Support NeoGAF

[chespace]

Anyone interested in running in our Turn 10 Great American Face Off tourney this week?

Camaro vs. Mustang modified within the limits of Class-B, baby.

http://forzamotorsport.net/090506-2.htm

 

[Kabuki Waq]

wait did SSX just proclaim GT4 the racing king just because of sales? eventhough it has no actual RACING AI or damage modeling?

 

[FightyF]

Right well if Forza2 wants to simulate a concusion or driving drunk then I guess blur would be realistic.

Statements like this lend me to believe that you haven't driven over 90 mph. :/

 

[Gek54]

Statements like this lend me to believe that you haven't driven over 90 mph. :/

How much do you want to bet you dont have to be going 90mph before the blur kicks in?

 

[Helznicht]

There are so few quality racing games on the Xbox

What? Name one Quality Racer other than GT thats not on Xbox that is on another console.....

I do agree that blur is excessive, and the grass areas need something to keep them from looking like a sheet of marble, but other then that, looks awesome and cant wait.

 

[FightyF]

How much do you want to bet you dont have to be going 90mph before the blur kicks in?

Oh no, don't misunderstandimate me, I wasn't meaning for that number to be a threshold amount. It's all about relative movement, you could be driving 30mph, another car coming at you at 15 and your eyes will blur it if you aren't focusing on it.

You have to realize that there is a threshold speed where your eyes cannot track objects and so whether you like it or not, your brain will interpret it likewise and you'll see it as blur. I don't know how fast you'd have to be, though I did try researching this myself I'd need an airport lot to really get a good answer. Again, it's relative so gauging it while in my pickup is different than in my car as the riding height is different. But there is definately a point where your eyes cannot track objects.

 

[Gek54]

Oh no, don't misunderstandimate me, I wasn't meaning for that number to be a threshold amount. It's all about relative movement, you could be driving 30mph, another car coming at you at 15 and your eyes will blur it if you aren't focusing on it.

Exactly, now....how does the game know what you are wanting to focus on?

 

[Klocker]

Are you ready to eat crown now

oh chit! I forgot... yea.. serve it up... :lol

 

[3rdman]

Oh no, don't misunderstandimate me, I wasn't meaning for that number to be a threshold amount. It's all about relative movement, you could be driving 30mph, another car coming at you at 15 and your eyes will blur it if you aren't focusing on it.

You have to realize that there is a threshold speed where your eyes cannot track objects and so whether you like it or not, your brain will interpret it likewise and you'll see it as blur. I don't know how fast you'd have to be, though I did try researching this myself I'd need an airport lot to really get a good answer. Again, it's relative so gauging it while in my pickup is different than in my car as the riding height is different. But there is definately a point where your eyes cannot track objects.

No wonder our country is going to the crapper...Our president is spending all his time on GAF!

 

[Last Hope]

Gek54 is right in a sense. Sure you see blur out of the corner of your eye when driving but when you are directly looking at something, you don't see blur because your eye tracks the object (if it can but it would have to be pretty close to actually force you to see blur).

Anywho, I hate motion blur just as much as gek does but che did say that the motion blur in game would be nothing like that of what we see in the replay shots. I am just going to trust him on this one until I see further shots (preferably in car so I can see the in game blur). Che has not lied about anything so far (but no record of truth telling either) so I won't treat him like I do with all the developers/PR people on my shit list who are constantly lying about stuff in the name of damage control.

 

[BenjaminBirdie]

If a message board could ever have Perfect Comic Timing, that exchange would be it.

Cah-lassic.

 

[Ryudo]

Someone please tag GEK so that he doesnt need to keep stating the obvious in every bloody forza thread.

We all get it, you dont like blur.... But guess what ? we dont like your girly whining either.

 

[Speevy]

What? Name one Quality Racer other than GT thats not on Xbox that is on another console.....
.

Yeah, I've always thought this is one genre in which the Xbox either rivals or kicks the snot out of other consoles, depending on your perspective. RSC and RSC2, PGR and PGR2, Forza, Sega GT, all the best versions of the multiplatform racers, classic arcade ones.

 

[Brashnir]

Could someone tell me why I keep clicking this thread? The screenshots suck, the commentary is worse, yet I keep coming in here every time I refresh the forum.




Damn you, GAF.

 

[Kangu]

Yeah, I've always thought this is one genre in which the Xbox either rivals or kicks the snot out of other consoles, depending on your perspective. RSC and RSC2, PGR and PGR2, Forza, Sega GT, all the best versions of the multiplatform racers, classic arcade ones.

