Microsoft Forza Motorsport - Information Thread, update: Digital Foundry PC version technical review

[AbsolutSurgen]

39 minutes ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

I would also add that when doing practice laps, unless you’re in a hurry do not just leave after 3 laps. Run until time expires. It’s extra experience for your car, which after the race translates to a high car level and more car points to spend on upgrades before the next race. 
 

 

I understand why you would say that, but I disagree. Adding experience to your car doesn’t give you much, but adds time to your progress. 

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

43 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

I understand why you would say that, but I disagree. Adding experience to your car doesn’t give you much, but adds time to your progress. 

thing is you only get so much progression and then you’re off to using a new car in a new cup. When I just left after the 3 practice laps I felt like I wasn’t able to upgrade my car as much as I wanted by the end of the cup. 
 

kind of a failure of both the upgrade system and career mode. This upgrade system was made for a bigger game than FM actually is. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

9 minutes ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

thing is you only get so much progression and then you’re off to using a new car in a new cup. When I just left after the 3 practice laps I felt like I wasn’t able to upgrade my car as much as I wanted by the end of the cup. 
 

kind of a failure of both the upgrade system and career mode. This upgrade system was made for a bigger game than FM actually is. 

Ok. I think the progression is focused on multiplayer, not single player. 
I’m not sure I understand the rationale of spending more time practicing. 

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

yeah I guess you could buy your car at the start of a cup, leave the cup, then go play free play for a couple hours then go upgrade your car, then go back to the cup, and then race, ignoring the practice almost entirely, but that’s not a well designed gameplay loop either. 
 

If they designed it around multiplayer then that doesn’t mean it isn’t a failure of the design of career mode.  It means they vastly under developed it to gel cohesively with their new upgrade system.

 

in most games, and Forza is no exception the majority of players do not stick around in multiplayer if they even play mp at all. They do the single player. So Turn 10 focusing so much harder to design the game around multiplier is just further evidence of the downfall in design. It leads to making the game feel half baked and like they’ve barely been designing anything for six years. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

I'll be honest, I was expecting a lot more, and something different from this game.  It is still a "good game", so I will enjoy what they have designed and see if they make changes going forward that make it more compelling in the future.

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

This popped in my feed and man, I cannot disagree at all. Interesting to hear from somebody that came to it not only after the game’s relevance had passed, but after the game’s servers were no longer even online. 
 

 

 

and in case anyone doesn’t remember how much there was to do in FM4 single player. 


 

That’s not 10x31 races. That’s events. some being just a single challenge, some being a 3 race series, or like you can see selected there, being as many as a 12 race championship. This was the “bucket list”, but the game initially takes you through most of those events via the season mode. You could finish all 10 seasons and still have plenty to do on the challenge board. The game still had free play, rivals, events, and online MP. 
 

Also Camino Viejo de Montserrat (originally introduced in FM3) is in my opinion the greatest fantasy track T10 has ever made. It’s so massive that the different individual layouts are great tracks all on their own, and if added to FM for launch would have made the game feel like it had 25% more individual tracks than it does now. In fact it should have had that track instead of VIR … probably not T10’s fault, but I do not like this track. It feels way too narrow for a modern track and no part of it even feels fun to drive on. Road America, Watkins Glen, and Sebring each have VIR beat, and one of those isn’t even in the game.  

[cusideabelincoln]

14 hours ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

thing is you only get so much progression and then you’re off to using a new car in a new cup. When I just left after the 3 practice laps I felt like I wasn’t able to upgrade my car as much as I wanted by the end of the cup. 
 

kind of a failure of both the upgrade system and career mode. This upgrade system was made for a bigger game than FM actually is. 

 

So far the only upgrade I aim for is tires, because some of the stock cars have terrible grip.

 

I dislike the locking upgrades behind both points and a level threshold. Just let us spend car points on whatever we want for that car, maybe they can lock some of the bigger changes (drivetrain swap, engine swap, etc) behind a level, but tires? Come on now.

