Support NeoGAF

[wumster3000]

It's not just better AA and image quality though is it.

Better reflections, better shadows, better track textures, better weather effects, better cockpit reflections, better damage, less lod pop in....

It does alot of things better.

Sorry for my edit.

I agree. I think DF missed something’s with this comparison. But I still think GTS art style and implementation is better. Forza has an extremely clean and crisp look. The AA is a lot better than GTS.

 

[dark10x]

I wonder why John did not cover the damage model in each game? In Forza 7, if you rear end an AI car, not only does your car take physical damage, but the AI car does as well. I tested this in GT and I rear ended a AI car at 100mph and the rear end of the AI car looked as new as it if it just came out of an assembly line. In Forza 7 rear ending an AI car causes brake light housing to be blown out, visible damage to the rear end and in addition severe damage to the player car with visible damage.

In cockpit view, front windshields and side windows get blown out depending on hard you hit something, in GTS you can take a header into a brick wall at 200mph and your car apart from some minor visible scratches on the very front of the car remains in tack, windows don't crack or anything. I may have missed it, but I don't recall rear view mirrors, spoilers, bumpers etc getting damaged or broken off in GTS, while in Forza 7 they break off and remain on the track. In GTS on one of the ovals I decided to drive back wards and had head on collisions with every AI car and every one of them drove away like nothing happened with no damage. I did the same in Forza 7 and all 23 AI cars had visible blown out lights, damaged front ends etc.

I wonder why damage model was not covered. I would think if GTS had the level of damage for both the player and AI cars at the same level of Forza 7 would it still be able to do what it does at 60fps? It is just a odd thing to leave out of this comparison.

I do have both games and I enjoy both of them. They both do things differently, I just think in a sim type of game, having damage and visible damage is something that should of been covered as it does have an impact on performance and what they are each able to do.

I did include it in the video but honestly wasn’t impressed by it in either game. It’s much better in Forza, as I said, but I slammed the car around like crazy and it felt like the damage was pretty minor considering. GT Sport is worse in that regard.

I can say this - anything missing is the direct result of running out of time. Was working until 2am on this last night. I spent so much time making comparison shots and this was all I could achieve in the time frame. Lining up damage comparisons was a little tricky and I just ran out of time.

That’s it. This is what I could do in the time frame. There is more to compare but I wasn’t able to physically make it all happen in time for dead line.

 

[Rodelero]

I wonder why John did not cover the damage model in each game? In Forza 7, if you rear end an AI car, not only does your car take physical damage, but the AI car does as well. I tested this in GT and I rear ended a AI car at 100mph and the rear end of the AI car looked as new as it if it just came out of an assembly line. In Forza 7 rear ending an AI car causes brake light housing to be blown out, visible damage to the rear end and in addition severe damage to the player car with visible damage.

In cockpit view, front windshields and side windows get blown out depending on hard you hit something, in GTS you can take a header into a brick wall at 200mph and your car apart from some minor visible scratches on the very front of the car remains in tack, windows don't crack or anything. I may have missed it, but I don't recall rear view mirrors, spoilers, bumpers etc getting damaged or broken off in GTS, while in Forza 7 they break off and remain on the track. In GTS on one of the ovals I decided to drive back wards and had head on collisions with every AI car and every one of them drove away like nothing happened with no damage. I did the same in Forza 7 and all 23 AI cars had visible blown out lights, damaged front ends etc.

I wonder why damage model was not covered. I would think if GTS had the level of damage for both the player and AI cars at the same level of Forza 7 would it still be able to do what it does at 60fps? It is just a odd thing to leave out of this comparison.

I do have both games and I enjoy both of them. They both do things differently, I just think in a sim type of game, having damage and visible damage is something that should of been covered as it does have an impact on performance and what they are each able to do.

I think it's largely because, in the general scheme of things, the damage models just aren't that impressive (not really anyone's fault, just the reality of what car manufacturers will agree to). The damage in these games is less impressive in every way than things that were being achieved last generation (or even before that) in franchises like Burnout and GRID, and obviously it's a million miles from the damage you see in contemporary 'games' like BeamNG.