No wheel, default loss.

 

[Ryudo]

No RSC, RSC2, default loss.

That i can agree with.

 

[Bill-Lumberg]

Yeah, I've always thought this is one genre in which the Xbox either rivals or kicks the snot out of other consoles, depending on your perspective. RSC and RSC2, PGR and PGR2, Forza, Sega GT, all the best versions of the multiplatform racers, classic arcade ones.

Don't forget TOCA 3 which is stunningly good.

 

[Zenith]

Then again, I'm not really a graphics whore.

But what else can we judge it on? It's using the same cars and tracks as a million racers before it because it's based on cars+tracks that exist in real life. It's a racing sim, so we already know all the "features" it's going to have and what gameplay they're aiming for. We can't judge physics+AI until we get videos. If it has the same content as previous games of its type and is expected to play pretty damn similar then the only major way to improve on it is in the graphics dept.

For racing sims the only thing you can judge in screens are the graphics, so if these aren't even close to what the final is meant to look like why did you even bother releasing them when you knew it would only generate bad press? Those god-awful grass textures alone should have told you it was too early. Fire your marketing team.

 

[travisbickle]

Man, get off the blur kick, people. Blanket statements like "IT DOES NOT BELONG IN A SIM GAME" are just silly. when it's subtle, it will lend positively and realistically to the overall experience. That's why movies use it,

 

[mrklaw]

That's why movies use it, that's why CG cinema uses it,

er. M0dus.....

Movies don't use it, its an artifact of capturing images at 24fps. CG in movies only uses it to simulate that real-world artifact.



Still, that bit does back up your point of people being used to seeing blur on a flat screen. TV, movies etc all exhibit blur due to the way they are produced. So replicating that in a game makes sense.

 

[Apex]

And see how the headlights look flat at an angle in these pics now? Don't you see that also?

What's wrong with you?

http://i5.tinypic.com/29p6ff5.jpg
http://img.interia.pl/gry/nimg/gry434654.jpg

 

[shantyman]

You know, Che smiled when he said a new release date was coming. Maybe it'll be out early!!!

 

[JMPovoa]

The game looks pretty good, just not awesome.

Isn't this going to have 12 cars (vs. 8 cars in PGR3), 60fps (vs. 30fps in PGR3), AA (vs. none in PGR3) and full HD Resolution (vs. 1024x600 in PGR3).

Seriously guys, how the hell do you expect Forza2 to look as good as PGR3 (souped up pics) in screenshots with all those handicaps? It's great as it is right now, and if Che says it can only get better from here i believe him.
The game must look killer in motion.

 

[Mmmkay]

You know, Che smiled when he said a new release date was coming. Maybe it'll be out early!!!

Apparently Microsoft is still telling European retailers to expect it on December 8th.
http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=67352

 

[shantyman]

Personally, I loved Forza 1, so my main focus is on gameplay. I'm sure it will look fine when it comes out.

 

[Gek54]

Modus, show me a lifelike 60fps CG movie without blur and one with blur. Only reason CG uses blur is becuase 1. Its 30fps and needs blur to smooth out the motion. 2. Its trying to be overly dramatic. All your movie refereces are bullshit becuase they are trying to simulate a film look, not an immersive reality. So get off your CG movie kick, it doesnt look real. I know you like your CG but this isnt some Final Fantasy game.

Any camera affect takes you out of the game. Motion blur in a 60fps sim is as stupid as DOF durring gameplay. In both cases the game is telling you where you should be looking and that should never be the case.

And you keep forgeting that everyone can still tell PGR3 is 30fps, blur doesnt solve the framerate problem. It just shitsmears the tail end of the movement, the front end still jumps each frame, there is no way around that.

You go on and on about how images in reality do blur in your vision and I agree but the simple fact that the game can not tell where you are looking and what you are wanting to track so any bluring done by the game is NOT REALISTIC. I dont know about you but I am looking at and tracking objects all over the screen, my eyeballs are not fixated to the center of the screen at all times.

I could be an ass and say, 'People quit trying to change m0dus mind', and 'This conversation ends here', 'You want blur BECUASE YOU LIKE IT' but I guess im not as big of an ass as you.

 

[ccharla]

I don't see the need for overhead maps of the track showing your relative position to the other racers on track anymore. There's enough draw distance on screen now that you can see what's coming up and who is in front/behind you. Other than that, these screens worry me.

