ? I play on XBX so pretty much same as pc in video. I'm not saying your wrong but it's been a while since i watched video and the things i mentioned are basic things that stick out in a racing game but are well worth mentioning in a racing game face off. Maybe they stood out to me more as i had F7 months before GTS.

 

[Three]

So what are the short comings on F7 that he doesn't mention ? I play on XBX so pretty much same as pc in video. I'm not saying your wrong but it's been a while since i watched video and the things i mentioned are basic things that stick out in a racing game but are well worth mentioning in a racing game face off. Maybe they stood out to me more as i had F7 months before GTS.

The fact that in Forza the interiors have no lighting from othe cars headlights except weirdly the driver, making him look like glowing jesus when a car is behind you whereas in GTS night races headlights light up interiors.



Or the fact that there is no refraction in Forza 7 headlights, Or the model inaccuracies in Forza 7, or the same reflection pop in you see in GTS.

He also failed to mention some GTS shortcomings not mentioned here like the fact that GTS has mostly static models and Forza some moving ones. A person is only human and can miss things but I for one can say 100% that he was more impartial in that video than most the bullshit completely bias shots you're looking at in this thread.

 

[Apex]

So what are the short comings on F7 that he doesn't mention ? I play on XBX so pretty much same as pc in video. I'm not saying your wrong but it's been a while since i watched video and the things i mentioned are basic things that stick out in a racing game but are well worth mentioning in a racing game face off. Maybe they stood out to me more as i had F7 months before GTS.

You should review the video again. It was a very moderate comparison and it shows that he tried to balance each point to counterbalance the result and leave fans of both games happy. Except to the fanboys who are only happy when in a comparison the rival game is crushed by the reviewer...

If he had wanted to make a hard comparison without concessions to FM7, he could have done a whole section talking only about the cockpit view (internal rear view not modeled, rear-view mirrors at 30fps, lack of real-time reflections, bad driver animations and car elements, etc). He could also have analyzed in depth the graphics, lighting and effects of the AI cars, where FM7 would have lose clearly in relation to GTS. He could also have compared the physical interaction of the particles in both games (sparks, gravel, etc) knowing that in FM7 it is very basic or non existent. That's just the first things that comes to my mind, there are other little technical aspects that he could also have reviewed.

 

[Louis Cyphre]

Fortza Horizon 4

When will we have anything on console that can compete with this, an open racing game that looks this good and one that offers a 60fps option?

 

[Turk1993]

You should review the video again. It was a very moderate comparison and it shows that he tried to balance each point to counterbalance the result and leave fans of both games happy. Except to the fanboys who are only happy when in a comparison the rival game is crushed by the reviewer...

If he had wanted to make a hard comparison without concessions to FM7, he could have done a whole section talking only about the cockpit view (internal rear view not modeled, rear-view mirrors at 30fps, lack of real-time reflections, bad driver animations and car elements, etc). He could also have analyzed in depth the graphics, lighting and effects of the AI cars, where FM7 would have lose clearly in relation to GTS. He could also have compared the physical interaction of the particles in both games (sparks, gravel, etc) knowing that in FM7 it is very basic or non existent. That's just the first things that comes to my mind, there are other little technical aspects that he could also have reviewed.

Half of the things you mentioned is not true, keep in mind they compared the pc version and sometimes switch to X version, rear view mirrors are 60fps, relfections are real time and the back of the car is modeled even in 3d person the whole car is modeled because its using lod 0 on pc and X. Because you can't look back doesn't mean that the back is not rendered. But i agree on the particle and animation part. But the problem i have with that article is they compared the car models in photomode where GTS uses higher lod model and better reflection. Plus at night Forza's headlights cast more shadows for more objects, GTS only cast shadows for other cars. Forza 7 also has full 3d grass wich is mostly flat in GTS. They also compared the track textures in photomode where GTS gets 16x AF wich is not the same as in game. they mentioned splitcreen for GTS but not for Forza. They didn't even compare the rain like it was nothing. The ai cars are also more detailed in Forza then in GTS, they have even more polygons then the player model of GTS. But anyway both game looks good and both offer something that the other doesn't offer, and im glad i own both. The comparison could be better and more detailed

He mentioned most of the shortcomings on both sides and missed some on both too. He says in the end there is a lot more he can talk about but the video is already long. If people are concerned about impartiality they should be more concerned about this thread because I've not seen many post that aren't so obviously one sided, full of incorrect information and doctored shots. If dark10x entered this thread it actually will be infinitely more impartial than what we have here.

Still waiting for you to prove that my shots are doctored. Before saying that people here are posting one sided posts you should look in the mirror first. Cuz you dodge posts when you can't show any prove of the things you make up. Prove that my shots are doctored i waited 2 weeks still nothing.
.

 

[Bogroll]

You should review the video again. It was a very moderate comparison and it shows that he tried to balance each point to counterbalance the result and leave fans of both games happy. Except to the fanboys who are only happy when in a comparison the rival game is crushed by the reviewer...

If he had wanted to make a hard comparison without concessions to FM7, he could have done a whole section talking only about the cockpit view (internal rear view not modeled, rear-view mirrors at 30fps, lack of real-time reflections, bad driver animations and car elements, etc). He could also have analyzed in depth the graphics, lighting and effects of the AI cars, where FM7 would have lose clearly in relation to GTS. He could also have compared the physical interaction of the particles in both games (sparks, gravel, etc) knowing that in FM7 it is very basic or non existent. That's just the first things that comes to my mind, there are other little technical aspects that he could also have reviewed.

Didn't he mention particles in head lights and when you go off road and i thought he mentioned real time reflections aren't in F7. Mirrors are 60fps along with rain on the windscreen on the XBX. Can't say iv'e noticed bad driver animations to be honest. I'll have to have a look.

 

[Bogroll]

The fact that in Forza the interiors have no lighting from othe cars headlights except weirdly the driver, making him look like glowing jesus when a car is behind you whereas in GTS night races headlights light up interiors.



Or the fact that there is no refraction in Forza 7 headlights, Or the model inaccuracies in Forza 7, or the same reflection pop in you see in GTS.

He also failed to mention some GTS shortcomings not mentioned here like the fact that GTS has mostly static models and Forza some moving ones. A person is only human and can miss things but I for one can say 100% that he was more impartial in that video than most the bullshit completely bias shots you're looking at in this thread.

Yeah could have mentioned night racing looks a lot better generally on GTS but didn't he say draw distances and lods are about the same when they clearly are not. I'm not knocking the guy it's easy for us to go over it with a microscope for months later and he's got a limited time and has to move on to the next game

 

[ShapeGSX]

Fortza Horizon 4

When will we have anything on console that can compete with this, an open racing game that looks this good and one that offers a 60fps option?

This game is going to be very difficult to beat this generation.

 

[thelastword]

If anything, I think Dark10x was pretty lenient on Forza 7 and it's shortcomings, It's as if he didn't want to anger the X fans too much, so he tried to do a Ubisoft'd comparison. "Didn't want too many debates and stuff" . He asked us to weigh the differences for several aspects of rendering and decide which we prefer, when GTS clearly had superior implementations of foliage, shadows and reflections. He mentioned tire walls in F7, but yet there are so many effects that GT does in the environment that Forza does not or fails to render anything close to the detail or quality of GTS. The only thing F7 wins on is weather by default, only because GT does not have it yet.