It's a sideshow in both games and simply not worth getting excited about. Forza may have a slightly better damage model, but neither are remotely impressive.

edit: (I hadn't read the above post when I typed this!)

 

[wumster3000]

I did include it in the video but honestly wasn’t impressed by it in either game. It’s much better in Forza, as I said, but I slammed the car around like crazy and it felt like the damage was pretty minor considering. GT Sport is worse in that regard.

I can say this - anything missing is the direct result of running out of time. Was working until 2am on this last night. I spent so much time making comparison shots and this was all I could achieve in the time frame. Lining up damage comparisons was a little tricky and I just ran out of time.

That’s it. This is what I could do in the time frame. There is more to compare but I wasn’t able to physically make it all happen in time for dead line.

Sure man, it’s alright. We know you guys work very hard for your fans. Big thank you for your work here.

 

[platina]

GT Sport is the clear winner which is hilarious considering the F7 footage is running in 4k using maxed settings.

 

[Gingen]

Great video as always. One thing though, doesn’t GTS actually have 30 cars on stage during endurance races? Might recall incorrectly, but I’m quite sure someone showed that.

Yes, 30 cars on stage during endurance

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QB_4jbmsG7o

 

[JackAubrey]

I did include it in the video but honestly wasn’t impressed by it in either game. It’s much better in Forza, as I said, but I slammed the car around like crazy and it felt like the damage was pretty minor considering. GT Sport is worse in that regard.

I can say this - anything missing is the direct result of running out of time. Was working until 2am on this last night. I spent so much time making comparison shots and this was all I could achieve in the time frame. Lining up damage comparisons was a little tricky and I just ran out of time.

That’s it. This is what I could do in the time frame. There is more to compare but I wasn’t able to physically make it all happen in time for dead line.

Damage is less of a graphical effect, more of a gameplay one. It has impacts (no pun intended) on the races in Forza 7 - though admittedly the graphical representation is minor.

And away from technical issues - there are car manufacturer issues with damage that games like Burnout don't have to deal with.

 

[KageMaru]

Excellent video. I'd give the nod to GTS even though both look excellent. The key area where GTS excels are the material shaders and lighting. While it may be asking a bit much for Turn 10 to match GTS in shader work, given the difference in car numbers, it would be nice for them to up their game with the lighting. It's improved over Forza 6, but still lacking in ways like the tail lights.

Yea that's the sad thing.

Credit is due where credit is due. Give Polyphony their virtual trophy, they deserve it.

It is simply next level graphics. And it has nothing to do with being extra technical or pixel pushing, it's the art design and lighting design, but that is the difference maker between looking OK and looking amazing.

Like it's absurd they want to walk down the middle path so badly they can't simply comment to say the lighting is what carries GT graphics over other games. That is what it is at the end of the day, it has a lighting solution beyond what other games have.

He did give credit where it was due though. He highlighted where he thought one game outdid the other. He covered strengths and weaknesses to various approaches in detail. I thought he explained his views very well.

It's absurd that you expect others to share the same hyperbolic opinion you hold.

 

[LostDonkey]

Sorry for my edit.

I agree. I think DF missed something’s with this comparison. But I still think GTS art style and implementation is better. Forza has an extremely clean and crisp look. The AA is a lot better than GTS.

Yeah the lighting and car models/shaders are clearly superior in GTS.

I just feel after putting quite a few hours into both now that overall I'm more convinced when I'm playing Forza.

I would like to see DF do a comparison with Project Cars 2 on PC as well, I think that would be interesting.

 

[JackAubrey]

It's certainly a very good time for those of us racing game fans who are lucky to have all formats covered.

 

[Jumeira]

GT edges it, really impressed by some of the details from Polyphony Digital, the way they implement trees and crowds was extremely impressive, much better then Forza 7. I do prefer Forza sense of speed though, driving seems more exhilarating if thats what you like (i do).