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

1 minute ago, cusideabelincoln said:

 

So far the only upgrade I aim for is tires, because some of the stock cars have terrible grip.

 

I dislike the locking upgrades behind both points and a level threshold. Just let us spend car points on whatever we want for that car, maybe they can lock some of the bigger changes (drivetrain swap, engine swap, etc) behind a level, but tires? Come on now.

yeah, especially when the AI seemingly has race tires from the start. I can also see where it sucks for online MP where if you race where upgrades are allowed you’re at a disadvantage using a car you just bought, because you can’t upgrade it yet. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

I'm pretty sure the AI doesn't have race tires from the beginning, unless the game is lying about their car's rating.

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

5 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

I'm pretty sure the AI doesn't have race tires from the beginning, unless the game is lying about their car's rating.

I think the game will play with their PI rating. I’ve seen the AI using cars under the stock PI. I think there’s things you can do that do lower the PI rating of a car, like wheels that add weight, and I think ballasts can do that too, and in past FM titles the engine or drive train swap could lower the PI of a car. 
 

I saw this just recently when I raced a

series where the selectable cars had a Ferrari that had the best stock PI of over S701. I selected a different car with a lower stock PI, but looked to see if any of the AI had that Ferrari, and one did and it was now an A class car. 
 

but yeah, I’ll see cars on the starting grid of the first race that already have Medium tires. Which is only possible if they have race tires. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

19 minutes ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

I think the game will play with their PI rating. I’ve seen the AI using cars under the stock PI. I think there’s things you can do that do lower the PI rating of a car, like wheels that add weight, and I think ballasts can do that too, and in past FM titles the engine or drive train swap could lower the PI of a car. 
 

I saw this just recently when I raced a

series where the selectable cars had a Ferrari that had the best stock PI of over S701. I selected a different car with a lower stock PI, but looked to see if any of the AI had that Ferrari, and one did and it was now an A class car. 
 

but yeah, I’ll see cars on the starting grid of the first race that already have Medium tires. Which is only possible if they have race tires. 

I guess it is possible with a car that started with a low PI to begin with.

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

16 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

I guess it is possible with a car that started with a low PI to begin with.

yeah that’s what I would guess. The game upgrades the tires first on the cars. It might explain why on a rain race the gap was enormous (way beyond the usual) as I was on street tires vs their dry whether slicks. 

[SoberChef]

On 10/16/2023 at 11:50 AM, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

This popped in my feed and man, I cannot disagree at all. Interesting to hear from somebody that came to it not only after the game’s relevance had passed, but after the game’s servers were no longer even online. 
 

 

 

and in case anyone doesn’t remember how much there was to do in FM4 single player. 


 

That’s not 10x31 races. That’s events. some being just a single challenge, some being a 3 race series, or like you can see selected there, being as many as a 12 race championship. This was the “bucket list”, but the game initially takes you through most of those events via the season mode. You could finish all 10 seasons and still have plenty to do on the challenge board. The game still had free play, rivals, events, and online MP. 
 

Also Camino Viejo de Montserrat (originally introduced in FM3) is in my opinion the greatest fantasy track T10 has ever made. It’s so massive that the different individual layouts are great tracks all on their own, and if added to FM for launch would have made the game feel like it had 25% more individual tracks than it does now. In fact it should have had that track instead of VIR … probably not T10’s fault, but I do not like this track. It feels way too narrow for a modern track and no part of it even feels fun to drive on. Road America, Watkins Glen, and Sebring each have VIR beat, and one of those isn’t even in the game.  

 

Watching that FM4 review a decade+ later brought back SO MANY magnificent memories. Clarkson & the then Top Gear integration was sublime & I truly wish there was a way to incorporate he, May & Hammond in a Grand Tour type event for the new Forza but alas. Pointing out all the super nerdy niche nods of cars and coming to a damning realization that many of those in FM4 aren't or haven't been in the series since. Freaking heartbreaking to be sure.