 

[LuvOfThaGame]

If anything, I think Dark10x was pretty lenient on Forza 7 and it's shortcomings, It's as if he didn't want to anger the X fans too much, so he tried to do a Ubisoft'd comparison. "Didn't want too many debates and stuff" . He asked us to weigh the differences for several aspects of rendering and decide which we prefer, when GTS clearly had superior implementations of foliage, shadows and reflections. He mentioned tire walls in F7, but yet there are so many effects that's GT does in the environment that Forza does not or fails to render anything close to the detail or quality of GTS. The only thing F7 wins on is weather by default, only because GT does not have it yet.

Been plenty of shots posted that proves you're wrong. Enough with the bullshit, already.

 

[BigLee74]

He asked us to weigh the differences for several aspects of rendering and decide which we prefer, when GTS clearly had superior implementations of foliage, shadows and reflections.

You say 'clearly' as if fact. You have such a high opinion of yourself and Sony it beggars belief. Such a wind-up merchant.

IMO, I'll give GTS foliage (although neither are great looking to be fair). But the pixelated shadows and reflections looked horrendous, so I award those categories to F7. *applause*

 

[Bogroll]

You say 'clearly' as if fact. You have such a high opinion of yourself and Sony it beggars belief. Such a wind-up merchant.

IMO, I'll give GTS foliage (although neither are great looking to be fair). But the pixelated shadows and reflections looked horrendous, so I award those categories to F7. *applause*

People try and have a genuine discussion about the differences and he just keeps turning up with the same shit and bad attitude and drags the thread down. I'm going to try and keep out of here until Forza Horizon 4 or some other racing games turns up.

 

[GTR R35_Supra RZ]

Been plenty of shots posted that proves you're wrong. Enough with the bullshit, already.

Leave em alone, this obsessively delusional manchild fanatic will never admit to anything Microsoft aka Scorpio the most powerful console on the planet..he just can't deal with it..at this point, he's a laughing stock.

 

[TheAdmiester]

People try and have a genuine discussion about the differences and he just keeps turning up with the same shit and bad attitude and drags the thread down. I'm going to try and keep out of here until Forza Horizon 4 or some other racing games turns up.

You say that but FH4 is exactly what will cause a surge in his activity.

 

[BigLee74]

He's been suspiciously quiet concerning all the latest Forza horizon 4 reveals. Looking forward to his guaranteed in-depth mocking and put-downs more than the game itself!

 

[Louis Cyphre]

You say that but FH4 is exactly what will cause a surge in his activity.

He's looking for that one area that has a frame rate drop or a tree in the middle of nowhere that has one less branch than the others.

There's at least 10 good racing games out there if you include the PC yet his only concern is always PlayStation versus Xbox even though it appears he holds no interest in Xbox.

 

[Three]

Still waiting for you to prove that my shots are doctored. Before saying that people here are posting one sided posts you should look in the mirror first. Cuz you dodge posts when you can't show any prove of the things you make up. Prove that my shots are doctored i waited 2 weeks still nothing.
.

You seem to be confusing not engaging in conversation with you as dodging posts because doing so is about as fun as banging my head against the wall so I took the mod advice of mostly ignoring you. I've already showed you were your comparisons are doctored several times. Point me to where I made up things. In comparison you've said about a million things that are factually incorrect in this thread I've just never actually engaged in conversation because you always misconstrue the argument and deflect to your GTS shitting so what's the point?

 

[Turk1993]

You seem to be confusing not engaging in conversation with you as dodging posts because doing so is about as fun as banging my head against the wall so I took the mod advice of mostly ignoring you. I've already showed you were your comparisons are doctored several times. Point me to where I made up things. In comparison you've said about a million things that are factually incorrect in this thread I've just never actually engaged in conversation because you always misconstrue the argument and deflect to your GTS shitting so what's the point?

Stop lying and talking shit, show me whats doctored. you didn't point anything, all my gameplay shots are directly from the console without editing. Also funny the way you ignore me will still diggin shots at me with your bullshit like doctored shots argument. I pointed both strengths and weaknesses of both games, but you just coulnd't accept the truth and start throwing incorrect claims like in game car models, shadows and textures been better in GTS. Funny that you never say anything postive about Forza but always show its weaknes will i gave both credit in what they do good. Also if you want to bang your head against a wall, feel free to do it. Maybe it will help you to be more neutral when comparing both games instead of making claims that you can't back up.

 

[Mattyp]

This game is going to be very difficult to beat this generation.

How would it ever get beaten this generation when Poly wont get another game out the door until 2024

 

[Louis Cyphre]

How would it ever get beaten this generation when Poly wont get another game out the door until 2024

That's not that far away, they must have hired more people. Joking aside I can't wait to see what they can do on the PS5.

 

[Three]

Stop lying and talking shit, show me whats doctored. you didn't point anything, all my gameplay shots are directly from the console without editing. Also funny the way you ignore me will still diggin shots at me with your bullshit like doctored shots argument.

What am I lying or talking shit about, tell me? That dig wasn't aimed solely at you but you are a big part of the problem and you keep trying to provoke a reply by quoting me. I don't mean edited in photoshop after you've taken the shot I mean you not providing like for like shots. They were doctored in a way to provide a bad picture of one game and a good one of another by being selective about where you take the shots and how you take the shots in a manner that isn't the same for both games. I asked you to provide context to your pics and take more like for like shots to disprove a point in a civilised discussion instead of what you do now by just attacking everyones character. I gave you this advice because I think you troll a lot and had a bunch of your pics deleted by a mod

MODERATION NOTE:
To Turk as well as everyone else contributing to the thread. Please "contextualize" the comparisons by pointing out what you are trying to demonstrate. Don't spam the thread with too many images just stick to the ones that better exemplifies your case.

Turk1993 reason why images were deleted in the post is so you can edit this post and the other ones with the above linings into consideration. So please re evaluate your post. Thank you.
Edit: delete

MODERATION NOTE: Contribution is appreacited but please redit the posts with the suggestions made to make the thread more easy to read. Please edit this one as well.

Edit: delete

MODERATION NOTE: Please edit this one also.
Edit: delete

yet you spammed the EXACT same images from a few pages back on this page, not refuting anything and not making a point again. You were lucky you didn't get yet another mod warning.
you missed the point of my post completely though and turned it into yet another "GTS photomode lol" shitting post with incorrect information again (the headlights do have the rainbow effect) in gameplay and photomode.

You don't zoom in on your forza shots either when there is some low poly section or texture, I mentioned this to you. You tried to get as much reflection in your shot as you can when shaders for Forza were brought into question, I mentioned this to you. You use framerate mode to make sure the images posted are jaggy as hell and less visible in motion, I mentioned this to you. Your continuous use of time trial mode even when somebody mentioned to you that trackside becomes empty because it's not a racing event (which you incorrectly refuted as being the same). You use sunny condition tracks because it highlights specular aliasing in your jaggy GT shots but not your downsampled PC shots, it also helps because Forza doesn't get low light tracks right. These were how it was doctored. You aimed to provide unflattering shots for one and the best shots for the other. These games have the same tracks and the same cars it should be very very easy for you to provide extremely like for like shots and make a valid point but you refute others with deflection, nonsense and doctored shots designed to discredit the graphics of even photomode instead of actually making a point.

The fact that you even use shots only instead of video has a reason too. To only highlight IQ above all else (no issue with FH4 gifs and videos though go figure). You say it's because videos have compression but that compression will only remove detail that at worse would make them identical to the other video not worse but it's the fact that a material model is more than just a diffuse map in a still. it needs to look real in a scene. you can make materials that are basic diffuse maps look good in stills (which is all scapes backgrounds are too) but completely physically unreal when moving around a scene. For that you need things like normal maps, specular maps, refraction, cubemaps

I pointed both strengths and weaknesses of both games, but you just coulnd't accept the truth and start throwing incorrect claims like in game car models, shadows and textures been better in GTS. Funny that you never say anything postive about Forza but always show its weakness will i gave both credit in what they do good. Also if you want to bang your head against a wall, feel free to do it. Maybe it will help you to be more neutral when comparing both games instead of making claims that you can't back up.

