Tech Analysis: Forza 3 Demo

By Richard Leadbetter Published 6 October, 2009

Digital Foundry takes a closer look.

Forza Motorsport 3 is due for release at the end of this month, and while we're reserving some time for a tech analysis on the full game, the recently released playable demo also offers up a number of decent performance metrics, some neat tech stuff, and a number of interesting decisions by the developers at Turn Ten.

A quick analysis of the in-game 60FPS mode throws up a couple of interesting graphical quirks. First up, you might notice a stippled "screen door" effect on all the surrounding vegetation: a similar effect is in play on SEGA Rally. This is known as "alpha to coverage" and it's a low bandwidth method of giving some kind of transparency. You can also see it in effect at the overpass near the end of the circuit.

The effect has almost certainly been included to help sustain 60FPS. Literally rendering fewer pixels helps contain overdraw, while the framebuffer format might also be important. On some of the formats supported by Xbox 360, transparent so-called alpha pixels take twice as long to render - not good when you're looking to maintain a smooth 60FPS.

Forza's reputation for 60FPS gameplay remains virtually unblemished in this analysis, with just one minor slip during the action. The other blips are reserved for switches between the game cameras; basically unnoticeable during gameplay.

Also interesting is the inclusion of what's known as a negative LOD (level of detail) bias. In the normal scheme of things, high resolution textures are reserved for areas of the game world close to the player, with lower resolution assets deployed further away. In the case of Forza 3, the road textures detail levels are much higher than they need to be for the available resolution, and this results in some superb definition at the expense of some shimmering as the detail is downscaled. Quite why Turn Ten has opted for this method over some kind of adaptive anisotropic filtering is a bit of a puzzle bearing in mind the relative paucity of the 360's texture cache – it may well simply be the case that the developer had the GPU time to spare.

HDR tone-mapping has also been included, although its usage is somewhat muted, presumably to stop over-the-top lighting effects affecting the gameplay.

Analysis of the game's replay mode suggests that Turn Ten has taken a leaf out of Polyphony Digital's book and has opted for increased detail and effects, sacrificing the 60FPS refresh rate in the process, on the track-side cameras at least.

A rock solid 30 frames in the replay sections, though a soft v-lock appears to be in play. On scene changes in particular you get the odd torn frame.

At this stage of the game, superior motion blur effects are added, anti-aliasing is upped to a smoother 4x MSAA and interestingly the game runs with a soft v-lock at 30FPS. In this particular replay you don't see the effect much at all, but torn frames can crop in here, particularly on scene-changing moments. On the final game it'll be interesting to see how the engine copes on really challenging scenes. Also intriguing is that the alpha to coverage effect looks different in the replays. Combined with the mask generated by the 4x MSAA, it has the bonus of adding additional colour shades.

However, as some have pointed out, it is very curious to note that the car models employed in the replay mode are not of the highest quality (judged by the standards of the models elsewhere in the demo). The angles shown of the cars at the beginning of the actual race employ the highest LOD (level of detail) models, whereas the replay shows significantly less detailed meshes for the vehicles. In all honesty, this is a bit of a mystery, maybe even a bug that will be corrected in the final build.

'Tech Analysis: Forza 3 Demo' Screenshot 1
'Tech Analysis: Forza 3 Demo' Screenshot 2

Check out the detailing around the headlight. The replay model (right) appears to be using lower detail 3D models when compared against the intro cameras on the actual gameplay (left). Very curious and it could be a bug in the demo code.

Onto the issue of crash damage then, and it's interesting to see how Turn Ten has implemented its model. The car has been divided up into different sections, and each has a pre-determined, incremental level of damage, with a number of removable parts. In the course of general racing, the effect is fairly realistic, but it's still somewhat removed from the reality of a high-speed crash during a real race. There's no deformation along the lines of Burnout Paradise, for example, and even the dynamically generated "battle damage" in the Xbox 360 version of Burnout Revenge hasn't been replicated.

Attempts to play Forza 3 as though it's Burnout show both the strengths and weaknesses of the damage model.

So, what's the big deal with crash damage any way? The bottom line is that it's a hugely important part of games that purport to be racing simulators. High speed racing is synonymous with danger, and risk must carry the threat of dire consequences... the days of ramming opponents with impunity and bouncing harmlessly off solid walls should be well behind us. The danger principle is one of the core philosophies behind Burnout, and it is interesting to note that the Criterion game's over-the-top, enhanced crashes are still vastly more realistic graphically than anything seen in Forza 3.