 

That checklist for FM4, BRILLIANT. Also, pointing out that FM4 was the last before 'Driveatars', wow that slapped me upside the head as I watched the replay in the background & remembered innumerable races set into memory and how those cars acted versus the latter iterations in the series. Fujimi Kaido, in my humble opinion, is THE best track I ever raced on in my entire time w/ the series & I shall always be a proud supporter of bringing that track back.

 

God damn, how did we not know just how great we had it then!? In all honesty, every Forza after 4, has been measured in my head & heart against that title, and none have come close since. Heartbreaking to admit that.

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

4 hours ago, SoberChef said:

Watching that FM4 review a decade+ later brought back SO MANY magnificent memories

what’s amazing too is they didn’t even play FM4 until 2021 for the first time. So they were looking at the game through a modern lens. 
 

when F5 came out we definitely knew how good we had it with FM4. The most optimistic of us was willing to cut T10 a bit slack to allow them to build back up to a FM4 caliber of game. I think many hoped that FM8 might finally be it, if not the game that finally surpassed FM4 as the new benchmark for a racing game in the series. 

[SoberChef]

90% of Forza Motorsport Xbox players haven't completed a single online race

WWW.TRUEACHIEVEMENTS.COM

---

Forza Motorsport recently raced off the starting line into Xbox Game Pass and looking at achievement data, it seems players aren't too keen on multiplayer.

 

[Keyser_Soze]

It's not too surprising. Since it's a game pass game people can fire it up to look at it and bounce out even without finishing a race.

 

Look at Pentiment, only 13% of people have finished act one. However, if you look at the steam numbers (people who paid for the game) the number jumps up to 46%

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

5 hours ago, SoberChef said:

90% of Forza Motorsport Xbox players haven't completed a single online race

WWW.TRUEACHIEVEMENTS.COM

---

Forza Motorsport recently raced off the starting line into Xbox Game Pass and looking at achievement data, it seems players aren't too keen on multiplayer.

 

while the percentage is higher that I might have guessed, it’s also not surprising. Unless a game is MP only it will never get close to even half of the player base hanging out in MP. It’s why the sentiment that the progression system is because of MP is so bewildering to me if true. You don’t make a progression system based around the top 1% of 10% of your player base. And it’s why such a small “career” mode also seems like a baffling decision. 
 

despite the popularity of MP modes the majority of players are solo, even in MP games, and even more would prefer to avoid MP and stick to single player. MP does keep a game alive and relevant for longer than SP, but it’s not the main draw for most players. Even COD sees more people buy it for the campaign and never touch MP than people who live in the MP. 
 

For a game like FM it could be a number of things. The more serious nature making MP seem intimidating, less skilled players not wanting to screw up other people by slamming into them like they do the AI. Maybe worried that other drivers will slam

into them. And maybe believing they’re just not good enough and will lose every race, so they don’t even bother. Then with such a lacking career mode you’re probably gonna have more people that usually just stop playing entirely before they ever get far into it. 
 

Im still of the opinion that throwing a person into a “race” with all the assists turned on is a fucking stupid design choice. Always have as FM is nowhere near the first to do it. It make the game initially feel like absolute crap, and if it’s your first FM game could be an immediate turn off if you don’t know why the game feels the way it does. It’s both not skippable for veterans and also doesn’t explain what it’s doing for new players. 
 

The achievement for completing the opening race is 73%, not an uncommon percentage. But then the achievement for completing the 3 race tutorial cup is 43%. And then the drop off after that is stark. Finishing the first series in the builder cup drops to 24%, and finishing the first tour of the builder cup, those 4 series, is a rare achievement of under 5%. It may still be very early to truly compare, but 54% completed the first season of career mode in FM4. I’ll be surprised if FM gets anywhere close to that. So yeah, they’ve also got the issue that 76% players having finished more than 6 races in the game. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

So, I think I have a summary of all the hate, some of it justified, some of it less so:

1)  The physics aren't as accurate as iRacing or ACC

2)  Online Racing is borked

a) Match-making isn't doing a good enough job of separating the "serious" racers from the people who want to dive bomb

b)  Not enough penalty for dirty racers

c)  No radar/spotter to give you information on those around you in cockpit mode

3)  Wheel feedback/controls are significantly worse than iRacing/ACC/F1 -- it's too optimized for controller

4)  AI isn't good enough (strangely enough, I don't ever hear which game they want the AI to be more like)

5)  Single Player Campaign isn't good enough

6)  CaRPG mechanics detract from the experience

7)  Game is poorly optimized for PC

8)  Game doesn't look like the footage that was shared in the past/Game looks worse than Forza Horizon 5

9) There are too many game breaking bugs (I haven't had any)

[Best]

1 minute ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

Game doesn't look like the footage that was shared in the past/Game looks worse than Forza Horizon 5

 

Really? I think the one positive is this game looks phenomenal. Maybe I need to fire up FH5. I did play GT7 to compare and I'll be honest, it's super close. 

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

6 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

It's not too surprising. Since it's a game pass game people can fire it up to look at it and bounce out even without finishing a race.

 

Look at Pentiment, only 13% of people have finished act one. However, if you look at the steam numbers (people who paid for the game) the number jumps up to 46%

I have wondered for a while how much players that get really into a game and are playing it on GamePass would have bought it anyways had it not been on GamePass. Like I’m sure there are a lot of people playing games in game pass that otherwise wouldn’t try the game. For a game like Starfield or FM, what’s the conversion rate like for people on game pass that ever owned a previous title buying the deluxe edition upgrade. 
 

I also wonder what the demographics are for players that bounce around very quickly in GamePass, barely ever finishing a game, who otherwise would buy very few. Vs gamers doing a bit of that, but spending the majority of their play time in games they would have spent $70-$100 on anyways. 
 

I also wonder how much being a GamePass game is influencing the state at which games are coming out. FM and Halo both share a very unfortunate thing, in that they feel like incomplete games at launch. Especially when compared to past entries. It’s like even though there will be a $70 version they’re not concerned with making the product feel like it’s worth $70 day one. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

1 minute ago, best3444 said:

 

Really? I think the one positive is this game looks phenomenal. Maybe I need to fire up FH5. I did play GT7 to compare and I'll be honest, it's super close. 

I think Forza Horizon 5 looks better to my eye (both on PC Ultra settings).  Much of the complaints are that the XsX version, in particular, doesn't look as good as some of the trailers. (I've seen some suggest even the PC version on Ultra doesn't look as good.)

[Keyser_Soze]

1 minute ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

I have wondered for a while how much players that get really into a game and are playing it on GamePass would have bought it anyways had it not been on GamePass. Like I’m sure there are a lot of people playing games in game pass that otherwise wouldn’t try the game. For a game like Starfield or FM, what’s the conversion rate like for people on game pass that ever owned a previous title buying the deluxe edition upgrade.

 

I actually read the headline wrong, it was about online races not just any race which lines up with what I was saying in the Mortal Kombat thread. Yeah, many people do not play those games online. I think MK11 sold like around 12 million copies. But the number of people playing it online is minuscule. Like even if 20,000 people ever played it online (which I doubt they did) that is less than 1% of people who played the game online (in fact it's closer to .02% of people) so seeing a headline that 10% of people completed an online race is actually kind of impressive!

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

8 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

So, I think I have a summary of all the hate, some of it justified, some of it less so:

1)  The physics aren't as accurate as iRacing or ACC

Im on the side of “so?”  To be fair neither is GT. I think if you want to be that serious about it or already are you should be playing those games instead of a console sim game. 

2)  Online Racing is borked

a) Match-making isn't doing a good enough job of separating the "serious" racers from the people who want to dive bomb

b)  Not enough penalty for dirty racers

c)  No radar/spotter to give you information on those around you in cockpit mode

yeah feels like half baked implementation. 