I thought the same thing -- having the track map is sort of cheating, right? Then I looked in Sebastian Bourdais's Champ Car in the paddock at Cleveland -- he had the Cleveland track map taped to the inside of his cockpit! No realtime updates, but still... (And not that it mattered in the race, since Paul Tracy crashed into his head on the first turn and took him out).

-Chris

PS Here's the link if you want to see it (in German, even!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IW_4QaRRYVw

 

[FightyF]

Exactly, now....how does the game know what you are wanting to focus on?

It doesn't need to know. Because a game doing motion blur in a realistic sense will blur EVERYTHING that is passing that threshold of blur.

Which means that you could be looking right at the object in question, entirely focused on it, and once it passes that threshold it would blur. Just like in real life.

Thus far games have had unrealistic blur because it mimics the actions of a camera moreso than the human brain (which, in the end, forms the blur as it interprets information that the eye recieved). Simply put, it's overdone.

Realistic implementation has to be far more subtle.

My issue is that it's such an expensive effect, I'd rather have a 60 fps title than one the runs at 30fps with subtle motion blur. Of course, the best scenario is to have 60 fps with motion blur, that would be unreal.

In both cases the game is telling you where you should be looking and that should never be the case.

That is completely incorrect, Gek. You could be looking right at an object and tracking it and you'll still see blur.

This is why you need blur for ultra-realism. Without blur, it's going to look like a videogame.

 

[shpankey]

It doesn't need to know. Because a game doing motion blur in a realistic sense will blur EVERYTHING that is passing that threshold of blur.

I know you're being serious, and you know what you are talking about more than likely, so I'm not saying this is wrong... but it's just funny as hell sounding for some reason.

Someone get this man a tag that reads: "passing that threshold of blur"

:lol

 

[Vrolokus]

Gek's crusade against motion blur is getting pretty tiresome - especially for a game we haven't even seen in motion yet.

IMO, he's the #1 reason all Forza threads go to ****. I have to go with m0dus on this one.

 

[shpankey]

blur needs to die forever, leave Gek alone. keep up the good fight bud... i only wish i had your stamina to fight along side you. we need to nip this blur shit in the bud once and for all!

 

[Gek54]

If you read the post, which I'm beginning to actually doubt, I never said the game makers were trying to 'recreate' the movie experience. I simply said they use things like blur and DOF effects to replicate the parallax and visual artifacts that are NOT present in a 2-D medium.

Oh but they are trying to recreate the movie experience as the PGR3 devs described,"Just like a movie"

Except we don't have things like HMD's and ocular tracking in videogames yet. Welcome to a world of limitations. It doesn't mean they shouldn't give you something more to recreate the reality of the situation.

How do they recreate the reality of the situation by doing it for you when in reality you would control it? Until there is ocular tracking then they dont need to go out of their way to create what is ultimately a visual disability.

I seem to recall saying PGR overdoes it, which would make this point rather moot as an area of debate? The only difference between us is, I don't hate/complain about it constantly (which, you must admit, you freely do)

No but the majority of your posts in this thread are you complaining about other people complaining about the shots. So hello kettle, my name is pot. This discusion does not become moot until they come out and say that blur will be optional. I dont understand why you or anyone would feel that it shouldnt be an option.

No, the game doesn't know exactly where you are looking. Then again, if you're anything resembling a GOOD driver, the game knows where you SHOULD be looking, as it has PLACED your focal point right THERE (on the track ahead, that upcoming turn, that long stretch of straightaway). We are now getting into a limitation of the technology, and arguing semantics over what honestly boils down to nothing more than preference.

Um hello? I am pretty sure Forza 2 is not just a drag racing simulator, you are aware there ARE tracks with several visible turns that are not always in the center of the screen, right? Any GOOD driver is looking at least 2 turns ahead when visible. Not only that but when driving my view is constaly switching all over the screen between the cars around me, upcoming turns and watching the apex of hairpins/90degree turns to the side of my screen making sure I dont clip them.

Mine are. At best, I'll glance up ahead at an oncoming turn, which is always within my field of clarity (even in games like PGR)

That is horribly untrue and you know it.

Whatever, man. I'm not 'being an ass", This argument is ****ing tired. You can give me all the reasons you want why you don't want blur in a game, I can fully respect that. I've said so much quite a number of times. This becomes an issue when you start challenging other people's perception of what is and is not realistic with your own, and you take this shit too far with the same blanket statements. You don't think it looks more realistic? you feel it pulls you out of the moment? I'm sorry to hear that. Why the hell would I try to change your mind about your perception of it? Is that gonna miraculously make you suddenly like it?