This is where we have a problem that you really need to put aside. You call it 'a claim' and your opinion as 'truth'. I've said positive things about forza, even just a few posts up about how it has dynamic models but again you're oblivious to what I'm saying. I consciously made the decision not to shit on Forza the way you do GTS even when there were numerous opportunities to do so in the type of 'retaliation' posts you mostly make when somebody shares an opinion about something bad-looking in forza. Somebody asked for what DF missed about the shortcomings of Forza and that is what I provided and I even made a comment about an advantage of Forza that was missed. I only showed you the material modelling to defend an opinion of mine which you keep pretending is crazy but you impolitely seem to think your opinion is gospel truth and that anybody who disagrees with you is a salty fanboy, or DF are some biased outlet out there to shit on Forza so we end up with the character assassination going on here instead of discussing anything factual. For reference at the sort of materials DF were seeing (the car) go to this post (https://www.neogaf.com/threads/next...ns-current-gen.823807/page-231#post-251003726)

i did not make "incorrect claims" it's only you doing this at every turn. Why do you keep pretending I made an incorrect claim? The only incorrect claim I made was in the fact that I thought a rendered shot improves LOD but you've made even worse ones. I stated an opinion that the models and materials look better in gameplay in GTS and backed up that opinion with a simple demonstration that the material work and models in forza are higher res and higher poly and every other scaleble thing that comes with PC included (draw distance, AF, AA etc) but the texture work in the game is sloppy and it ends up looking worse than GTS. I provide you with a simple shot and demonstrated my point with a very like for like shot.

and you deflect 'that's photomode, a vender supplied that texture'. Now answer this does that texture get better in gameplay in forza? The answer is it doesn't. Does the texture on the right get worse in gameplay? The answer is no it doesn't. Only the interior is replaced with the interior view textures and the model details go up (polycount and engines/levers). Does the fact that it's a supplied vender texture matter? no it doesn't. At that point I say Ok we can agree to disagree and it's fine if you disagree. You offer to provide more shots I decline because I have the games and have this opinion and point out I don't want to get into a pissing contest. You suggest I need to get my eyes checked provide 'proof' of bad 'gameplay' textures except you say "I will use photomode to help GT lol" and provide shots of textures that DO NOT REALLY DIFFER between gameplay and photomode, why pretend to be helping GT with the use of photomode? To shit on photomode too of course. Using photomode wasn't to help GT it was your only way of shitting on it by zooming in on those low res textures as if you have refuted the fact that textures look worse in gameplay "by even using photomode". you provided these shots
Real:

GTS

Forza

I wasn't born yesterday mate I can clearly see what you're doing there with your shots so the question is why? you went low to get as much specular reflection from the low res normal map, you didn't zoom in on the section you were demonstrating on the Forza shot because that section of the car is not only incorrectly modelled but it is low poly too and has no normal map (meaning it doesn't react to light reflections correctly). When somebody else mentions that the the GT one is better textured you incorrectly state it doesn't have any more textures (Forza has a single opacity map there, GT has opacity map + normal map). Bizarrely trolling you make the other incorrect claim that the forza texture is even higher res than scapes mode model, I mean wtf. You have purposely tried to aim the camera in a way that makes the normal map look bad (aiming for direct reflection of the sun lightsource) you intentionally tried to hide what makes forza look bad by not providing the exact same shot.
If you really wanted to use photomode to "help" GTS the first thing you would do is provide a better like for like shot to Forza even if say you couldn't zoom in properly on that one shot

something akin to:

If you really wanted to help GTS you would be more impartial in the way you provide shots. Then you can discuss factually what the difference between them are opinion or otherwise while respecting other peoples opinions. eg Forza less aliasing/Higher res, GTS higher poly model (photomode improved), GTS more model detail (spoiler arm modelled, photomode improved), and so on.

Why do you pretend photomode looks shit with these doctored shots every time with "lol photomode", "this is even photomode", etc? It's clear you're only using photomode as a tool to try and make the game look shit. In photomode the difference isn't that big when directly compared to gameplay mode at gameplay distance and it is in fact IDENTICAL in the exterior materials you and I have discussed the only massive difference is the interiors.

So the question is why the hatred for photo mode? Is it because it's better than Forzas one? why wouldn't you want your models to be higher poly and more detailed even more so than on a PC when choosing to look at the models? The fact that you try and shit on it is clear to me. Then we get the concern trolling too 'criticise visuals so visuals get better' how does it get better? if anything they have put effort to use every bit of power available to them by improving the visuals when they are free from other GPU compute tasks when you look at the model. to the point where it is higher poly and more detailed than PC counterparts. If anything Forza can have visual improvements because the part that needs improving is in the way textures are placed on the models, what textures are placed and they aren't using the full power of your PC in any way.

I know me saying all this is just me pissing in the wind though and you won't engage in any kind of civil discussion I don't engage with you for that simple fact and you keep provoking with some trolling and your claims of incorrect claims and everyone being 'salty fanboys'. Your information is often wrong and intentionally unreliable though and I steer clear from it because all it does is eat time and I don't get anywhere meaningful or any information that's useful from you.

 

[Turk1993]

What am I lying or talking shit about, tell me? That dig wasn't aimed solely at you but you are a big part of the problem and you keep trying to provoke a reply by quoting me. I don't mean edited in photoshop after you've taken the shot I mean you not providing like for like shots. They were doctored in a way to provide a bad picture of one game and a good one of another by being selective about where you take the shots and how you take the shots in a manner that isn't the same for both games. I asked you to provide context to your pics and take more like for like shots to disprove a point in a civilised discussion instead of what you do now by just attacking everyones character. I gave you this advice because I think you troll a lot and had a bunch of your pics deleted by a mod





yet you spammed the EXACT same images from a few pages back on this page, not refuting anything and not making a point again. You were lucky you didn't get yet another mod warning.
you missed the point of my post completely though and turned it into yet another "GTS photomode lol" shitting post with incorrect information again (the headlights do have the rainbow effect) in gameplay and photomode.

You don't zoom in on your forza shots either when there is some low poly section or texture, I mentioned this to you. You tried to get as much reflection in your shot as you can when shaders for Forza were brought into question, I mentioned this to you. You use framerate mode to make sure the images posted are jaggy as hell and less visible in motion, I mentioned this to you. Your continuous use of time trial mode even when somebody mentioned to you that trackside becomes empty because it's not a racing event (which you incorrectly refuted as being the same). You use sunny condition tracks because it highlights specular aliasing in your jaggy GT shots but not your downsampled PC shots, it also helps because Forza doesn't get low light tracks right. These were how it was doctored. You aimed to provide unflattering shots for one and the best shots for the other. These games have the same tracks and the same cars it should be very very easy for you to provide extremely like for like shots and make a valid point but you refute others with deflection, nonsense and doctored shots designed to discredit the graphics of even photomode instead of actually making a point.

