Graphics looks to be a downgrade for sure while lighting has improved. I’m using Xbox One S and LG OLED.
Well sometimes lighting looks really awesome but I can’t get used to the matte painted Drivatar cars… At first I thought those matte cars are just having custom paint jobs but now I’m afraid they lack gloss reflections due to improve frame-rate. I hope I’m wrong because non-glossy only shaders are so very low-class in every driving game made after 1996.
2 Likes
Is this confirmed or just a bug?
Downgrading trees and grass is one thing. But giving almost all AI cars matte painting to save resources…
In Forza 8 all AI cars will have blacked out windows without interior, but we well get 8K @ 144Hz.
2 Likes
i was going to post 3 others shots, but now i get this message on my Gallery from the website : “Error Retrieving Photos. No Results Found” 
Don’t know about you but while racing I’m not looking at grass and trees unless I really stuff up.
In the OP, I’d say the second set of screenshots for Fm5 - Fm7 are very very similar. The only difference seems to be time of day/weather effecting the look of the trees and road.
Also for the OP - it’s really not as simple as “choosing textures”. It’s a question of millisecond budget per frame and engine architecture. I’ll agree, on some tracks, the bill boarded trees do look a bit ropey. Upping the resolution of that texture, or switching that texture from a previous game, is not going to make it look much better. It’s a question of billboarded trees vs geometric trees with bill boarded leaves and details.
It’s not all bad news though. Some tracks such as Spa, which from some angles has many trees, huge forests even, still looks great. Even on Maple Valley, if you discount some of the questionable trees, the rest of the backdrop looks pretty great.
It’s been said over and over so I don’t know why it still gets discussed. T10 is a huge studio with probably some of the best talent there is, and they have form- they know how to make things look great. But when your hardware stands still and the market demands new features that will impact your frame budget, you’ve got to sacrifice something somewhere. Sometimes I think they’d be better of cutting their losses, dropping to 30fps and regaining some ms for environment details. People make a big deal “muh 60fps” but I bet barely anyone would be able to tell the two apart in a test.
Who knows? Perhaps the Forza Engine is due a rewrite? When it was first conceived FM was a Xbox only title and the One X wasn’t a thing.
1 Like
Sometimes the gamers can make all sorts of Demands but that doesn’t mean that they know best or even what they’re talking about. Part of the developers job is to have that dialogue with the gaming community and say hey guys with the current level of Technology we have this is not possible.
I’m not actually sure turn 10 understand or know what good communication is and I think that is what upsets most people. If they came out and said hey guys we can make this game 60 frames per second at 4K but you’re going to lose some graphical details at least people would know ahead of time and they’d be informed. Another option turn 10 have is to say hey guys we can do this with the current level of technology and we know that the visual aspect of the game is important to you so we’re going to limit ourselves to 30 frames per second because it’s the best compromise.
Unfortunately turn 10 likes to make sure that when they present everything it looks the best it possibly can, and while there is nothing wrong with that it is not representative of a majority of their Market. Then they’re only idea of communicating with the community is through content creators which all pedal the same basic idea or through their measly week in review article which usually contains little to no useful information.
As has been the case over the past decade turn 10s problems are not their technical skills or abilities it’s their lack of communication.
2 Likes
Bolded part is a BS excuse. The hardware cycle for the Xbox 360 was significantly longer than the Xbox One has been…the Xbox One is not even 4 year old and the 360’s cycle was double that. FM4 boasted significantly better graphics than FM2. There is no reason our player car models should look as crummy as they do.
You really don’t know what you are talking about do you? I use game engines every day at work, and I’m used to trying to balance performance and visuals.
For a start, that’s a apples and oranges comparison, and it just isn’t relevant. Back then the engine was so different there’s probably very little comparison between it then and now. Certainly from a rendering aspect. For example, it didn’t have PBR back then. I really think the cars look fine too. I see a few jaggies here and there, but assumed that was down to the fact I’m playing a 1080p game on a wall with a projector. Maybe you should just go ahead and unpack some assets from FM6 and FM7, then compare equivalent LOD’s. These type of jaggies are not a result of “not enough polys” but of too little AA. You come across as if you think T10 did a naff job of the graphics to spite you personally. We’re talking a about a huge first party studio with a reputation plus those reputations of the individuals that worked on it. You think they just thought “Nah sod it I can’t be bothered today”?? Are you completely insane?