3)  Wheel feedback/controls are significantly worse than iRacing/ACC/F1 -- it's too optimized for controller

Ive seen some say that they think T10 just didn’t go through the trouble to identify all kinds of wheels that could be used and just left everything mid, leaving it up to the player to dial it all in Which is kind of fair I think. Their primary audience is likely one without a wheel.  

4)  AI isn't good enough (strangely enough, I don't ever hear which game they want the AI to be more like)

I hear iRacing has good AI, but most never race with it. I think the issue here is nobody really has great AI and everyone feels it’s about damn time somebody does. I’ve seen some say the AI was better in FM before “drivatars” became the new AI, but I can’t remember the AI from FM4.  

5)  Single Player Campaign isn't good enough

agreed. My number 1 complaint. Some just don’t like that there aren’t a bunch of events with GT3 or LMP cars, but I feel the lack of design goes further than that. 

6)  CaRPG mechanics detract from the experience

I don’t dislike it as much as others, but it needs more work as an idea. 

7)  Game is poorly optimized for PC

I think it’s the same thing as Starfield. The optimization isn’t perfect, but it’s most two camps complaining. Those who don’t even want to upgrade their PC once every 10 years, but still get 60fps, and those who only play games with fps counters on and allow it to influence how much fun they’re having. 

8)  Game doesn't look like the footage that was shared in the past/Game looks worse than Forza Horizon 5

yeah, kind of Starfield, FM doesn’t seem to look good enough for the performance it is delivering. What is it doing? It doesn’t look bad though, just not like some massive leap for the franchise. 

9) There are too many game breaking bugs (I haven't had any)

most same, I haven’t ran into any game breaking bugs that just ended a race or crashes the game. I do get the bug where the game stops rendering in most place, including the track surface, but it wasn’t anything I couldn’t just get past.

 

[AbsolutSurgen]

Quote

Im on the side of “so?”  To be fair neither is GT. I think if you want to be that serious about it or already are you should be playing those games instead of a console sim game. 

A lot of them are former Forza players who remember it fondly.  They want something else to play.  They don't consider GT in the same league either.  That's not their comparison base.

Quote

Ive seen some say that they think T10 just didn’t go through the trouble to identify all kinds of wheels that could be used and just left everything mid, leaving it up to the player to dial it all in Which is kind of fair I think. Their primary audience is likely one without a wheel.  

I've seen the same thing.  You would think they would have dialed in some of the more popular wheels though.

Quote

I hear iRacing has good AI, but most never race with it. I think the issue here is nobody really has great AI and everyone feels it’s about damn time somebody does. I’ve seen some say the AI was better in FM before “drivatars” became the new AI, but I can’t remember the AI from FM4.  

I haven't played it (don't have a wheel ATM).  IMHO -- You're never going to get AI that everyone likes.  The Sim Racing crowd wants AI that plays like real racers.   But the casual crowd wouldn't find that fun -- they want AI that they can play against.

Quote

agreed. My number 1 complaint. Some just don’t like that there aren’t a bunch of events with GT3 or LMP cars, but I feel the lack of design goes further than that. 

I think I do as well.  I do think they will expand it with regular events and new series as we go -- I'll hold my judgement waiting for the game to mature.

Quote

I don’t dislike it as much as others, but it needs more work as an idea. 

I think I am in the same camp as you.  I believe they were trying to take the game in a direction that didn't work out as well as they thought, and they had to pivot in late development.  I have no proof of this, just a theory.

Quote

I think it’s the same thing as Starfield. The optimization isn’t perfect, but it’s most two camps complaining. Those who don’t even want to upgrade their PC once every 10 years, but still get 60fps, and those who only play games with fps counters on and allow it to influence how much fun they’re having. 

Turn 10 isn't a PC developer -- so that probably explains it.  I have a 4080 with an i7-13700k -- this game objectively performs much worse than FH5.  I hope they figure out how to optimize it.