The fact that you even use shots only instead of video has a reason too. To only highlight IQ above all else (no issue with FH4 gifs and videos though go figure). You say it's because videos have compression but that compression will only remove detail that at worse would make them identical to the other video not worse but it's the fact that a material model is more than just a diffuse map in a still. it needs to look real in a scene. you can make materials that are basic diffuse maps look good in stills (which is all scapes backgrounds are too) but completely physically unreal when moving around a scene. For that you need things like normal maps, specular maps, refraction, cubemaps



This is where we have a problem that you really need to put aside. You call it 'a claim' and your opinion as 'truth'. I've said positive things about forza, even just a few posts up about how it has dynamic models but again you're oblivious to what I'm saying. I consciously made the decision not to shit on Forza the way you do GTS even when there were numerous opportunities to do so in the type of 'retaliation' posts you mostly make when somebody shares an opinion about something bad-looking in forza. Somebody asked for what DF missed about the shortcomings of Forza and that is what I provided and I even made a comment about an advantage of Forza that was missed. I only showed you the material modelling to defend an opinion of mine which you keep pretending is crazy but you impolitely seem to think your opinion is gospel truth and that anybody who disagrees with you is a salty fanboy, or DF are some biased outlet out there to shit on Forza so we end up with the character assassination going on here instead of discussing anything factual. For reference at the sort of materials DF were seeing (the car) go to this post (https://www.neogaf.com/threads/next...ns-current-gen.823807/page-231#post-251003726)

i did not make "incorrect claims" it's only you doing this at every turn. Why do you keep pretending I made an incorrect claim? The only incorrect claim I made was in the fact that I thought a rendered shot improves LOD but you've made even worse ones. I stated an opinion that the models and materials look better in gameplay in GTS and backed up that opinion with a simple demonstration that the material work and models in forza are higher res and higher poly and every other scaleble thing that comes with PC included (draw distance, AF, AA etc) but the texture work in the game is sloppy and it ends up looking worse than GTS. I provide you with a simple shot and demonstrated my point with a very like for like shot.


and you deflect 'that's photomode, a vender supplied that texture'. Now answer this does that texture get better in gameplay in forza? The answer is it doesn't. Does the texture on the right get worse in gameplay? The answer is no it doesn't. Only the interior is replaced with the interior view textures and the model details go up (polycount and engines/levers). Does the fact that it's a supplied vender texture matter? no it doesn't. At that point I say Ok we can agree to disagree and it's fine if you disagree. You offer to provide more shots I decline because I have the games and have this opinion and point out I don't want to get into a pissing contest. You suggest I need to get my eyes checked provide 'proof' of bad 'gameplay' textures except you say "I will use photomode to help GT lol" and provide shots of textures that DO NOT REALLY DIFFER between gameplay and photomode, why pretend to be helping GT with the use of photomode? To shit on photomode too of course. Using photomode wasn't to help GT it was your only way of shitting on it by zooming in on those low res textures as if you have refuted the fact that textures look worse in gameplay "by even using photomode". you provided these shots
Real:

GTS

Forza

I wasn't born yesterday mate I can clearly see what you're doing there with your shots so the question is why? you went low to get as much specular reflection from the low res normal map, you didn't zoom in on the section you were demonstrating on the Forza shot because that section of the car is not only incorrectly modelled but it is low poly too and has no normal map (meaning it doesn't react to light reflections correctly). When somebody else mentions that the the GT one is better textured you incorrectly state it doesn't have any more textures (Forza has a single opacity map there, GT has opacity map + normal map). Bizarrely trolling you make the other incorrect claim that the forza texture is even higher res than scapes mode model, I mean wtf. You have purposely tried to aim the camera in a way that makes the normal map look bad (aiming for direct reflection of the sun lightsource) you intentionally tried to hide what makes forza look bad but not providing the exact same shot.
If you really wanted to use photomode to "help" GTS the first thing you would do is provide a better like for like shot to Forza even if say you couldn't zoom in properly on that one shot

something akin to:

If you really wanted to help GTS you would be more impartial in the way you provide shots. Then you can discuss factually what the difference between them are opinion or otherwise while respecting other peoples opinions. eg Forza less aliasing/Higher res, GTS higher poly model (photomode improved), GTS more model detail (spoiler arm modelled, photomode improved), and so on.

Why do you pretend photomode looks shit with these doctored shots every time with "lol photomode", "this is even photomode", etc? It's clear you're only using photomode as a tool to try and make the game look shit. In photomode the difference isn't that big when directly compared to gameplay mode at gameplay distance and it is in fact IDENTICAL in the exterior materials you and I have discussed the only massive difference is the interiors.

So the question is why the hatred for photo mode? Is it because it's better than Forzas one? why wouldn't you want your models to be higher poly and more detailed even more so than on a PC when choosing to look at the models? The fact that you try and shit on it is clear to me. Then we get the concern trolling too 'criticise visuals so visuals get better' how does it get better? if anything they have put effort to use every bit of power available to them by improving the visuals when they are free from other GPU compute tasks when you look at the model. to the point where it is higher poly and more detailed than PC counterparts. If anything Forza can have visual improvements because the part that needs improving is in the way textures are placed on the models, what textures are placed and they aren't using the full power of your PC in any way.

I know me saying all this is just me pissing in the wind though and you won't engage in any kind of civil discussion I don't engage with you for that simple fact and you keep provoking with some trolling and your claims of incorrect claims and everyone being 'salty fanboys'. Your information is often wrong and intentionally unreliable though and I steer clear from it even though it because all it does is eat time and I don't get anywhere meaningful or any information that's useful.

First lets start with the first picture, its still has 1 lighting point instead of 2 like the trailer. Now keep posting dark photos in shadowy area to hide the detail, why not sunny setting where you can see everything clear or why is the rear of the car in a shadow area. Why hide the detail and the grill? Why are you still acting like the difference between photomode and gameplay is small? Why did you not see my gameplay comparisons of the car in both games with the same lighting? Why do you think there is no 360 camera in GTS? Why can't you read when i clearly told that the lighting and shaders where better in GTS? Why do you still believe that GTS has better texture when its showing clearly that textures on tracks and cars are much higher quality in Forza then in GTS. You wanna see the real difference between gameplay and photomode? here have a look, look at the car model, environment, reflections and draw distance.
Gameplay(1800P mode) look at the interior and exterior of the car, look at the road in the back and look at the relfection of the water.

Photomode(not rendered)

Gameplay(1800P mode) look at the house on top left, look at the road on top of the hill and look at the yellow braking point poles next to the coins.

Photomode(not rendered)

Gameplay(1800P mode) look at the difference in polygons between the 2 models.

Photomode(not rendered)

Gameplay(1800P mode) look at the engine of the car and polygon of the body, look at the reflection of the water and look at the amount of the grass right next to the car between the 2 flowers.

Photomode(not rendered)

Thats the reason you don't compare in photomode, because the game looks nothing like it in gameplay. And if you render the shots the shadows, texture filtering and iq gets a massive boost wich at that point is just a bullshot. And all the GTS shots are 4K will Forza shots are 1080p. Funny thing is you where crying when you saw a Forzavista shot of mine where i compared with a real car, and now you say that its ok to compare in photomode. You see how hypocritical you sound? You do everything to make GTS look good, while i just post some gameplay shots to show strenghts and weaknes of both games. And the reason why i used the photomode for that Ferrari was because you said that textures where better in GTS then in Forza and you used photomode picture to show it thats why. And the reasons i call you a troll is you call all my shots cherry picked and doctored will i am the one that post comparisons of gameplay shots of both games in similar setting. And you can't fool me with that explanation of what doctored means, we both know what you meant. You said cherry picked and doctored wich the later you mean photoshopping or altering the pictures.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

What am I lying or talking shit about, tell me? That dig wasn't aimed solely at you but you are a big part of the problem and you keep trying to provoke a reply by quoting me. I don't mean edited in photoshop after you've taken the shot I mean you not providing like for like shots. They were doctored in a way to provide a bad picture of one game and a good one of another by being selective about where you take the shots and how you take the shots in a manner that isn't the same for both games. I asked you to provide context to your pics and take more like for like shots to disprove a point in a civilised discussion instead of what you do now by just attacking everyones character. I gave you this advice because I think you troll a lot and had a bunch of your pics deleted by a mod





yet you spammed the EXACT same images from a few pages back on this page, not refuting anything and not making a point again. You were lucky you didn't get yet another mod warning.
you missed the point of my post completely though and turned it into yet another "GTS photomode lol" shitting post with incorrect information again (the headlights do have the rainbow effect) in gameplay and photomode.

