Horrible graphics. Won't touch this with a 10 foot stick.
Why do people keep buy the same crap over and over and over and over. Aren't we sick and tired of this kind of game already?
Let me get this straight.
Any one who's 360 doesnt have a hard-drive is being forced to buy a $150 add-on just to play a $60 game? Oh yeah, theres also the $60 DLC too right?
Gee thats gonna add up! Hope they got good credit!!!
@Mnicholas
You have more respect for Fermi than I do. Ive been seeing amazing GPU demos for years but somehow real games never look that good. Dont think Fermi will be any different.
@Kakkoli
Youre out of your depth bro. Plain and simple. Of course the Cell is designed to do GPU stuff! Ever heard of Killzone or Uncharted? Even GT5 uses raytracing man its like your living under a rock. No offense tho, just saying.
Oh yeah, and one other thing, no(!...
The Wii is basically a GameCube with a massive clockspeed boost. Why do the graphics in this game look worse than PS2 and Xbox games? Even the GameCube had Rogue Squadron which looks better than 99% of Wii games.
http://www.tothegame.com/re...
http://www.tothegame.co...
Statement:
"Forza 3 looks a little less clinical that its predecessor - but still quite clinical"
Breakdown:
"Clinical" is not a compliment. In the context of aesthetics it's a term commonly used to liken something to the bare and basic decor of a clinic and here the term is clearly being used as a criticism. I've provided the formal definition of "clinical" at the bottom of the post.
Statement:
"and despite Turn 10's c...
1) I never said they "downplayed" the graphics. That's entirely your interpretation of what I said. What I pointed out was say that there are at least three games out there which they think have better visuals. One for it's relative photorealism (GT5) and the other two for the sense of speed and excitement conveyed.
In other words, although they said the game looked good, when they, for the sake of the article, compared Forza 3's visuals with the visuals of three o...
It's just not in the same class as GT5 Prologue. It only draws half the cars. And the material shaders are simply inferior as everything looks like it's made of just the same one or two materials.
The light and shadow effects are simply nowhere near as good as GT5: Prologue. Pull up actual c***pit gameplay videos of each game and it's just glaringly obvious. Even the few real-time replays shown (not the prerendered DIY trailer segments) betray signs of an engine under stress ...
Why not? It's not as if their lighting system is particularly impressive. The replay clips do look very good but the in-game videos are all rather disappointing. The lighting/shadows are low grade, the FOV is noticably narrower than notable competitors, and the environments are dull and lifeless. Perhaps the final version will fix some of these issues but as of now there's nothing impressive in terms of tech.
How in the hell are they pumping out those visuals through a G70 class GPU??? It's so much ahead of anything else it's got to be some kind of black magic!
It's just simply breath-taking.
While I applaud Forza's progress, GT5 Prologue is obviously better, and the trailer of the actual GT5 game is bloody incredible. In fact, some of the scenes in the trailer are so good I'm half tempted to dismiss it as CGI. The bit showing the Subaru flying through the air has lighting that's simply far too good to be running in real-time on a 7800 class GPU. Then again, it seems they keep chipping away at that Cell. What a beast!
Nothing new. Kinda like OnLive. It's old tech in new packaging.
Forza 2, like Forza, has highly inaccurate tracks.
I can understand that they wanted lap times to be closer to real life but it's meaningless if the physics and track are so wrong. Hopefully they've improved the physics engine such that they don't have to lengthen and alter the tracks to keep lap times somewhat realistic.
We'll see!
They did noticably improve some aspects of the visuals so that certainly shows they are trying harder to impress this t...
Seems people have forgotten quite how good GT5 looks.
http://www.videogames.net.a...
http://www.threespeech.com/...
http://gallery.techarena.in...
@Mnicholas, I feel you dude, it's a bad situation. Do you have kids? I've dated a lot of girls (probably more than you and that other guy combined! kidding) and for some reason they all tell me their back story so I know that this is not something unusual....
That's not a compliment.
Check out these comparison shots:
http://img.photobucket.com/...
http://img.photobucket.com/...
It's the war between two ways of thinking.
Sony: Give the customer a premium device to redefine the home multimedia experience and include everything they could ever need at a value price.
Microsoft: Let's give the customer the lowest up-front price on stripped down hardware and charge them a premium price for additional capabilities such as a hard-drive, wifi, and online play.
Sony wants to create a product based on their vision of home entertainment...
I'd say goodbye to three games I'd never play and get Full 1080P Blu-Ray movie playback (best rated Blu-Ray playback), best in the world graphics like GT5: Prologue and Little Big Planet, Wifi, Web-browsing, true in-game Keyboard/Mouse control for games, Blue-Tooth (for, among other things, my awesome new blue-tooth headphones), easily and cheaply upgradeable hard-drive, vastly superior reliability, free and more reliable life-time online play (saves me $50/yr and lots of headaches), etc... ...
Compared to Forza 2
+ Artistic decisions are much improved
+ Lighting is no longer inconsistent
+ Specular maps on roads
+ Better reflection textures
- Less crowds (saves fill-rate and polygons)
- No anisotropic filtering (saves texture processing and bandwidth)
Just like Gears of War 2 the way they got improvements in lighting and textures was by cutting back where they felt people will notice it the least.
Compared ...