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

7 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

Turn 10 isn't a PC developer -- so that probably explains it.  I have a 4080 with an i7-13700k -- this game objectively performs much worse than FH5.  I hope they figure out how to optimize it

I have the same setup now.  Set everything to ultra, put the resolution on 1440p I stay above 70fps in the benchmark test, which so far in game I don’t think I’ve run into a spot where it was more intense than that. Usually less. I could have left it at 4k and been just a hair above 60, but I wanted the extra headroom. 
 

One recommendation I saw was be sure to not set anything to auto. They think it causes stutters. Instead just pick a value. The game is more stable doing that. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

3 minutes ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

I have the same setup now.  Set everything to ultra, put the resolution on 1440p I stay above 70fps in the benchmark test, which so far in game I don’t think I’ve run into a spot where it was more intense than that. Usually less. I could have left it at 4k and been just a hair above 60, but I wanted the extra headroom. 
 

One recommendation I saw was be sure to not set anything to auto. They think it causes stutters. Instead just pick a value. The game is more stable doing that. 

I have a 1440p Ultrawide.  I did the same (usually getting around 70 fps, with some dips in more demanding places) -- I am in the habit of manually cranking every setting when I get into a new game, so I haven't been using auto anywhere.  I was getting 120 fps+ with this setup in FH5, so I'm a little disappointed.

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

3 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

I have a 1440p Ultrawide.  I did the same (usually getting around 70 fps, with some dips in more demanding places) -- I am in the habit of manually cranking every setting when I get into a new game, so I haven't been using auto anywhere.  I was getting 120 fps+ with this setup in FH5, so I'm a little disappointed.

I wonder if it’s a case of FM trying to rely so much more heavily on RT for the lighting and visuals. During the day I think it looks worse than even FM7 in many places if RT is off. I don’t think FH5 was using RT as much as FM is trying to. But there’s probably more to it than just RT

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

Something that dawned on me doing the Open C class series in career mode, but if there’s a D class car you wanted to bring up and race with you might just need to go do free play until you level it up enough you can upgrade it. 
 

This is kind of why when I looked at the Career mode I wondered why the open class series were not the main career mode set of series. Start with E or D class, and let the person unlock the next class as they complete each preceding one. You could still drop your car for another or you could bring your D class car all the way up to the open B class series. Probably wouldn’t want to do A or higher, but you could give it a go as you’d have unlocked engine swaps by then. 
 

You could still be unlocking the series’s that are more themed as you go too, so if you want to go race BMWs and Mercs from the 80s and 90s instead of doing the open B class or A class series you could. But this simple change to how the series are organized and presented to the player would change how we connect with and build a

relationship with our car(s). 
 

I get that it’s rather slow for some people, but one thing I do like is the slower upgrade progression for for cars through a series. I like that feeling of starting out with a low C class car and over the course of several races upgrading it to be a maxed C500. I actually like that feeling of the handling getting better, the acceleration getting better, etc. I do think changing parts on the car should be something you should be able to do in practice also. I would like to see where series are a bit longer and races require different setups. Like some races being better served with high downforce or a car kitted out more for handling and breaking, while another would see speed being the priority, and the AI kit their cars accordingly too. Get even the more casual players used to the idea that car setups are not one-size fits all for all tracks. 

[SoberChef]

On 10/24/2023 at 11:30 AM, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

Something that dawned on me doing the Open C class series in career mode, but if there’s a D class car you wanted to bring up and race with you might just need to go do free play until you level it up enough you can upgrade it. 
 

This is kind of why when I looked at the Career mode I wondered why the open class series were not the main career mode set of series. Start with E or D class, and let the person unlock the next class as they complete each preceding one. You could still drop your car for another or you could bring your D class car all the way up to the open B class series. Probably wouldn’t want to do A or higher, but you could give it a go as you’d have unlocked engine swaps by then. 
 

You could still be unlocking the series’s that are more themed as you go too, so if you want to go race BMWs and Mercs from the 80s and 90s instead of doing the open B class or A class series you could. But this simple change to how the series are organized and presented to the player would change how we connect with and build a

relationship with our car(s). 
 