You don't zoom in on your forza shots either when there is some low poly section or texture, I mentioned this to you. You tried to get as much reflection in your shot as you can when shaders for Forza were brought into question, I mentioned this to you. You use framerate mode to make sure the images posted are jaggy as hell and less visible in motion, I mentioned this to you. Your continuous use of time trial mode even when somebody mentioned to you that trackside becomes empty because it's not a racing event (which you incorrectly refuted as being the same). You use sunny condition tracks because it highlights specular aliasing in your jaggy GT shots but not your downsampled PC shots, it also helps because Forza doesn't get low light tracks right. These were how it was doctored. You aimed to provide unflattering shots for one and the best shots for the other. These games have the same tracks and the same cars it should be very very easy for you to provide extremely like for like shots and make a valid point but you refute others with deflection, nonsense and doctored shots designed to discredit the graphics of even photomode instead of actually making a point.

The fact that you even use shots only instead of video has a reason too. To only highlight IQ above all else (no issue with FH4 gifs and videos though go figure). You say it's because videos have compression but that compression will only remove detail that at worse would make them identical to the other video not worse but it's the fact that a material model is more than just a diffuse map in a still. it needs to look real in a scene. you can make materials that are basic diffuse maps look good in stills (which is all scapes backgrounds are too) but completely physically unreal when moving around a scene. For that you need things like normal maps, specular maps, refraction, cubemaps



This is where we have a problem that you really need to put aside. You call it 'a claim' and your opinion as 'truth'. I've said positive things about forza, even just a few posts up about how it has dynamic models but again you're oblivious to what I'm saying. I consciously made the decision not to shit on Forza the way you do GTS even when there were numerous opportunities to do so in the type of 'retaliation' posts you mostly make when somebody shares an opinion about something bad-looking in forza. Somebody asked for what DF missed about the shortcomings of Forza and that is what I provided and I even made a comment about an advantage of Forza that was missed. I only showed you the material modelling to defend an opinion of mine which you keep pretending is crazy but you impolitely seem to think your opinion is gospel truth and that anybody who disagrees with you is a salty fanboy, or DF are some biased outlet out there to shit on Forza so we end up with the character assassination going on here instead of discussing anything factual. For reference at the sort of materials DF were seeing (the car) go to this post (https://www.neogaf.com/threads/next...ns-current-gen.823807/page-231#post-251003726)

i did not make "incorrect claims" it's only you doing this at every turn. Why do you keep pretending I made an incorrect claim? The only incorrect claim I made was in the fact that I thought a rendered shot improves LOD but you've made even worse ones. I stated an opinion that the models and materials look better in gameplay in GTS and backed up that opinion with a simple demonstration that the material work and models in forza are higher res and higher poly and every other scaleble thing that comes with PC included (draw distance, AF, AA etc) but the texture work in the game is sloppy and it ends up looking worse than GTS. I provide you with a simple shot and demonstrated my point with a very like for like shot.


and you deflect 'that's photomode, a vender supplied that texture'. Now answer this does that texture get better in gameplay in forza? The answer is it doesn't. Does the texture on the right get worse in gameplay? The answer is no it doesn't. Only the interior is replaced with the interior view textures and the model details go up (polycount and engines/levers). Does the fact that it's a supplied vender texture matter? no it doesn't. At that point I say Ok we can agree to disagree and it's fine if you disagree. You offer to provide more shots I decline because I have the games and have this opinion and point out I don't want to get into a pissing contest. You suggest I need to get my eyes checked provide 'proof' of bad 'gameplay' textures except you say "I will use photomode to help GT lol" and provide shots of textures that DO NOT REALLY DIFFER between gameplay and photomode, why pretend to be helping GT with the use of photomode? To shit on photomode too of course. Using photomode wasn't to help GT it was your only way of shitting on it by zooming in on those low res textures as if you have refuted the fact that textures look worse in gameplay "by even using photomode". you provided these shots
Real:

GTS

Forza

I wasn't born yesterday mate I can clearly see what you're doing there with your shots so the question is why? you went low to get as much specular reflection from the low res normal map, you didn't zoom in on the section you were demonstrating on the Forza shot because that section of the car is not only incorrectly modelled but it is low poly too and has no normal map (meaning it doesn't react to light reflections correctly). When somebody else mentions that the the GT one is better textured you incorrectly state it doesn't have any more textures (Forza has a single opacity map there, GT has opacity map + normal map). Bizarrely trolling you make the other incorrect claim that the forza texture is even higher res than scapes mode model, I mean wtf. You have purposely tried to aim the camera in a way that makes the normal map look bad (aiming for direct reflection of the sun lightsource) you intentionally tried to hide what makes forza look bad by not providing the exact same shot.
If you really wanted to use photomode to "help" GTS the first thing you would do is provide a better like for like shot to Forza even if say you couldn't zoom in properly on that one shot

something akin to:

If you really wanted to help GTS you would be more impartial in the way you provide shots. Then you can discuss factually what the difference between them are opinion or otherwise while respecting other peoples opinions. eg Forza less aliasing/Higher res, GTS higher poly model (photomode improved), GTS more model detail (spoiler arm modelled, photomode improved), and so on.

Why do you pretend photomode looks shit with these doctored shots every time with "lol photomode", "this is even photomode", etc? It's clear you're only using photomode as a tool to try and make the game look shit. In photomode the difference isn't that big when directly compared to gameplay mode at gameplay distance and it is in fact IDENTICAL in the exterior materials you and I have discussed the only massive difference is the interiors.

So the question is why the hatred for photo mode? Is it because it's better than Forzas one? why wouldn't you want your models to be higher poly and more detailed even more so than on a PC when choosing to look at the models? The fact that you try and shit on it is clear to me. Then we get the concern trolling too 'criticise visuals so visuals get better' how does it get better? if anything they have put effort to use every bit of power available to them by improving the visuals when they are free from other GPU compute tasks when you look at the model. to the point where it is higher poly and more detailed than PC counterparts. If anything Forza can have visual improvements because the part that needs improving is in the way textures are placed on the models, what textures are placed and they aren't using the full power of your PC in any way.

I know me saying all this is just me pissing in the wind though and you won't engage in any kind of civil discussion I don't engage with you for that simple fact and you keep provoking with some trolling and your claims of incorrect claims and everyone being 'salty fanboys'. Your information is often wrong and intentionally unreliable though and I steer clear from it because all it does is eat time and I don't get anywhere meaningful or any information that's useful from you.

Yoooooooo. It’s a game. Entertainment. Pixels that you move around with an input device.

 

[LostDonkey]

I don't know how many times it has to be shown that GTS is not the same in gameplay as it is in photomode.

These photomode bullshots that you all keep banding around should be thrown out now. Enough is enough. It is just not representative of the actual game at all.

 

[Vtecomega]

Forza has better IQ and texture resolution but horrid flat lighting model.

Gt sport has better lighting model, colour accuracy and overall tech but horrid IQ/AA that drags the visuals down.

End of discussion.

 

[Vlightray]

I really hope we can get some sort of update to the lighting engine in Forza 7 since they seem to be focusing on fixing it up. Especially having some more sunshine very gloomy game.

