Unless you've played both games, you are comparing screenshots that represent 1/60th of a second of a game. A 70+ hour game, and people think they know which game is better based on 1/60th of a second.
"Microsoft first party exclusive bested by EA multiplatform title."
Ignorant statement as usual. The only thing NFS has over Forza is slightly better graphics. Based on how each game plays, it's clear that EA made many sacrifices in the areas of physics and control in order to obtain those better graphics. Of course, I don't blame EA - after all, NFS is an arcade racer and Forza is a sim. Arcade racers are supposed to look better and control worse.
...
Actually, unlike you, most 360 owners actually PLAY the games before making determinations about their quality. PS3 fans like you base your opinions a few screenshots. You are the ones being fooled.
Consider this - Forza runs at 60 frames per second. So, these screenshots represent 1/60th of one second of gameplay. Yet, that is enough for you and many others to make sweeping condemnations of their quality. 1/60th of a freaking second and your mind is made up. Talk about f...
Forza runs at 60 frames per second. So, your "facts" are based on a single screenshot, in other words, 1/60th of a second of a game. Wow, pretty overwhelming evidence there. Who knows, maybe in the future you can improve your standards and base your opinions on a full 1/2 second of a game.
By the way, do you enjoy playing screenshots? Is it as good as playing sales?
Of course that's what they believe. They simply cannot accept the fact than an excellent racing sim exists outside the Sony Universe, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
You can't play screenshots, but that's all some people have to cling to while they wait (and wait, and wait). Three 90+ rated racing sims in four years - now that's a developer that knows what they are doing.
On topic - I've always though Forza 2 was a very good looking game, so any ...
Yeah, I forgot about Brutal Legend.
Did you guys actually read the article? "Sizeable step up" in graphical quality since you are so interested.
More pointless screenshot comparisons. Because as we all know, graphics=quality. /s
My favorite game on launch day - still fun to play.
You have a good point. However, the 5-6 year console cycle has been pretty well established since the 1980's. The economic climate may alter it slightly this time around - maybe by a year - but it will most likely still hold true.
PS1 was replaced in 5 years, PS2 was replaced in 6 years - 5.5 years on average. Since consoles generally launch at the end of the year, late 2012 would be 6 years for Sony - right on target.
Beat?? Hardly. Remember, the PS3 came out a year later than the 360, and cost $200-$300 more - it should have much better graphics. Yet, Forza 3, on technology that's a year older than PS3's, looks just as good. I'll give GT5P a very slight edge in a few graphical areas, but overall, they look roughly the same.
Of course, many people here are shallow enough to care only about graphics - gameplay doesn't seem to matter to them. And it's gameplay where Forza shines above al...
This has been available on UMD for a while now.
You're right. Not only does crashing affect steering, but it will affect you speed as well. After a particularily rough crash, my Ferrari could barely reach 100 MPH, and shifting gears took a lot longer than normal.
That's exactly how it should be, and Forza 3 gets it right.
You should know by now that PS3 fanboys will consider GT5P a demo when it suits one arguement, and a stand-alone release when it suits another.
GT5P had 6 tracks and 70 cars. The full version of GT5 is rumored to have 70 tracks and 1000 cars, meaning Prologue is less than 1/10th of the full game. However, it costs $40, 2/3 the price of a full game. Yet, these are the same people who complain about Halo 3:ODST's price.
@1.2 - "The gaming media desperately ...
Still obsessed with the 8 cars, huh? Quantity for quantity's sake isn't going to score any points with real gamers.
I just played Nascar 09 - it has 43 cars on the track. By your reasoning, it must be better than Forza and Gran Turismo 5 combined.
It's going to be a bad day for the haters when the reviews start rolling in. Of course, the narrow minded fools will simply recycle the tired old "media bias" excuse for all the good scores.
States don't have different currencies, languages, etc. It's not the same.
Arcade 360 buyers can buy a 20gb hard drive from MS for $30. Of course, you conveniently forget to mention that. Buying DLC is NOT a requirement for Forza 3. Are you going to look at EVERY PS3 game and add all future DLC costs into those prices too? Somehow, given your history of exaggeration, I doubt you will.
I'm sure 360 Arcade owners are glad that you care about them so much, but give it a rest already. Your smoke and mirrors aren't fooling anyone. Everyone knows the ...
"It's articles like this that makes me ashamed to be called American."
It's statements like that make me (and probably many others) ashamed to have to call you a fellow American.
Disrespecting your country simply because your video game console of choice is behind the competition?? Disgusting.
You just don't get it. If Turn 10 had sacrificed realistic physics and control as EA did, Forza 3 could have easily outshined NFS graphically. Fortunately, Turn 10 realizes that accurate physics and control are FAR more important that graphics. Besides, Forza 3 still looks great. You don't average a 93 review score unless you get nearly everything right.