Interestingly though, Forza 3's model appears to have much in common with the latest work by Polyphony Digital on Gran Turismo 5. While our first impressions of the crash damage in GT5 at gamescom were not so positive, recent footage from the Tokyo Game Show suggests that Polyphony has made big, big improvements over the GC code. Removable body parts have been joined by localised damage. Whether it is dynamically generated, or pre-determined like Forza 3 is something we won't be able to confirm until there's better video or preferably some hands-on code to analyse.

It wouldn't surprise us at all if the damage is indeed pre-determined on both games. The Burnout titles have the luxury of using non-licensed cars; Criterion are the lords and masters of their creations and can do with them whatever they see fit. Both Forza and GT5 don't have that luxury, and it may well be the case that the developers need to get manufacturer sign-off on all the in-game representations of their vehicles. Detachable parts and pre-determined damage would be a convenient solution.

Forza Motorsport 3 is an impressive-looking game. Chances are that you've played the demo and you're as impressed with it as we are. Fingers crossed we can get a closer look at the final game pre-release...

Many thanks to Alex Goh for his input into this feature.

Picture of Richard.

About Richard Leadbetter

Rich has been a games journalist since the days of 16-bit and specialises in technical analysis. Commonly known around Eurogamer as the Blacksmith of the Future.

Read more articles from Richard by visiting the Richard Leadbetter archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (67) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • mattigan #1 2 years ago

    It's a hell of a lot faster though, in the time it's taken to arrive.

  • BartonFink #2 2 years ago

    Cor blimey indeed that lokks very very nice indeed. Rock solid 60FPS the only lowering of it looks like when changing views.

  • GlassMoon #3 2 years ago

    ECHO

  • RedPanda #4 2 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • uglygamer #5 2 years ago

    The demo looks nice and plays really well. I am happy enough with it.

    /Loves these articles. Let the haters hate.
    Edited by 1 at 06/10/09 @ 17:14

  • ronuds #6 2 years ago

    Focus on the negatives of the game, and then say it looks great?

    Odd article...

  • TopKatt #7 2 years ago

    It does look very, very pretty, I'm hoping GT5 looks as good when its released.

  • JensonJet #8 2 years ago

    "the days of ramming opponents with impunity and bouncing harmlessly off solid walls should be well behind us."

    ...Try telling that to 99% of online Forza 2 gamers! If only it were true, but sadly this feature is pretty much a waste of time. People bad enough to see the damage model in action get bored of it and turn it off, and those good enough to race with it, probably barely get a chance to see it in action by racing properly. Maybe I'm strange, but I'm only interested in watching races to perfect tune-up or watch a race I feel I did well. Watching a crash... as the article mentions, there are better games, specifically set up for crashing if that's what turns you on about racing.

  • cianchristopher #9 2 years ago

    @evilfoxhound - the game runs at 720p, 60fps with 2xAA in-game and 30 fps, 4xAA in replays, no?

    That's pretty good, among the best of this generation (only Fight Night 4, Burnout Paradise, GT5:p and Wipeout HD can compete with those numbers, I reckon, maybe one-or-two more.....)

  • leafmulch #10 2 years ago

    I spent a couple of hours Sunday comparing the demo against GT5P. The game looks more painterly, but less crisp than GT5P. I prefer the feel of the cars by a nose, but there really isn't much in it IMO. I do notice that although the cars look a little more detailed in GT5P there are some V-SYNC issues that detract from the feeling of racing in a pack. FZM3 doesn't have this sort of issue from what I could tell. I also prefer the AI, as in there is some. I'm sure I'll end up with both games, but I think FZM3 is more of a stopgap before the behemoth arrives - which hopefully won't disappoint.

  • Keivz #11 2 years ago

    "The danger principle is one of the core philosophies behind Burnout, and it is interesting to note that the Criterion game's over-the-top, enhanced crashes are still vastly more realistic graphically than anything seen in Forza 3."

    See GRID.

  • Sulaco #12 2 years ago

    "The angles shown of the cars at the beginning of the actual race employ the highest LOD (level of detail) models, whereas the replay shows significantly less detailed meshes for the vehicles. In all honesty, this is a bit of a mystery, maybe even a bug that will be corrected in the final build. "

    I'm pretty sure its not a bug. The car shown at the start of the race uses the same high level model used in the car select menus. It is not used during the race or the replays though. The cars still look good to me though.

  • linea #13 2 years ago

    evilfoxhound: Perhaps they're waiting for the full tech analysis to talk about that.