MS should allow Forza devs an extra year for 8 to implement better methods and details to really show a decent jump from 7, Im more impressed by GT visually, its obvious more time being allowed helped significantly.

 

[dark10x]

Damage is less of a graphical effect, more of a gameplay one. It has impacts (no pun intended) on the races in Forza 7 - though admittedly the graphical representation is minor.

And away from technical issues - there are car manufacturer issues with damage that games like Burnout don't have to deal with.

I admit that, when I play these games, I tend to disable damage because I prefer the untouched models. Maybe in Burnout it’s cool but I really am not into damage modeling in cars - visually or gameplay wise. I think it’s neat that the feature is there for hardcore sim fans, though.

 

[Jeff Freecss]

Why use PC version? PC vs console exclusive game (pc vs console) is never equal I feel. You'd have to limit the hardware too but even then it's not the same, PC would usually just brute force stuff when you limit settings (the part about framerate at the beginning. I paused it right after he mentioned they are using the PC version for that comparison.)

That's because Turn 10 already said Xbox One X version of the game is running locked 60 with everything set to max. And if you know anything about Turn 10 games, you know they always deliver on locked 60 fps. And since Digital Foundry has multiple experience with the game on Xbox One X, they have every reason to believe the final product will deliver.

 

[JackAubrey]

I admit that, when I play these games, I tend to disable damage because I prefer the untouched models. Maybe in Burnout it’s cool but I really am not into damage modeling in cars - visually or gameplay wise. I think it’s neat that the feature is there for hardcore sim fans, though.

I like it in Forza, stops me using the car ahead as a brake, otherwise my suspension would be destroyed.

I think I probably drive better with damage on.

 

[EGM1966]

What an odd comparison to make in terms of hardware base: surely regular PS4 vs regular XB1 was the way to go?

Anyway as expected some choice comments already.

I’m surprised the Pro version of GTS acquits itself pretty well vs PC Forza though: both look good but I’d have figured running on decent PC spec capable of 4K would easily make Forza stand out in most yo every area.

 

[Xcell Miguel]

@dark10x :

The part about reflections in Forza 7 is wrong, check at the end of the video, it uses the same technique as GTS (and it was in previous Forza games too), cubemaps shared across vehicles : https://youtu.be/SQ6W4bVqQzk?t=22m

As I said on the first page, in Forza 7 :
- hood cam uses data from previous frame
- exterior and cockpit views uses the cubemaps technique, like GTS, and other cars share the same cubemap, we can see it in the video (but John did not notice ?). That's why on consoles it's limited to 30 FPS and unlimited on PC.
- cockpit loses reflections if the track is in "rain" mode, the reflection cubemap is used for the track.

 

[Sad Affleck]

It is arguably a highly inefficient use of resources though. Boosting resolution is the brute force approach to better visuals.

Ever since Cerny used the term 'brute force' I see it used a lot but the starting point of any such discussion should be that everything about graphical power and how it is used is subjective. Some people prefer better effects at the cost of resolution, others put resolution over detail, for some (including me) framerate is above everything else.

Excluding PC since that platform allows for a lot of customization and less limitations, consoles are all about compromise and most people disagree on what is the best use of available resources. Some want better graphics at 30 fps, others would take a resolution hit for higher framerate, some would prefer resolution over additional effects.

I don't find any decision objectively wrong or inefficient. Using the available power for a resolution bump provides a crisp image. Using it for effects provides more impressive visuals at a lower fidelity. Using it for framerate provides the best gameplay experience at the cost of graphics. Digital Foundry compared two different approaches and it was interesting to see. The people complaining that DF didn't declare a 'winner' don't understand that this wasn't a direct comparison between different builds of the same game. It was meant to showcase how two developers each took a different path while developing similar games.

For me GTS looks better because I'm watching a 1080p video so the difference in clarity and crispness isn't apparent. If I was looking at the two games in the real world I might find Forza 7 more pleasing to my eyes. In any case for me there is no wrong opinion here. If you like the look of GTS, great, if you like Forza's graphics, also great.

 

[Jeff Freecss]

Yeah the lighting and car models/shaders are clearly superior in GTS.