The best I can do is offer you a solid reason why it is done. It's up to you to take it or leave it.

Seems some people's perception of reality is through a TV camera and yes I will always challenge that percetion. You speak as if I am the only one who has a problem with blur. If this argument is so tired why are you still argueing? And if I should 'take it or leave it' then shouldnt you be able to do the same? Take up your own advice some time.

To say nothing of the fact that we've revisited this SAME issue, what, 20 times or so? my little diatribe above gives you (albeit simplified) factual breakdown about why things blur the way they do in real life, which isn't dictated by framerate. I asked people to quit trying to change your mind because it incites this kind of stupidity.

Oh ok, so my opinions expressed in my posts are 'stupid' and you are not an ass. Yes, seems so. I must be one aguing for an effect that is inherently problematic due to technical limitations, i.e. no "ocular tracking". ....oh wait.

And for the record, I DO LIKE IT when it is subtle and unobtrusive. It doesn't pull me out of the experience when it is done right (IE, not in those first screenshots). I don't like it so much that I'm going to try and force YOU to like it.

If you like it you like it, I am not trying to change that for anyone. I do have a problem with people saying the effect is what I would and should be seeing in reality and I will always argue that it isnt, until of course they get that ocular tracking down.

Blur should be an option, would you really argue that it shouldnt?

 

[Gek54]

Speaking of misplaced effects, I just now thought about the rumble motor in the handle of the new wheel that will supposedly act as rear wheel feedback. Since that is horribly inacurate, I would bet it wouldnt be too hard to take it out and rewire it to something that would vibrate your back or ass. Then it might be worth that $150 asking price.

That is completely incorrect, Gek. You could be looking right at an object and tracking it and you'll still see blur.

Uh..no, when you track an object it does not blur because it is static in your field of vision.

blur needs to die forever, leave Gek alone. keep up the good fight bud... i only wish i had your stamina to fight along side you. we need to nip this blur shit in the bud once and for all!

Right on! Seems only the true sim heads understand.

 

[AlanHemberger]

I love Gek. He is truly one of the only Unbiased System Warriors.

 

[Teknopathetic]

"Right on! Seems only the true sim heads understand."

:lol Just a short while ago you were all hard up for GT. True sim head, indeed.

 

[Gek54]

"Right on! Seems only the true sim heads understand."

:lol Just a short while ago you were all hard up for GT. True sim head, indeed.

That was well over a year ago, much has changed. That was more of a sony fanboy willing to argue for anything in favor of sony than actually thinking GT was any kind of supreme sim. That gek is dead, Sony can dick around as much as they like, I dont care. Forza seems to be the only GT-esque sim that is going in the right direction, I just dont want them to wreck it with forcing blur. You dont see any of the current or up comming PC sims using blur and for good reason. Based on comments from Simbin I can almost garuntee that GTR on the 360 will not use motion blur.

 

[Pimpwerx]

There's nothing wrong with subtle use of blur. Most of the time, the blur we see in screens is nearly imperceptible in motion. I wouldn't fret over it too much. If the picture starts to look like LCD ghosting, then complain. But I don't think there's a point bitching about screens...yet. PEACE.

 

[Deezel]

Forza seems the only GT-esque sim that is going in the right direction, I just dont want them **** it up with forcing blur. You dont see any of the current or up comming PC sims using blur and for good reason. Based on comments from Simbin I can almost garuntee that GTR on the 360 will not use motion blur.

That's a much better way of putting your point across Gek. it's a shame some of your other posts in this thread made you out to be a ****, rather than someone just not wanting blur in a game. Part of the reason this thread went to ****

 

[FightyF]

Uh..no, when you track an object it does not blur because it is static in your field of vision.

My wording was a bit off. Objects can move faster than your eyes can track them. You can attempt to track these objects, but they will still blur.

Wave your hand quickly and try to keep your eye tracked on one finger. You'll still see blur.

And that is why, for ultra-realism, you need motion blur.

 

[Gek54]

So Bizzare Creations now speaks for all Game developers who've ever incorporated motion blur? Did I miss a memo? :lol

Hopefully they dont but they are one of many who have expressed the desire to do so.

You don't 'control it'. It is ever present. And saying "until we have the technology DON'T TRY!" would be like asking RCA not to bother inventing color television until they had HDTV packed and ready to go.

Blur in real life is purely dependant on where you are focusing and what you are tracking. By moving your eyes you change what is blured and what isnt. Your color/HDTV analogy brings up a good point. Why go HD if they are just going to smear the image all over the screen?