    Or perhaps it's just not particularly interesting from a technical standpoint, even though a lot of people are talking about it. Personally I noticed it (and the rather flat appearance of the cockpits) for about the first 15 seconds of playing the game but didn't give a hoot thereafter. It seems to be a game which looks better the more time you spend with it.

  • Bazfrag #14 2 years ago

    It was obvious that the screenies Turn 10 have often showed were not from replay, as they claimed....ahem.

    However when the game the game is in motion, as DF says its looks good. I doubt anyone will be shouting: "Stupid alpha to coverage!" or "Goddam freekin' muted HDR Tone-mapping!" while they play.

  • Bigglesworth #15 2 years ago

    This, on top of the GT5 preview, goes to show precisely one thing: both Team 10 and Polyphony should stay the hell away from damage 'simulation' until they implement a physics system capable of representing it. GT5 was bad enough, with cars pushing each around like constipated hippos, but now this? Cars flipping and barrel-rolling about like they're filled with helium! Horrible.

    Please, T10 & PD, concentrate on the racing. Leave crashing to Burnout (and GRID, apparently).

  • Bazfrag #16 2 years ago

    Judge GT when its out as far as damage goes. Pd haven't shown thier hand fully yet...if you believe rumours...

    /end troll..lol!!

    As long as there is internal damage, then thats fine by me. At least there is a performance (or DNF) penalty for driving like a Hammond.

  • Scimarad #17 2 years ago

    "So, what's the big deal with crash damage any way? The bottom line is that it's a hugely important part of games that purport to be racing simulators."

    I really couldn't disagree with this more. You only see it when you screw up and it's not remotely realistic anyway. It's a fun addition but that's about all.

  • Darren #18 2 years ago

    I don't think Forza 3 is a great looking game personally from the demo but it looks like being a fairly nice looking game. In-game the demo looks fine with a detailed environment plus the pre-race car pan around looks good as do the car models in the select screens. The dashboard/cockpit view is a bit underwhelming though with no glass visible in the windscreen; NfS SHIFT and PGR 4 were superior in that respect.

    Turn 10 have obviously compromised in order to achieve a tear-free 60 fps - as they should have - so I couldn't describe it as near photo-realistic looking like Gran Turismo 5/Prologue. Lighting isn't especially convincing to me and there's lots of noticeable aliasing on the barriers and cars. It looks good enough in-game and looks better than Forza 2, thank goodness, but I doubt it'll be praised for its visuals. Still, the graphics are not the reason I'm buying the game anyway and I'm sure it'll excel in every other department.

    /Is looking foward to playing it.

  • Alkeno #19 2 years ago

    I believe that some of you are bashing the damage F3 and GT5 only in a graphical level, which is not the point (or shouldn't be at least). What Forza and GT should be doing is implementing a good mechanic damage model that forces you to drive well. In the Forza 3 demo there is a diagram showing color-coded damage to different parts of the car (wheels, transmission, engine, gearbox, suspension...). I drove the EVO into a nice crash and the car was useless for the rest of the race (barely making over 60mph and steering to the right on its own). Didn't seem 100% realistic, but good enough for making you care for not crashing at all. The rewind feature comes in handy :-)

    F3 and GT5 seem to use basic rigid-body physics to make the cars ("adamantium chassis syndrome";) and then adding parts with complex behaviour (suspension, brakes...) to model the handling. The result is a good simulation of normal movement of the car on the road, but we can't expect the car to break in half or crash realistically.

    Maybe next generation will be able to do a full physics simulation, chassis stiffness included, and we can break cars in two, make them cabrio by crashing them sideways into a tree...

  • SpaceLettuce #20 2 years ago

    Fantastic article!

  • rotmm #21 2 years ago

    @Darren, "so I couldn't describe it as near photo-realistic looking like Gran Turismo 5/Prologue"

    Now, I can't comment on GT5 as I haven't played it (due to it not being released yet ;)) but can you really say that Prologue is "near photo-realistic"? It's looks very gamey to me, with anything approaching photo-realism being only when watching a replay.

  • rmp29 #22 2 years ago

    Dirt2 is a good example of calculated damage deformation that's not predetermined - and that's on real cars, not made up models like burnout. This makes me think the damage limitations in Forza/GT5 are probably more down to performance problems and the technical difficulty of making the damage look good. After all the Colin McRae / DiRT games have been doing damage for a long time and must have lots of experience at it.