I just feel after putting quite a few hours into both now that overall I'm more convinced when I'm playing Forza.

I would like to see DF do a comparison with Project Cars 2 on PC as well, I think that would be interesting.

The problem with this "superior" claim is HDR. GT opt to focus on the brightness of lighting. Forza 7 opt to showcase the HDR's capabilities of different shades of dark color and extreme contrast capabilities. I think you'll find GT's style more "artsy" yet a bit unrealistic. Forza 7 oozes less style but is extremely realistic on HDR displays.

It really is the difference of art direction. You can say you prefer one style over another. But superior claim is just console warrior rant and I always think Neogaf is better than this.

 

[AgentChris]

The teraflops did what? Nothing.

 

[potatohead]

Excellent video. I'd give the nod to GTS even though both look excellent. The key area where GTS excels are the material shaders and lighting. While it may be asking a bit much for Turn 10 to match GTS in shader work, given the difference in car numbers, it would be nice for them to up their game with the lighting. It's improved over Forza 6, but still lacking in ways like the tail lights.



He did give credit where it was due though. He highlighted where he thought one game outdid the other. He covered strengths and weaknesses to various approaches in detail. I thought he explained his views very well.

It's absurd that you expect others to share the same hyperbolic opinion you hold.

Not hyperbolic at all.

The lighting is flat out better in gt and that's why it looks like the better game. Higher rendering resolution for either game doesn't change that

Sorry if that upsets you

Straddling the middle line trying to avoid an opinion is just lame

What is the purpose of entertaining anything else the fact is a ps4 pro with 4.2 tflop game locks better than a maxed out pc game on a titan xp

Tell me that ain't something for polyphony to shout from the rooftops about

Making a df video u want to say is so much work making a game with next generation leap lighting that deserves way more credit

 

[FIREKNIGHT2029]

The teraflops did what? Nothing.

Exactly what I've been telling people for a long time. Tflops are no substitute for raw talent and will of devs.

Incredible that GT Sport won considering the much weaker hardware it's running on. This is F7 maxed out on PC and GTS still edges out a win? Insane I say.

PD are the gods of racing game graphics.

 

[Jeff Freecss]

The teraflops did what? Nothing.

Console warrior alert. And this guy is a member...

That's Neogaf for you.

 

[dark10x]

@dark10x :

The part about reflections in Forza 7 is wrong, check at the end of the video, it uses the same technique as GTS (and it was in previous Forza games too), cubemaps shared across vehicles : https://youtu.be/SQ6W4bVqQzk?t=22m

As I said on the first page, in Forza 7 :
- hood cam uses data from previous frame
- exterior and cockpit views uses the cubemaps technique, like GTS, and other cars share the same cubemap, we can see it in the video (but John did not notice ?). That's why on consoles it's limited to 30 FPS and unlimited on PC.
- cockpit loses reflections if the track is in "rain" mode, the reflection cubemap is used for the track.

Ah dang, I added that bit at the last minute and didn’t consider that they were using two different methods. Somehow I never noticed that before, weirdly enough. Surely they could have found some way to deliver 60fps reflections on the XOX, though. Feels like that should be doable.

That’s what I get for trying to add stuff that late in the project. Ah well, the point still stands about the reflection update rates - just that it’s achieved in a different way.

 

[tlop53]

Console warrior alert. And this guy is a member...

That's Neogaf for you.

stop whining mate

 

[Jeff Freecss]

Not hyperbolic at all.

The lighting is flat out better in gt and that's why it looks like the better game. Higher rendering resolution for either game doesn't change that

Sorry if that upsets you

Straddling the middle line trying to avoid an opinion is just lame

Again, if you play both games in HDR, you will have different opinion. There are just so many colors you can't see on regular screen, especially for Forza 7 because it has lots of dark color.

 

[LostDonkey]

Console warrior alert. And this guy is a member...

That's Neogaf for you.

You'll last long around here.