No, the majority of my posts complain about people who don't give a FLYING SHIT about this game coming in to stir up everyone else. I've made that pretty ****ing crystal clear by now.

You spent the entire thread defending Forza at every turn. We all know you are buddy buddy with your chromehoud mate, Che. The motive behind your constant defense of Forza's fumblings is becoming more and more transparent. Not everyone who might complain about the a screen shot is a troll who doesnt care about the game. GAF Announcement! : DONT COMPLAIN ABOUT SCREEN SHOTS or you will be labled commie bastard troll. I'd like to know where they sell these mind reading crystal balls? Hey, its not like the game looks like the last gen game or anything. BTW, I dont care if Forza 2 is just Forza 1 with 60fps but I can understand if others are beefed about that. As a big of a 3D buff as you are I am a little suprised you of all people dont have a issue with them using the same old models from the last gen game.

Which is hilarious, because in 90% of the racing games out there that use some sort of blur, if they don't overdo it, you can see 'two turns up the track' just fine. Which is, btw, what I was referring to when I talked about watching the road.

Oh really, please list of the sims that feature non-optional blur. Hell, list all the racing games you think use blur versus ones that dont. Id really like to where this 90% statistic comes from. BTW, huge difference between peripheral bluring of the screen edges and full screen motion bluring.

Oh please. What, now you're trying to alter MY perceptions? I call them as I see them, and I'll thank you to respect that. I offer you the same courtesy. Try to display it in kind.

And I call bullshit when I see it.

Because you continue to renew the discussion, and because you said I was acting "like an ass". I'm not going to let that kind of shit slip by. :lol

If I renew the discusion then how is it tired? Make up your mind.

Man, what the hell is this? It's like arguing with a passive-aggressive version of you where everything I say is an insult? read the line again, bucko:

"To say nothing of the fact that we've revisited this SAME issue, what, 20 times or so? my little diatribe above gives you (albeit simplified) factual breakdown about why things blur the way they do in real life, which isn't dictated by framerate. I asked people to quit trying to change your mind because it incites this kind of stupidity."

By "THIS KIND OF STUPIDITY" I am referring to these rambling oft-repeated and ETERNALLY UNSETTLED diatribes and useless arguments that serve to do nothing more than derail the ****ing thread after doubling it in size like a goddamn tumor. These arguments are ****ing idiotic, yet no matter how many times I try to let them die, they resurface like ****ing locusts every summer, everyone piles in, and they devolve to fanboy retreads and system-wars bullshit. it has NEVER had anything to do with blasting your opinion and you know it, considering how many ****ing times I emphasize the point that you're entitled to it, and that I respect it. For ****'s sake, this is a ****ing 'butter side up vs butter side down" argument. Why the HELL do we have to keep revisiting it?

'scuse me while I wipe up the spittle.

I dont know, if you have such a problem then why do YOU keep revisiting them with me? Hypocricial much?

And please, do tell, at what point did this turn into an argument against being able to turn blur off? At no point, thanks. You know damn well I support options like that, and including that option was NEVER an issue of disagreement.

Then why would you fevorshly defend the use of blur? Would you be distrought if it wasnt there at all?

 

[Vrolokus]

At this point I wish those screenshots were showing the level of blur in the game, because then maybe Gek would finally decide he didn't want it... and there would be a thousand years of peace.

And by the way...

We all know you are buddy buddy with your chromehoud mate, Che. The motive behind your constant defense of Forza's fumblings is becoming more and more transparent.

It could be pointed out that "we all know" you go after Che like the guy hasn't sent your mom child support in 12 years... so by the same token: aren't your incessant rants about Forza becoming more and more transparent, too?

 

[GhaleonEB]

oh jesus are you two still going at it? :lol

 

[Gek54]

It could be pointed out that "we all know" you go after Che like the guy hasn't sent your mom child support in 12 years... so by the same token: aren't your incessant rants about Forza becoming more and more transparent, too?

Nah, Che gets called out when he diserves it, some times when he doesnt but most of the time he does. Calling for someone to be banned, becuase they said they have not seen one good looking 360 racer, is pretty low, if anything it shows desperation and I HATE seeing that. Did anyone call for Che to be banned any time he made a criticizing post in a GT thread? For the most part I am sick of seeing MS, Che included, publicly laugh at all of Sony's fumblings, might I add righfully so, and then turn around do the same fuking thing. If someone from Polyphony Digital came to the forum, made fun of MS and Forza and then tried to present us with GTHD as GT5, he would get the same amount of hell. I am pretty much done with Sony after all the E3 crap, I just dont want to see MS start pulling the same lame shit.