  • SAH1977 #23 2 years ago

    GT5's latest damage model has only been shown behind closed doors, it appears the GC/TGS damage model was somewhat of a placeholder to demonstrate damage is actually being implemented.

  • SteveB #24 2 years ago

    Surprised there is no mention of being able to roll the car now. It really adds to immersion, particularly with the in car view.

  • ronuds #25 2 years ago

    @ rotmm

    What a lot of people fail to mention for some reason, is that GT5P has some issues of its own - tearing, lack of AA, etc. I don't know why these things are only mentioned in regards to Forza.

  • lukaz #26 2 years ago

    Forza 2 already had 30fps replays.

  • ronuds #27 2 years ago

    I didn't mean it completely lacked AA, but they both have 2xAA. It's no better than Forza's.
    Edited by 1 at 06/10/09 @ 22:07

  • MrsPacMan #28 2 years ago

    It's a hell of a lot faster though, in the time it's taken to arrive. Mattigan u r what's generally known as a cocksucker

  • ukBoodhunter #29 2 years ago

    I'm totally disinterested about GT5, this game looks waaaay better

    I don't even have a fucking 360 though >:(

  • MrsPacMan #30 2 years ago

    @RMP

    'Dirt2 is a good example of calculated damage deformation that's not predetermined - and that's on real cars, not made up models like burnout. This makes me think the damage limitations in Forza/GT5 are probably more down to performance problems and the technical difficulty of making the damage look good. After all the Colin McRae / DiRT games have been doing damage for a long time and must have lots of experience at it. '

    Get a life

  • MrsPacMan #31 2 years ago

    @Darren

    Sorry, it's the usual yawn. What a jerk

    I've just read the second half of your post. You really are a 'C'
    Edited by 1 at 06/10/09 @ 22:34

  • FiReTiGeR2K #32 2 years ago

    I'm still playing Forza2 like right now and i couldnt care less what the game will look like and im pretty sure gt5 will look MUCH better than F3 but if it doesnt it still have like 500 more cars?? so you cant even compare the 2 games in terms of content which to me a s a gamer is all that matters especially in a racing game. Never the less i will be most likely buying both games anyway, all i want and expect from Forza3 as a game is a better online system and more cars, tracks and customisation options plus a way to curb the glitchers of the class system so 1969 Chargers go 240mph in Aclass. Anyone who is actually playing the game now knows that is a serious problem which spoils the online ppart of the game and spoils the game for gamers who arnt very good at tuning (AKA. Noobs)
    Edited by 1 at 07/10/09 @ 01:56

  • Zappa #33 2 years ago

    Looks like crap compared to old GT5P on PS3.

    Also ,DF bias shines through again imo. Such a let down from a hyped game as this would be like a 3 page story for PS3 saying the tiniest stupid details.

  • Flamebait #34 2 years ago

    ''Looks like crap compared to old GT5P on PS3.

    Also ,DF bias shines through again imo. Such a let down from a hyped game as this would be like a 3 page story for PS3 saying the tiniest stupid details.''

    LOL LMAO,i have GT5p and looks like crap next to Forza 3 who are you trying to kid? i bet you haven't even play the demo,let alone owning a xbox 360.

  • smelly #35 2 years ago

    OH LOOK!!!

    Another shitty pointless, clueless Digitial Foundry Article!

    More of these please!

  • Darren #36 2 years ago

    @rotmm - I've played GT5 Prologue and seen enough of GT5 in-game footage to see for myself that it looks more photo-realistic that Forza 3. It's not the modelling or textures really, it's more the lighting and, thus, colours. It looks more real in GT whereas Forza 3's lighting makes it looks a bit... well... cartoonish at times; basically it just looks a little 'fake' for want of a better word even in the replays. Just my opinion mind.

  • Goodfella #37 2 years ago

    @ Flamebait

    How old is the GT5:p 'demo' again?

    Yeah, comparing an old work in progress to a demo of a finished game. *slow claps*

  • Retroid #38 2 years ago

    Zappa: "Also ,DF bias shines through again imo."

    DF's bias also explains how they loved Uncharted 2's tech so much, doesn't it? Oh, wait; it's almost as if they're not biased at all, it's just fanboys getting annoyed when their chosen favourites aren't unreservedly praised and their competitors aren't roundly trounced, regardless of worth.