 

[Pop-O-Matic]

It really is the difference of art direction. You can say you prefer one style over another. But superior claim is just console warrior rant and I always think Neogaf is better than this.

"Console Warrior Rants" are literally the foundation upon which The House of NeoGAF is built.

 

[Novocaine]

Exactly what I've been telling people for a long time. Tflops are no substitute for raw talent and will of devs.

Incredible that GT Sport won out so handily considering the much weaker hardware it's running on. This is F7 maxed out on PC and GTS still edges out a win? Insane I say.

PD are the gods of racing game graphics.

I’m sure if Turn 10 only made 1 game in 6 years with less cars and tracks then they would have been able to spend more time on the smaller details as well.

Of course GTS looks better.

 

[Hoo-doo]

Console warrior alert. And this guy is a member...

That's Neogaf for you.

Oh come on. This is a 12 TFLOP PC being compared to 4 TFLOP console and the console coming out on top. The quip is quite accurate in this case.

 

[Jeff Freecss]

stop whining mate

No, I will not stop. Because console warrior stuff is flat out banned by this site.

 

[Hawk269]

I did include it in the video but honestly wasn’t impressed by it in either game. It’s much better in Forza, as I said, but I slammed the car around like crazy and it felt like the damage was pretty minor considering. GT Sport is worse in that regard.

I can say this - anything missing is the direct result of running out of time. Was working until 2am on this last night. I spent so much time making comparison shots and this was all I could achieve in the time frame. Lining up damage comparisons was a little tricky and I just ran out of time.

That’s it. This is what I could do in the time frame. There is more to compare but I wasn’t able to physically make it all happen in time for dead line.

John, I hope you did not take my comment as a negative. IMHO, the damage model with brake light housing and parts being able to break off in F7 is a lot more impressive than the ZERO things other than some scratches in the front end of the player car only of GTS. I am sure if they added the same level of damage model in GTS if it still would be able to do what it does at 60fps?

But I want to be clear with this John, in no way was I implying that your were lazy or purposely omitted this. I know what you guys do and the time it takes to do and I appreciate all the work you and your team put into these things. I am a Patreon supporter and have been for a while now because I believe in supporting the work that you guys do and I love getting the high-bit versions of these videos as a side note!!! So please do not take my comment in that regard.

My comment was made because as a developer if you do not have to model damage on every vehicle on the track, the AI of the cars having to do pit stops because they encountered damage has an impact on what you can and cannot do and provides more resources for other things. The engine in GTS has 4 less cars to worry about in most cases and no damage to AI vehicles so that does free up resources for other things. Again, both are great racing games I enjoy both for different reasons. I just thought with a comparison of graphics that this kind of stuff might have had more time devoted, but again, I know the amount of work you put into these things.

 

[black070]

 

[FIREKNIGHT2029]

I'm sure if Turn 10 only made 1 game in 6 years with less cars and tracks then they would have been able to spend more time on the smaller details as well.

Of course GTS looks better.

Yea, I'm sure too. It's not like I'm saying T10 aren't talented, they are also very talented devs and F7 looks incredible to say the least.

I'm just amazed that GTS looks as good as it does on much weaker hardware than the PC F7 is running on.

Edit: Yea, GT took 4 years to develop not 6 but I get your point.

 

[Corine]

I’m sure if Turn 10 only made 1 game in 6 years with less cars and tracks then they would have been able to spend more time on the smaller details as well.

Of course GTS looks better.

Yeah if anything it shows how far ahead Turn 10 is in talent and will. Made a game with far more content in half the time with half the people that easily keeps up with gts graphically(they both do things better). Plus it reviewed far better.

 

[Loudninja]

I'm sure if Turn 10 only made 1 game in 6 years with less cars and tracks then they would have been able to spend more time on the smaller details as well.

Of course GTS looks better.

GT6 game out in December 2013.

It was a regular dev cycle.

 

[Sepultura]

I can say this - anything missing is the direct result of running out of time. Was working until 2am on this last night. I spent so much time making comparison shots and this was all I could achieve in the time frame. Lining up damage comparisons was a little tricky and I just ran out of time.