 

[FightyF]

Nah, Che gets called out when he diserves it, some times when he doesnt but most of the time he does. Calling for someone to be banned, becuase they said they have not seen one good looking 360 racer, is pretty low, if anything it shows desperation and I HATE seeing that.

Someone saying something that stupid deserves to be banned. It's not a sign of desperation, it's a sign that he doesn't want to see this forum become one of the many stupid gaming forums out there. Sure, you've stupified this thread pretty bad, but it's nothing like saying "I haven't seen a good 360 racer" when there are games like PGR3 and Moto GP.

Did anyone call for Che to be banned any time he made a criticizing post in a GT thread?

No because he didn't make a stupid comment like that.

For the most part I am sick of seeing MS, Che included, publicly laugh at all of Sony's fumblings, might I add righfully so, and then turn around do the same fuking thing. If someone from Polyphony Digital came to the forum, made fun of MS and Forza and then tried to present us with GTHD as GT5, he would get the same amount of hell. I am pretty much done with Sony after all the E3 crap, I just dont want to see MS start pulling the same lame shit.

Brutha PLEASE, I can't believe your fanboy heart is being broken here. Just get over it. And accept that motion blur is part of real life and games that aim to be realistic must have it.

 

[GreekWolf]

Nah, Che gets called out when he diserves it, some times when he doesnt but most of the time he does. Calling for someone to be banned, becuase they said they have not seen one good looking 360 racer, is pretty low, if anything it shows desperation and I HATE seeing that.

holy smokes you're psycho

 

[Gek54]

Someone saying something that stupid deserves to be banned. It's not a sign of desperation, it's a sign that he doesn't want to see this forum become one of the many stupid gaming forums out there. Sure, you've stupified this thread pretty bad, but it's nothing like saying "I haven't seen a good 360 racer" when there are games like PGR3 and Moto GP.

Just becuase you dont share the same tastes doesnt mean somone is stupid. I can easily say I have not seen a good looking racer on PS3, would you considered that a stupid comment? I dont agree that PGR3 or MotoGP are great looking but I am not going to call your comment stupid nor ask for you to be banned.

 

[Gek54]

being a 3D buff, I can tell from a glance that not only are these different models, but they have a far higher fidelity than most of the other nextgen racing games out there.

Ok 3D buff, point out the differences between Audi's in this Forza 1 shot and this Forza 2 shot.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4195805&postcount=61

Answer here:

Spoiler

The models have the exact same polygonal edges and texutre quality but the Forza 2 models is missing certain textures and the side skirt. :lol

 

[PG2G]

There's a fairly obvious difference in the headlights

 

[HokieJoe]

I hope that Turn 10 will use some of that extra processing power to accurately model fuel mileage in Forza 2. Forza Motorsport had a gas gauge but it wasn't modeled very accurately IMO. No matter how gingerly I drove, it would always go empty at the same point in an endurance race. Now the tire (or tyre, if you speak in the Queen's tongue ) wear was modeled quite well in FM. I'd like to see that kind of realism expanded upon in Forza 2.

 

[Gek54]

Well, non-3-D buff, a 12 year old could point out the fact that the angular wheel-well in the Forza 1 shot is a smooth curve in the Forza 2 car, the rims on the Forza 1 car are in 'fasblurrtexture' mode while the rims on the Forza 2 car are 3-D, the side vents on the front end in the Forza 1 shot are a texture map, whilst in the Forza 2 shot they are, in fact, 3-D, and lastly, that same observant kiddy could (if he were a gaf-member) tell you that that Forza 1 shot is what is known as a 'bullshot'--a scene rendered at a far higher fidelity and resolution (both polygon and texture-wise) than the actual game engine cold produce, while the Forza 2 shot is a frame-buffer capture of unfinished product. No fee for the consultation, it's on the house.

Just pulled fresh of Dscaler:

Hmm seems the angular wheel well is not so apparent at that angle. As for rims not being 3D, we all know how GT4 pulled that off in photomode But I will give Forza 2 the benefit of the doubt for being able to put the 360 use and not have to turn rims flat at highspeed, Next gen total! Seems the texture quality is also same as featured in the game. The side vents are in fact fully modeled in Forza 1, horribly wrong again. Are you sure you even own Forza 1?

I know we are not paying you for your "expertise" but I am sorry, we still have to let you go.