 

[Three]

Thats the reason you don't compare in photomode, because the game looks nothing like it in gameplay. And if you render the shots the shadows, texture filtering and iq gets a massive boost wich at that point is just a bullshot. And all the GTS shots are 4K will Forza shots are 1080p. Funny thing is you where crying when you saw a Forzavista shot of mine where i compared with a real car, and now you say that its ok to compare in photomode. You see how hypocritical you sound? You do everything to make GTS look good, while i just post some gameplay shots to show strenghts and weaknes of both games. And the reason why i used the photomode for that Ferrari was because you said that textures where better in GTS then in Forza and you used photomode picture to show it thats why. And the reasons i call you a troll is you call all my shots cherry picked and doctored will i am the one that post comparisons of gameplay shots of both games in similar setting. And you can't fool me with that explanation of what doctored means, we both know what you meant. You said cherry picked and doctored wich the later you mean photoshopping or altering the pictures.

You've misconstrued the point again when did I say we should be comparing things on photomode? I didn't in any way suggest doing that I said why are you constantly using photomode as a scape goat for elements being discussed that don't actually CHANGE in photomode when having a discussion. Why do you suggest photomode is some kind of game disadvantage and constantly try and discredit it? I'm not talking about a house on a hill somewhere since i never brought that up, show me where photomode considerably improves the thing I was showing you on the model outside of what I already mentioned to you (polycount and interior textures, engine/levers and you provided additional shots for) because you keep saying I made incorrect claims. In any case even if irrelevant to any point I made that is some nice info there at least about photomode so thanks. Another misconstrued point is that 'I cried' when you used forzavista. I didn't cry when you used forzavista I said it's funny how forzavista shots are posted like it's nothing while the same person raises such a stink only 2-3 posts before about how there should be no photomode images posted since they're basically all lies and misrepresentation and so are videos and gifs except of course when it's their racer of choice. Don't constantly come up with a strawman to my points.

And you can't fool me with that explanation of what doctored means, we both know what you meant. You said cherry picked and doctored wich the later you mean photoshopping or altering the pictures.

Cherry picking would be choosing conditions optimal for one game yet providing the same like for like images in a comparison, doctoring is when you alter that comparison/result by moving around and framing things differently so as to not provide like for like shots so that a factual discussion could be had that's all that's meant in the difference between the two. Doctoring would be things like setting framerate mode for your stills or picking time trail mode. Cherry picking and doctoring results are different. One is a comparison that is picked because it's favourable to one but at least a reliable result in that it compares like for like the other is where the result of what you are even comparing is being altered. There is no reason to suggest I'm lying and meant something I didn't, even after I've clarified. You're just needlessly being argumentative as always.

Yoooooooo. It’s a game. Entertainment. Pixels that you move around with an input device.

yeah, I know. It's the reason why I wasn't replying before because it does not concern me enough to say 'oh but look at how shit this game looks here too though' in the sort of retaliative war posts you get here or 'Your info is wrong look at how great it looks there'. I mostly ignore replying because it does not bother me all that much. What bothered me is in doing so he thought that I was dodging him when he called me a lying shittalker, salty fanboy who makes false claims or whatever else he was saying. So I made the effort to reply and immediately regretted spending that much time on disproving some of the things he's been saying and doing. I said a few posts back him shitting on the games does not affect me but the lack of respect for other peoples opinions and character assassination is annoying because the other person didn't agree about their favourite game. All while pretending to be more impartial when they're not. The character assasination is even worse when it's somebody's job on the line as is the case with Dark10x.

 

[Turk1993]

You've misconstrued the point again when did I say we should be comparing things on photomode? I didn't in any way suggest doing that I said why are you constantly using photomode as a scape goat for elements being discussed that don't actually CHANGE in photomode when having a discussion. Why do you suggest photomode is some kind of game disadvantage and constantly try and discredit it? I'm not talking about a house on a hill somewhere since i never brought that up, show me where photomode considerably improves the thing I was showing you on the model outside of what I already mentioned to you (polycount and interior textures, engine/levers and you provided additional shots for) because you keep saying I made incorrect claims. In any case even if irrelevant to any point I made that is some nice info there at least about photomode so thanks. Another misconstrued point is that 'I cried' when you used forzavista. I didn't cry when you used forzavista I said it's funny how forzavista shots are posted like it's nothing while the same person raises such a stink only 2-3 posts before about how there should be no photomode images posted since they're basically all lies and misrepresentation and so are videos and gifs except of course when it's their racer of choice. Don't constantly come up with a strawman to my points.


Cherry picking would be choosing conditions optimal for one game yet providing the same like for like images in a comparison, doctoring is when you alter that comparison/result by moving around and framing things differently so as to not provide like for like shots so that a factual discussion could be had that's all that's meant in the difference between the two. Doctoring would be things like setting framerate mode for your stills or picking time trail mode. Cherry picking and doctoring results are different. One is a comparison that is picked because it's favourable to one but at least a reliable result in that it compares like for like the other is where the result of what you are even comparing is being altered. There is no reason to suggest I'm lying and meant something I didn't, even after I've clarified. You're just needlessly being argumentative as always.


yeah, I know. It's the reason why I wasn't replying before because it does not concern me enough to say 'oh but look at how shit this game looks here too though' in the sort of retaliative war posts you get here or 'Your info is wrong look at how great it looks there'. I mostly ignore replying because it does not bother me all that much. What bothered me is in doing so he thought that I was dodging him when he called me a lying shittalker, salty fanboy who makes false claims or whatever else he was saying. So I made the effort to reply and immediately regretted spending that much time on disproving some of the things he's been saying and doing. I said a few posts back him shitting on the games does not affect me but the lack of respect for other peoples opinions and character assassination is annoying because the other person didn't agree about their favourite game. All while pretending to be more impartial when they're not. The character assasination is even worse when it's somebody's job on the line as is the case with Dark10x.

You still don't get the point do you? How can you say that photomode is not a misrepresentation of the game after all the images above show clearly that the game gets enhanced. And i have never said that the shaders on the exterior change when you enter photomode. I always talked about the car model itself, and yes they change even you admit it. So the whole body, interior and engine changes but you still call that car model almost identical as photomode car model? you look constantly at the grill but completely ignore 80% of the car such as interior, logo, body and engine. So you say the car model in Forza is worse then GTS because it has to many holen in the grill but completely ignore the difference between the body, interior and textures. Then when i show you other textures like the logo and such you start attacking me by calling me a troll. When something in GTS looks worse you just say its cherry picked or worse you blame me for doctoring the image. And i don't have anything against video's, but you can't compare car model, textures, environment detail, reflection quality, texture filtering, image quality and shadow quality with a youtube video. Its too compressed and hides everything like the fine details and such. It gives a good look at the lighting, shaders, motion blur and framerate, but you can't compare the other things i mentioned. And i don't want anybody to lose his job. Dark10x favours sony over microsoft wich is clear in his older post, but that doesn't mean he can't post unbiased articles. I just pointed out that he made a mistake when he compared the car model in photomode and said that there where identical as the in game model. Everybody can make a mistake, im not on that. Other than that it was a mostly ok comparison outside few things he didn't mentioned. And one thing i want to mention is you say that i have a lack of respect to people, but you don't respect my comparisons. Instead asking in wich mode it is or what setting it was, you just blamed me for cherry picking and doctoring. then you call me a troll when i anwsered in the way i did. But you are not the only one, you and 3 others here where constantly triggered when you saw in game comparisons i made and start freaking out because GTS didn't look better than Forza. And you say that i didn't zoom in Forza wich i clearly did in the multiply images i posted. The funny thing is Forza doesn't change the car model, textures and environment in photomode unlike GTS, so i was givin GTS a advantage that you keep ignoring. But anyway even after all the image i posted above you gonna ignore that and call my shots doctored and cherry picked.