I get that it’s rather slow for some people, but one thing I do like is the slower upgrade progression for for cars through a series. I like that feeling of starting out with a low C class car and over the course of several races upgrading it to be a maxed C500. I actually like that feeling of the handling getting better, the acceleration getting better, etc. I do think changing parts on the car should be something you should be able to do in practice also. I would like to see where series are a bit longer and races require different setups. Like some races being better served with high downforce or a car kitted out more for handling and breaking, while another would see speed being the priority, and the AI kit their cars accordingly too. Get even the more casual players used to the idea that car setups are not one-size fits all for all tracks. 

 

Couldn't agree more. I have really altered the way I tune my vehicles in this iteration of the franchise as opposed to all the prior installments. I work towards handling/cornering/adjustments on my gear ratios as opposed to going all for flat out HP. I've had steadily, well under the ranks of the rest of the field, yet by making sure my 2nd/3rd/4th gears are tuned in such a way that allows my car to be faster out of the exit of turns, I can hold my own. Furthermore, as I was regularly setting myself up as far as 24th & still coming in 1st (or at the very least top 3 in every race minus 1 that I have played so far) I have now turned up the Driveatar level to 5 & am already contemplating level 6 perhaps.

 

Seeing the incremental changes made, being able to tune on the fly, hit the track & see how that difference is handled, just really having a lot of fun. I would say that this is a wholly new & unique entry for the franchise that, while not quite perfect, still has elements that I have come to love a lot. Meanwhile, I still haven't gone online or even done any free driving or anything, so there's a lot of game left for me!

[AbsolutSurgen]

I have been mostly avoiding the tuning menu in the single player campaign -- racing 50% Drivatar level 5 / 50% Drivatar level 6.  Mostly because I haven't needed to.  If I am racing a competitive car, I can usually beat the second place car by 5-10 seconds on level 5.  I think to consistently compete at level 6, it makes sense to get into the tuning menu (because some cars really are badly set up).  However, because your car is changing so much race-to-race due to upgrades earned in the CarPG mechanics,, I haven't wanted to devote the time to tweaking a setup and testing it on track,

 

I have done a little bit of it in the Rivals section, because I think it is difficult to get a top 10% time without doing it.

 

Clearly, to be competitive in multiplayer, you would need to focus on setup -- because there is significant time to be gained in getting the setup right.

[AbsolutSurgen]

Forza Motorsport Community Update 2

AKA.MS

---

While we continue to work on improvements and updates to Forza Motorsport, here’s a preview of what’s coming in Update 2 next month.

 

[Keyser_Soze]

I got a survey for this game, anyone else get one?

[SoberChef]

6 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

I got a survey for this game, anyone else get one?

I have not, what was it inquiring?

[Keyser_Soze]

1 hour ago, SoberChef said:

I have not, what was it inquiring?

 

The information you receive during the course of the survey is proprietary and confidential information to Microsoft, and you agree to take all necessary steps to preserve that confidentiality. As a part of your obligation to preserve the confidentiality of the information you agree not to (i) disclose the existence of the survey; or (ii) disclose or provide any information you receive in connection with the survey to any third party (other than as specifically permitted herein) in any manner including but not limited to capturing and posting survey screen shots, videos, or opinions about the survey or any other information related to the Product on any websites or blogs. However, you may disclose confidential information in accordance with judicial or other governmental order, provided you shall give Microsoft reasonable written notice prior to such disclosure and shall comply with any applicable protective order or equivalent. Further, you shall not be liable to Microsoft for disclosure of information which you can prove (a) is already known to you without an obligation to maintain the same as confidential; (b) becomes publicly known through no wrongful act of you; or (c) is independently developed by you.

 

 

Spoiler

Basically asking if you like the game

 

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

I got a survey asking if I liked the idea of using facial scans or pictures of government IDs as age verification for Xbox games and services. 
 

I said no.