  • Bennicus #39 2 years ago

    Nobody else wondering what the heck a "soft v-lock" is? Perhaps a pointless new term for some kind of v-sync? But v-sync is either on or off, and if it's off you sometimes get tearing, I don't know what a soft v-sync would be.

    edit:google gives me nothing, it must be DF making stuff up to sound clever :p
    Edited by 1 at 07/10/09 @ 08:48

  • Huffman_D #40 2 years ago

    not much into "car porn" myself, but this game looks pretty good. the cars bounce off each other like tonka trucks, but i guess adding in a physics model would've only been a detriment to getting those 60fps, which seems like that was their goal anyway.

    neat!

  • duckncover #41 2 years ago

    Shame the games physics are diabolical.

  • El-Dev #42 2 years ago

    The Forza 3 demo definately doesn't look as good as GT5P. If anyone has played either of them for any length of time it would be clear to them. Forza 3 is still a good looking game but the graphics aren't on the same level as GT5P. It has other features to make up for this, such as the ability to fully customise your car, if you're in to that sort of thing.

  • Pac #43 2 years ago

    I also think Forza 3 looks stunning. And perhaps has the edge over GT5P.

    Plan of action:

    Sell Dirt 2 (it was good knock-about fun for a few days but the Forza 3 demo has blown it out of the water).

    Buy Forza 3

    wait ages...

    Buy GT5

  • dirk_aircool #44 2 years ago

    forza demo feels like its got steering assist on all the time . most noticeable on the Porsche . hope the games not like that .I will buy it anyway .

  • ronuds #45 2 years ago

    @ evilfoxhound

    Read ALL the comments. I wasn't the first to mention GT5, or compare its graphics to Forza.

    Suck on that egg! :D

  • ronuds #46 2 years ago

    Comparing a game that we've been playing a demo for, to one that isn't out for 6 months is an excellent comparison.

    And one that I want to be part of.

  • ronuds #47 2 years ago

    PS3 fanboy says GT5 is better looking than Forza, 360 fanboy disagrees.

    What a remarkable turn of events.

  • aphexstwin #48 2 years ago

    i was disappointed when i downloaded f3 because i had the press shots still implanted in my brain but it has grown on me. the cars, especially the ferrari look a little glum, theres shadow glitch on the exhaust of the evo, but thats minor stuff. the roll-over was a bit childish in the fact you use the stick to roll back, reminded me of the warhawk tanks. the damage was meh, i front-ended an evo @ 90mph and could still drive away. ive yet to try it with my wheel but on the pad it felt no different to f2.

    but the ai, textures and scenery are really good. much better than gt5p, which when talking about the ai, isnt hard. the mountains on the demo circuit look stunning and full of detail. i will buy f3 coz i need a racer but i dont want it to be dull and lacking variety like gt5p and f2 did

  • ronuds #49 2 years ago

    They're saying it doesn't match the particular qualities of those games. Just because it isn't as photorealistic, doesn't make it worse looking - just makes it not as photorealistic. But I don't know if Turn 10 is aiming for photorealism.

    Edited by 2 at 07/10/09 @ 16:51

  • uglygamer #50 2 years ago

    If anyones interested the Forza 3 embargo for the reviews is supposed to be tomorrow.

  • uglygamer #51 2 years ago

    they are both aiming for realism. thats the nature of these 2 games.

    Of course they are. But at the end of the day they are both GAMES so importantly the gameplay must be the priority :)
    Edited by 1 at 07/10/09 @ 16:52

  • ronuds #52 2 years ago

    Ok, whatever you want to believe. You're just going to try and counter any argument I have with an equally weak argument. The truth is, nobody knows for sure - and there's more going on in the game than graphics.

    But in all seriousness, what are you even in this comments section for - other than troll? Go back to the GT5 forums and enjoy yourself, and let us who are looking for Forza do the same.

    You're never going to convince anyone that anything is better or worse, so just quit trying. And whether one is truly better looking than the other is really inconsequential to which game is actually better. And I'd put my money on Forza begin the better all around game.

  • ronuds #53 2 years ago

    lol - you're sad.

    I'll give you a +1 because you either have some issues or are taking the piss. Either way, +1 for making me chuckle.
    Edited by 1 at 07/10/09 @ 17:04

  • Godhather08 #54 2 years ago

    why does it look so freaking jaggy?

  • MrsPacMan #55 2 years ago

    Darren is a CUNT.

  • rotmm #56 2 years ago

    @Darren, "I've played GT5 Prologue and seen enough of GT5 in-game footage to see for myself that it looks more photo-realistic that Forza 3. It's not the modelling or textures really, it's more the lighting and, thus, colours. It looks more real in GT whereas Forza 3's lighting makes it looks a bit... well... cartoonish at times; basically it just looks a little 'fake' for want of a better word even in the replays. Just my opinion mind."