 

[Louis Cyphre]

I don't know how many times it has to be shown that GTS is not the same in gameplay as it is in photomode.

These photomode bullshots that you all keep banding around should be thrown out now. Enough is enough. It is just not representative of the actual game at all.

That's why I said, just show video of the game running. I really think we should move on because it's just Forza 7 versus GT Sport like all feuds, Xbox versus PlayStation.

Assetto Corsa Competizione

Forza Horizon 4

Both entirely different types of racers, both are going to be the one's to beat.

 

[Three]

You still don't get the point do you? How can you say that photomode is not a misrepresentation of the game after all the images above show clearly that the game gets enhanced. And i have never said that the shaders on the exterior change when you enter photomode. I always talked about the car model itself, and yes they change even you admit it. So the whole body, interior and engine changes but you still call that car model almost identical as photomode car model?

Continue to misrepresent what I'm saying with points I myself make. I didn't say it isn't a misrepresentation of the game in gameplay. I said why do you yourself post rendered forza photo shots and forzavista shots then wierdly make a stink about somebody posting something in photomode to show YOU something that barely changes in photomode. I said why do you use photomode as a scapegoat to shit on when totally deflecting a point being made instead of just admitting that the point made is valid? If somebody had said look how great this house is when I drive around in GTS and presented you with a photomode shot sure. If they said look how high poly the car is in gameplay and provided you with a shot it's misrepresentation. If somebody said look at the water in GTS in gameplay and provided you a shot in photomode sure make a point that it's in photomode. but don't misrepresent photomode and don't dodge the actual point the person is making.

I'm saying why do you post a post like this:

You think that looks flat?

Im playing on pc maxed out 4K downsampled with 8xaa 90+fps and you say that GTS takes the win in image quality? lol
And for the track details, does GTS have detail and textures like this

And yes weather is dynamic in Forza 7, GTS doesn't have proper rain. Forza is on another level when it comes to weather against GTS. For a game that doesn't cut corner i find it weird that GTS doesn't even have rain on tracks outside that 1 litlle level where you can race with 1 car. The worst part is the car doesn't even reflect on the wet asphalt and there is minimal raindrops on the windshield. Now look at this GTS doesn't come even close

For the car model on PC and XBX1X Its the same quality as photomode, even the cockpit is fully rendered and the speedometer works you can see it from the outside view. GTS on the other hand uses different lower quality lod

yet when I try to make a point here about Forza having incorrect textures on the 650S you instantly jump to the fact that it's photomode:

First you are still using photomode, where GTS uses higher quality car model. Second you completely ignore my gameplay shot where Forza looks better. Third because of little stretched vender texture you say that car models look better in GTS ok. Just for you i will use photomode to help GTS

and

you kept saying that GTS uses the highest quality car model in gameplay so does it become worse in photomode

when I said no such thing. You continue to misconstrue every point made and return to the point being made by the other person in the first place.
The point I was making in the above post isn't that photomode is identical to gameplay it was that 'The texture I showed you is IDENTICAL in gameplay' so why the same 'but photomode' deflection? The point was also that you call photomode a misrepresentation yet post rendered photomode images of Forza and Forzavista shots when you try and make your point about showing something.

Be honest does the front grill texture i showed and the logo textures you zoomed change in photomode in the pictures below? only 3D logos change in polycount, as does the body, and the interior switches to interior view textures (meaning you can compare interiors with a free cam in photomode). So why even constantly deflect by bringing up that tangent of 'that's photomode' every time somebody makes a point. yet you raise points with photomode on GTS to emphasis things that don't change in Photomode and show things in completely rendered forza photomode images.

even went somewhere sunny

And this isn't just one time you deflect with it's photomode. Every time somebody raises any point shown with it you do. If you think what they are showing is affected by moving the camera around in photomode show how and provide proof of it, simple.
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/next...ns-current-gen.823807/page-288#post-253277587
That was to show the difference between timetrial and race to you by someone else. The fact that it was shown from that view to show you the difference very clearly was the point. The fact that it was photomode was not the main point at all.

The most bizarre one was Hago though which was what I was referring to there with the 2-3 posts
posts a shot of Forzavista talking about how detailed the engines are modelled, someone posts comparison how detailed scapes models are and its "scapes lololol" exactly one post after
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/next...ns-current-gen.823807/page-288#post-253278971

So why the suggestion that you want no misrepresentation of gameplay whereas I do, that's not what I'm saying. I said photomode has changes in it. those changes are not relevant to the things being highlighted or discuss as they are almost or exactly identical when it comes to the point being made. people are just trying to show you something easily being able to frame it. i said you call them misrepresentative of gameplay (which I agree with) yet it's fine when it's Forzavista and rendered Forza shots. I never said we should be using photomode to compare or the fact that videos don't lose high frequency detail but the loss of it does not result in a textures looking worse than another video that has had its textures gone through the same thing it can only became the same all things equal. SO when you see textures, aliasing or whatever in one video and not the other it means that they are worse. DF do video comparisons all the time and texture differences are still visible.

I always talked about the car model itself, and yes they change even you admit it.

yeah I know except that you're argumentative and in a war mentality that you think I "admitted it" as if it is some kind of admission of guilt for something rather than me stating a fact/opinion in a thread before you provided further images of it. Does that show I'm being factual/impartial or 'taking an L' again like you thought before?

Then when i show you other textures like the logo and such you start attacking me by calling me a troll... And one thing i want to mention is you say that i have a lack of respect to people, but you don't respect my comparisons. Instead asking in wich mode it is or what setting it was, you just blamed me for cherry picking and doctoring.

Yes, that's why I called you a troll because you provided screenshots, not because you posted this after I said I think the grill looks better in GTS:

HAHAHAHAH mate please stop i can't lol. You still say that the grill looks better in GTS of that La Ferrari. I swear you GT fans are mental not right. Get some rest mate you really need it. Like you can't even see the clear difference lol.

not for that opinion at all, or your constant claim of incorrect claims by me while being hypocritical or deflecting the points I'm making with 'lol photomode' or your own incorrect claims, or repeated shots without any context while calling others trolls, but because you posted such impartial screenshots of that logo I called you a troll.

Glad you don't want Dark10x to lose his job. Just to be clear I wasn't suggesting that you do either, I don't think you are a monster. i was telling the other person the constant calling of others as salty, blind, mental, shittalking lying, fanboy, trolls who make incorrect claims you do with people is unnecessary and is what annoys me enough to reply. It's more so harmful to Dark10x than me because character assassination of me on a forum affects my life less though it would be sad to have people think I'm somehow a shittalking troll since I've liked visiting Neogaf over the years. I have a habit of being passive aggressive and I regret it but leave the namecalling stuff at the door. Be polite no matter how much you disagree with the other person or how bias they are and argue the facts with context, try to be contextual and be factual and this thread can be pleasant I think. Got to agree with AngularSaxaphone the games are ones and zeros can't put them above people. I will try my best to do the same by not being so passive aggressive in my responses.

 

[Bogroll]

Just a idea. Lets try and bring some piece and harmony to this thread and only post game play in comparison shots and when we post photo mode state it clearly. I know some people will try and drop some photo mode's in on the sly but we could all try and get on.

Anyway out of interest, Are car models and everything else on screen in Forza 7 on Xbox X and PC highest settings the same in game play as photo mode for definite ?