Seriously dude I don’t know what to tell you. You’ve demonstrated a clear lack of understanding of what you are arguing about, and at that point lost all creditability of your argument. Of all the issues I have with the game, any graphical things are bottom of the list right now.
1 Like
Exactly this is why many of us are surprised in a bad way. Forza Motorsport is a game series which is famous mostly because of it’s top quality graphics. It’s one of the main game franchise of the Xbox consoles. The dev. team is officially helped by Microsoft.
This the reason why I haven’t expected that the new Forza game will feature trees looking like imported from Need For Speed III and dull cars looking like made of clay because they don’t have gloss shaders. For and independent dev.team of five guys it would be okay, but we’re speaking about a really high budget production made by maybe over a hundred people.
Still I’m not bashing them but I really hope they don’t leave the game in its present shape.
4 Likes
You must have gotten one of those special “not terrible” copies.
No, you’ve demonstrated a clear lack of foresight into what is acceptable and what is not. No, I do not work for a gaming company, but I am a purveyor of multiple types of game; in fact I’m at a place in my life where I can literally buy whatever I want whenever I want. It’s a nice place to be in even if I don’t have time to learn all your graphical jargon.
Bottom line is this, though…even if it has a higher resolution, better lighting, increased LOD or whatever…it looks worse. There is no question that it looks worse. If it looks worse then all the crap you mentioned is not worth it.
For this sack of poo, I feel like I’ve perhaps thrown $100 away. No, actually it feels like Turn 10, a company I’ve defended for years, has STOLEN $100 for me in a quick cash grab based on their previous name.
1 Like
Hell no. 60fps is a must and not something you compromise on. 60fps is what makes the game feel great. I was so happy that FH3 came to PC and I could finally play at 60fps or higher. The previous FH games annoyed the hell out of me due to the 30fps. 60fps should be the minimum standard for all games. Anything less is peasant garbage.
1 Like
Yes, i can confirm that the graphics looks downgrade also on PC compared to FH3 and Forza Apex. In particular most of the car models are flat and poor detailed and definitely they look much worse than Forza Horizon 3. Also the great new entry, dynamic weather condition and day time are a [Mod Edit - Abbreviated profanity, profanity and profanity that is disguised but still alludes to the words are not permitted - D]! You can be enable these features only in a few preset locations and they’re not dynamic. Seriously, whats happen to this game?
I don’t like what I see…
5 Likes
im going from forza 6 and horizon 3 on a standard xbox one to forza 7 on an xbox one s…are the graphics gonna be better or worse?
im playing maxed out settings and 150% resolution scale on PC (2560x1080) and everything looks perfect EXCEPT the damn trees. straight up 2D spins with the camera. i only use like 60-70% avg GPU usage on a 980ti and about 30% CPU i7 4790k, so plenty of headroom for some nicer trees.
1 Like
You have to make sacrifices somewhere. I’ve noticed that even Maple Valley in FM4 looks a lot more vibrant and detailed than in FM7; 3D trees, track details, etc. FM7 has an almost flat tarmac, 2D trees and such. However, you can’t beat the higher resolution, framerates and lighting.
2 Likes
I think the lighting is garbage. The shadows are barely there and the flat track textures just draw your attention to the models poly-count deficiencies.
Why do we have to make sacrifices? FM6 looked great. If I have to give up spectacular looking cars for something that looks like it belongs in Gran Turismo 4 so that a race can start in the rain and end sunny, then screw it. I’d rather an all wet race and my money back. This feels like a mediocre expansion at best.
3 Likes
Just a wild theory at the moment: do you think a bit of slacking off in the graphics area was due to a lack of competition? I mean PCARS2 still looks bland on consoles. So does Dirt 4. As one gentleman said, the X360 had double the lifespan of the One, and there were significant improvements between FM2 and 4.
1 Like
If you mean bland per say graphics then I have PC2 running on PS4 PRO and it looks photo realistic compared to FM6. I do noticed while using the Civic in tier 1 compact race that the cars rear has this very bad halo effect jagginess look to it and hopefully T10 can look into this .
…it’s almost like they worked backwards from the One X and PC versions or something
2 Likes