That’s it. This is what I could do in the time frame. There is more to compare but I wasn’t able to physically make it all happen in time for dead line.

Just curious to know why there are these strictly imposed deadlines since, unless I’m misinformed, DF is really the only outlet to cover these aspects in detail in full writing and video format?

 

[Jeff Freecss]

Oh come on. This is a 12 TFLOP PC being compared to 4 TFLOP console and the console coming out on top. The quip is quite accurate in this case.

The reason this comparison is valid is because Xbox One X use almost the identical settings as Max Pc. The only difference is that PC can go higher than 60 fps.

 

[Gowans]

Stellar vid Dark, it might be one of my faves!
Very fair and balanced, both games look great!

Great think to do with both racing games sharing tracks, cars and can be directly compareable.

I wouldn’t be surprised if people prefer either on preference.

 

[chubigans]

I did include it in the video but honestly wasn’t impressed by it in either game. It’s much better in Forza, as I said, but I slammed the car around like crazy and it felt like the damage was pretty minor considering. GT Sport is worse in that regard.

I can say this - anything missing is the direct result of running out of time. Was working until 2am on this last night. I spent so much time making comparison shots and this was all I could achieve in the time frame. Lining up damage comparisons was a little tricky and I just ran out of time.

That’s it. This is what I could do in the time frame. There is more to compare but I wasn’t able to physically make it all happen in time for dead line.

It was a great video. Excellent work as always.

How bout that GT soundtrack eh? Soooo good.

 

[Rodelero]

Ever since Cerny used the term 'brute force' I see it used a lot but the starting point of any such discussion should be that everything about graphical power and how it is used is subjective. Some people prefer better effects at the cost of resolution, others put resolution over detail, for some (including me) framerate is above everything else.

Excluding PC since that platform allows for a lot of customization and less limitations, consoles are all about compromise and most people disagree on what is the best use of available resources. Some want better graphics at 30 fps, others would take a resolution hit for higher framerate, some would prefer resolution over additional effects.

I don't find any decision objectively wrong or inefficient. Using the available power for a resolution bump provides a crisp image. Using it for effects provides more impressive visuals at a lower fidelity. Using it for framerate provides the best gameplay experience at the cost of graphics. Digital Foundry compared two different approaches and it was interesting to see. The people complaining that DF didn't declare a 'winner' don't understand that this wasn't a direct comparison between different builds of the same game. It was meant to showcase how two developers each took a different path while developing similar games.

For me GTS looks better because I'm watching a 1080p video so the difference in clarity and crispness isn't apparent. If I was looking at the two games in the real world I might find Forza 7 more pleasing to my eyes. In any case for me there is no wrong opinion here. If you like the look of GTS, great, if you like Forza's graphics, also great.

To be honest I wasn't aware Cerny had used the term 'brute force' (at least not consciously) - I'm using it from my own perspective as a graphics programmer. Even if one's preference is for image quality first and foremost, boosting resolution simply isn't a very efficient way of doing it compared to other methods. It undeniably gives the best results but I don't think the trade off is worth it, particularly for a 60FPS game, at this stage of the generation.

The very fact there is even a debate between which of these two games look better, one on a PS4 Pro and the other on an ultra powerful gaming PC is pretty crazy when you think about it and I think Turn 10 should be considering some of their decisions in this area. Some people may indeed feel like image quality is so important that the fairly marginal gap between the two games is meaningful, but they're going to be a pretty small minority. Again - this shouldn't be close. Polyphony have always had a bit of magic about them when it comes to visuals, but I can't help but feel Turn 10 could do more if they made some smarter decisions. For what it's worth, I think Playground do a far better job on that front. FH3 looks incredible for a game running on the Xbox One (at 30FPS admittedly), Forza Motorsport 7 doesn't really look incredible for a game running on an Xbox One X/ultra high end PC.

 

[platina]

 

[Novocaine]

GT6 game out in December 2013.

It was a regular dev cycle.

Oh yeah sorry I forgot. For some reason I thought it came out closer to the time this gens systems did. Even still that’s 4 years and 2 entires from Turn 10.