 

[thelastword]

Best online racer, bar none....I shudder to think of what GT7 would look and play like, both offline and online, if they've already nailed it so well this gen....

 

[Turk1993]

Continue to misrepresent what I'm saying with points I myself make. I didn't say it isn't a misrepresentation of the game in gameplay. I said why do you yourself post rendered forza photo shots and forzavista shots then wierdly make a stink about somebody posting something in photomode to show YOU something that barely changes in photomode. I said why do you use photomode as a scapegoat to shit on when totally deflecting a point being made instead of just admitting that the point made is valid? If somebody had said look how great this house is when I drive around in GTS and presented you with a photomode shot sure. If they said look how high poly the car is in gameplay and provided you with a shot it's misrepresentation. If somebody said look at the water in GTS in gameplay and provided you a shot in photomode sure make a point that it's in photomode. but don't misrepresent photomode and don't dodge the actual point the person is making.

I'm saying why do you post a post like this:



yet when I try to make a point here about Forza having incorrect textures on the 650S you instantly jump to the fact that it's photomode:
and

when I said no such thing. You continue to misconstrue every point made and return to the point being made by the other person in the first place.
The point I was making in the above post isn't that photomode is identical to gameplay it was that 'The texture I showed you is IDENTICAL in gameplay' so why the same 'but photomode' deflection? The point was also that you call photomode a misrepresentation yet post rendered photomode images of Forza and Forzavista shots when you try and make your point about showing something.

Be honest does the front grill texture i showed and the logo textures you zoomed change in photomode in the pictures below? only 3D logos change in polycount, as does the body, and the interior switches to interior view textures (meaning you can compare interiors with a free cam in photomode). So why even constantly deflect by bringing up that tangent of 'that's photomode' every time somebody makes a point. yet you raise points with photomode on GTS to emphasis things that don't change in Photomode and show things in completely rendered forza photomode images.

even went somewhere sunny

And this isn't just one time you deflect with it's photomode. Every time somebody raises any point shown with it you do. If you think what they are showing is affected by moving the camera around in photomode show how and provide proof of it, simple.
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/next...ns-current-gen.823807/page-288#post-253277587
That was to show the difference between timetrial and race to you by someone else. The fact that it was shown from that view to show you the difference very clearly was the point. The fact that it was photomode was not the main point at all.

The most bizarre one was Hago though which was what I was referring to there with the 2-3 posts
posts a shot of Forzavista talking about how detailed the engines are modelled, someone posts comparison how detailed scapes models are and its "scapes lololol" exactly one post after
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/next...ns-current-gen.823807/page-288#post-253278971

So why the suggestion that you want no misrepresentation of gameplay whereas I do, that's not what I'm saying. I said photomode has changes in it. those changes are not relevant to the things being highlighted or discuss as they are almost or exactly identical when it comes to the point being made. people are just trying to show you something easily being able to frame it. i said you call them misrepresentative of gameplay (which I agree with) yet it's fine when it's Forzavista and rendered Forza shots. I never said we should be using photomode to compare or the fact that videos don't lose high frequency detail but the loss of it does not result in a textures looking worse than another video that has had its textures gone through the same thing it can only became the same all things equal. SO when you see textures, aliasing or whatever in one video and not the other it means that they are worse. DF do video comparisons all the time and texture differences are still visible.



yeah I know except that you're argumentative and in a war mentality that you think I "admitted it" as if it is some kind of admission of guilt for something rather than me stating a fact/opinion in a thread before you provided further images of it. Does that show I'm being factual/impartial or 'taking an L' again like you thought before?



Yes, that's why I called you a troll because you provided screenshots, not because you posted this after I said I think the grill looks better in GTS:



not for that opinion at all, or your constant claim of incorrect claims by me while being hypocritical or deflecting the points I'm making with 'lol photomode' or your own incorrect claims, or repeated shots without any context while calling others trolls, but because you posted such impartial screenshots of that logo I called you a troll.

Glad you don't want Dark10x to lose his job. Just to be clear I wasn't suggesting that you do either, I don't think you are a monster. i was telling the other person the constant calling of others as salty, blind, mental, shittalking lying, fanboy, trolls who make incorrect claims you do with people is unnecessary and is what annoys me enough to reply. It's more so harmful to Dark10x than me because character assassination of me on a forum affects my life less though it would be sad to have people think I'm somehow a shittalking troll since I've liked visiting Neogaf over the years. I have a habit of being passive aggressive and I regret it but leave the namecalling stuff at the door. Be polite no matter how much you disagree with the other person or how bias they are and argue the facts with context, try to be contextual and be factual and this thread can be pleasant I think. Got to agree with AngularSaxaphone the games are ones and zeros can't put them above people. I will try my best to do the same by not being so passive aggressive in my responses.

Im gonna start with the last part, and i agree with you. I will try to be less aggressive next time. Now lets get back to the first part. It all started when you disagreed with me when i said that the gameplay models in Forza where higher quality. You posted that image from a youtube video with the 650S getting compared in photomode to prove that car models and textures where better in GTS. The grill is more like the real thing in GTS but the whole car body and interior is different in gameplay thats why i said that its not fair to compare them in photomode. Cuz the grill is not the only part of the car model right . Yeah the grill is the same in gameplay but look at your own screenshots, you can clearly see big difference in the car model compared to Forza.
Have a look
Gameplay

Now look at the car in photomode, its exactly the same model without lod change or anything.

You see what i mean? Yes the grill looks litlle better in GTS, but the body of the car and the interior are much superior in Forza. Thats why i say that in gameplay Forza has the better car model. You said you agreed with DF about the car models where they stated that its the same as photomode. If we compare scape or photomode, then yeah GTS can look better im not against it. But thats not how we play. And the first screenshots i posted where against thelastword where he was posting low britrate youtube video screenshots of Forza and called the textures shit. He was also saying that GTS image quality was better, he was just trollin at that point. I respondend in that way becasue thats the only way he understands. And for the pictures of my Ferrari, i have showen you that they where not rendered. I posted 2 post later images with the photomode menu on them. I have even rendered the GTS photos after to show that they didn't change, and few pages back i posted gameplay shots of both games in the same lighting and tod. I hope you understand now what i mean, and why i think that Forza has the better car model. Have a nice day

Just a idea. Lets try and bring some piece and harmony to this thread and only post game play in comparison shots and when we post photo mode state it clearly. I know some people will try and drop some photo mode's in on the sly but we could all try and get on.

Anyway out of interest, Are car models and everything else on screen in Forza 7 on Xbox X and PC highest settings the same in game play as photo mode for definite ?

Yes, on pc the car models and everything else is the same as photomode look above (outside the motion blur and background blur that you can add obviously).

 

[Three]

Now look at the car in photomode, its exactly the same model without lod change or anything.

You see what i mean? Yes the grill looks litlle better in GTS, but the body of the car and the interior are much superior in Forza.

Yeah I see it. LOD is really nice and everything looks really smooth. The clear coat shader for Forza isn't great but their carbon fiber material is really good on the 650s because it uses dual normal maps. As for the grill It's probably mainly because I can't unsee some of those incorrect details once I've seen it that my eyes get even more drawn to it.

The same goes for the veyron engine in GTS having agressive LOD. Once it was pointed out it's like I can't unsee it and notice it more now. low poly on GTS is most obvious when there is specular or high reflectivity which is why I think they spent most of the polygon budget on the round body of the veyron to get nicer reflections from the cubemap.

 

[Hage Kamo]

Fixed not being modified even after half a year

 

[flashfire926]

Some of those shots are insane. Both Forza 7 and GT Sport are looking good.

Spoiler

This is a stealth console war thread, isn't it?