    The lighting model used by PD is stunning. However, it's a long way from photorealistic. Real life isn't that oversaturated and over shiny. GT5 seems more "filmic" than "realistic", more Michael Bay/Tony Scott than anything approaching reality.

    Don't get me wrong, it looks fantastic. Well, fantastic in replay mode, and pretty damn good in-game. But it's just too over the top to be photorealistic.

  • stephen #57 2 years ago

    Anyone know if this is going to be a region-free release? I'm stuck in America till christmas and have access to a US 360, but I wanna take Forza home to my euro one!

  • BillyBrush #58 2 years ago


    Darren
    07/10/09 @ 08:17
    ignore poster | #43
    @rotmm - I've played GT5 Prologue and seen enough of GT5 in-game footage to see for myself that it looks more photo-realistic that Forza 3.



    But..if the car physics are floatier..maybe that's a 1up in Forzas direction eh?

    I think there's little point in comparing them...Forza 2 was a great racing sim in it's own right, and it looks like F3 will be as well. Sim wise turn 10 are doing a good job

  • BillyBrush #59 2 years ago

    [link url=http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox 360/forzamotorsport3
    ]http://ww w.metacritic.com/games/platform...[/link]

    Reviews are coming in..

  • Trejser #60 2 years ago

    Sorry but this track looks awful: [link url=http://gamersyde.com/str eam_forza_motorsport_3_point_to_point_fujimi_kaido-13254_en. html
    ]http://ga mersyde.com/stream_forza_motors...[/link]

    Poor textures, 2d bush, bitmap background. So it's confirmed, demo track is the best looking one.

  • UberMod #61 2 years ago

    Good work. Again. Mr DF. But to come back on your Burnout comment, as well as Criterion being able to do what they like with their look-a-like cars, they are also driverless. Driverless to avoid a higher age certificate. Hence the bike crashes are never shown. Criterion said they aren't shown because of the age rating. Perhaps Forza couldn't do such Massive Damage because of the age rating it would attract? Just a thought.

  • lukaz #62 2 years ago

    Ingame car models are significantly better in GT5P. However Forza 3 has a stable framerate, no tearing and more polygons in the environment.

  • funkateer #63 2 years ago

    Played the demo at a friends house, and I think it looks good and performs well. I especially like how the frame rate stays stable, unlike GT5P.
    Which one looks better I think is more a matter of taste. I prefer the overall look of GT5P, but there's certainly something to be said for F3's rock solid framerate.

    However I'm not too convinced about the handling in F3. It's certainly not bad, but it somehow didn't all feel very natural to me. Like it primarily aims to be a driving sim, but at the same time wants to attract some arcade fans on the side too.
    Turn 10 can say what they want, but I found GT5P's handling still feel more realistic and satisfying, provided you turn off all driving aides (otherwise it's quite horrible, to be frank).

  • Badassbab #64 2 years ago

    @78

    You do realise Forza 3 handling can be tweaked from full on sim to downright casual arcadey? What setting did you play it on?

  • Badassbab #65 2 years ago

    Can't wait till it's released THIS MONTH! Thanks to the quality of FM3, GT5 is being pushed back another 6 months lol! At least PS3 owners will get probably the definative driving game when it's finally out. But by then FM3 will have a thriving online community and tons of dlc.

    You want the very best? Well you better be prepared for the wait while everyone else is having fun now. The choice is yours.
    Edited by 1 at 11/10/09 @ 00:08

  • Badassbab #66 2 years ago

    I guess I wasn't clear enough, I was refering to FM3 and GT5 only. And comparing GT5P and FM3 is a bit unfair since one is effectively a demo for the real thing.I think people are comparing it graphically rather than based on content and gameplay. PD are perfectionists (hence the long delay and amazing technical accomplishment) while Microsofft always gear up for Christmas sales which is why I think T10 released the much hyped FM3 now (the second disc is less than 2GB...I'm sure T10 would've liked to fill that up) . However FM3 has been getting excellent reviews in the 90% range so it's all good.

    Btw pacthes and updates are and will always remain free. And I bet PD release DLC for GT5.

  • Amoebalove #67 2 years ago

    'PD might release DLC but I hope they are against having ppl pay for it.'

    well they had no prob making people pay for a demo so don't hold your breath!