 

[tlop53]

No, I will not stop. Because console warrior stuff is flat out banned by this site.

go sit down somewhere you aint no mod

 

[KageMaru]

Not hyperbolic at all.

The lighting is flat out better in gt and that's why it looks like the better game. Higher rendering resolution for either game doesn't change that

Sorry if that upsets you

Straddling the middle line trying to avoid an opinion is just lame

What is the purpose of entertaining anything else the fact is a ps4 pro with 4.2 tflop game locks better than a maxed out pc game on a titan xp

Tell me that ain't something for polyphony to shout from the rooftops about

Making a df video u want to say is so much work making a game with next generation leap lighting that deserves way more credit

I agree that GTS has better lighting and even expressed that in my post you quoted. Still to say it's next level and next generation leap is laughable and where the hyperbole comes from. Again John highlights and gives credit where the games excel. The tail lights and lit particles are a perfect example of where he gave credit.

Both PD and T10 have worked under extremely different conditions. One given a lot more time with less content on more powerful base hardware. You're fooling yourself if you think all of that doesn't make a difference. So I think both studios should be proud of what they accomplished.

 

[Reckheim]

The reason this comparison is valid is because Xbox One X use almost the identical settings as Max Pc. The only difference is that PC can go higher than 60 fps.

Whats a 'max pc'? Got any specs to compare?

 

[dark10x]

Just curious to know why there are these strictly imposed deadlines since, unless I’m misinformed, DF is really the only outlet to cover these aspects in detail in full writing and video format?

We follow a set schedule, basically. It would have left a hole on Saturday which is not good. Plus, at 24 minutes, I felt it was already beefy and full of interesting bits.

Beyond that, I completely ran out of SSD capture space. I captured 3tb of video for this. I took my drives to zero. It’s insane. I couldn’t realistically do more.

 

[onQ123]

Ever since Cerny used the term 'brute force' I see it used a lot but the starting point of any such discussion should be that everything about graphical power and how it is used is subjective. Some people prefer better effects at the cost of resolution, others put resolution over detail, for some (including me) framerate is above everything else.

Excluding PC since that platform allows for a lot of customization and less limitations, consoles are all about compromise and most people disagree on what is the best use of available resources. Some want better graphics at 30 fps, others would take a resolution hit for higher framerate, some would prefer resolution over additional effects.

I don't find any decision objectively wrong or inefficient. Using the available power for a resolution bump provides a crisp image. Using it for effects provides more impressive visuals at a lower fidelity. Using it for framerate provides the best gameplay experience at the cost of graphics. Digital Foundry compared two different approaches and it was interesting to see. The people complaining that DF didn't declare a 'winner' don't understand that this wasn't a direct comparison between different builds of the same game. It was meant to showcase how two developers each took a different path while developing similar games.

For me GTS looks better because I'm watching a 1080p video so the difference in clarity and crispness isn't apparent. If I was looking at the two games in the real world I might find Forza 7 more pleasing to my eyes. In any case for me there is no wrong opinion here. If you like the look of GTS, great, if you like Forza's graphics, also great.

Check the date I was using the word before Cerny gave his speech & I'm sure others was too it's not just people regurgitating his words.

 

[Hoo-doo]

The reason this comparison is valid is because Xbox One X use almost the identical settings as Max Pc. The only difference is that PC can go higher than 60 fps.

I think we'll have to wait for the X1X final product and a DF analysis for a verdict on this.

I have trouble believing that a PC with three times the raw power of the X1X is going to look visually identical to the console version. Because honestly, that sounds like PC gamers getting shafted.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Sounds like both are quite sufficient and nobody should be disappointed with either product visually.

 

[goonergaz]

I’m sure if Turn 10 only made 1 game in 6 years with less cars and tracks then they would have been able to spend more time on the smaller details as well.

Of course GTS looks better.

Maybe Turn 10 should not release games so frequently (do we really need so many Forzas?) It's the choice of the devs so they should live by that IMHO.