Yea, for sure buy. Wonder how Shadowrun will end up in reviews. I'm on the fence with SR.

Let me help you. It's 9 maps and $60 :| .........MP ONLY.

haha those graphics whores on IGN. Reading that review you can totally tell they ripped the game a new one because the graphics weren't to their liking.

No way is the game anything less than a 9, but oh well who cares about their review. Gamespot's review is more in line with my opinion.

lol and 1up gives it an 8.5. They must be out of their mind. Its obvious they are docking it way too much due to the graphics.

Best sim racer out there as 1up says with incredible online options and many other things that it has should not receive an 8.5. The game accomplishes its biggest goal in flying colors so an 8.5 is a joke.

Yea well there is nothing wrong with disagreeing with that opinion.

I don't have the game myself yet, but Forza 2 for what its doing sure as hell isn't deserving of an 8.5. 1up is putting way too much emphasis on graphics. I liked the way Gamespot talked about the game's graphics. They were much more reasonable while still pointing out its weaknesses. They showed the essence of what forza 2 is ultimately suppose to be more respect I believe.

They are understanding of the fact that what Forza 2 needed to nail the most it did it and it managed to do it impressively.

My opinion is that T10 has tried to excel in every part, but at the end they've hardly failed. the game was announced at the end of last year, then was delayed for another half year. You simply need to look at the promissed features and what remains. They've said to outperform PGR3 in graphics part and promissed features like global illumination, 4xAA, 3d grass, HDR. They are promissing photorealistic graphics, even now! (look at the xbox site for FM2) They've cheated the customer and said that the CGIs are all rendered with ingame assets. (Sebring is just crap now) They've promissed 12 cars on track and 18 environments.
Nothing remains!!!!!!!!!1111111111
Now, after everybody is saying that the graphics isn't that big deal and almost doesn't keep up with PGR3, the marketing department is focusing on gameplay and trying to tell everybody that the game isn't about graphics, but gameplay and blablablub. Sorry, but which serious sim game provides some childish pimp stuff, paint stuff or an auction house instead of essentiell sim features like cockpit view or weather effects?! So this makes me believe that they've initially targeted a much wider audience with many features they've wanted to deliver. Exactly that what everybody is expecting from a first party. But they didn't deliver! (maybe because of time constraints) So they've put together what was done and this is exactly what makes the game looking so unfinished and unbalanced. It's definitly not a system-seller or something that you've expected from a first party. Despite of my hard critism on FM2, i've ordered a copy (although i didn't want it at first place) to make my final judgement on the final game. I really hope they will release some new tracks on XBOX Live, because driving on the same tracks i know from FM1 (almost with no changes) could become boring.

Sorry, i was a little exaggerating I've just wanted to say that these features are not essential for a sim, because everybody is defending the flaws of FM2 always with the same sentence: "because it's a sim, thing xyz isn't important". On the other side, games like NFS gets bashed as kiddy games, because of the pimp stuff (FM even does far more in the pimp, paint area).
I don't say it's bad to have pimp/paint stuff, but not at the cost of more important features. NFS is a fun racer so i am expecting to pimp my car. FM2 want's to be a sim, so i am expecting it simulates different driving experiences (cockpit view/weather) and not different appearances of the cars.

In FM it's called tuning and customization, in the NFS series it's called pimping.. That's the difference I think.. And in FM it's much deeper..

FM is for reallife carnuts (like me), NFS is for the more arcade style of gamer that just wants to have fun and most likely cannot get a car arround the track in FM without hitting something with most or all assists off..

Besides all that I cannot play a single NFS game on the Xbox 360, because they all have very crappy framerate imho.. I hate the 60fps discussions, but NFS on the Xbox 360 just doesn't feel and look smooth to me, I guess the game-engine which is just in all of them just sucks.. PGR3 also isn't 60fps, but at least it looks and feels smooth..

Well to sum it up for me, most of the reviews seem spot on...

I'm dissapointed in the graphics that I've seen in the demo, only in the sense, that they didn't meet the hype. But that is not to say the graphics bother me. I think they are fine. They just don't wow me like PGR3 did the first time I put it in my 360.

This game, you have to look at the whole package, and it has a lot to deliver... more of the same, yeah, its Forza2.

More cars, better physics, good looking game, lots of bells and whistles. MS and Turn 10 should be proud of their effort... the hyping of the graphics early on is the only sore spot for me. I still think it looks good, and like every review out there is saying... its the best sim racer on a console to date. (basically that is what they are saying).

I'll be getting it today, and picking up DIRT as well next month and racing all Summer.

Well, sorry to say this, but your dad is obviously completly clueless about videogame graphics.. Either that, or he needs glasses.. Calling FM2 a PS2 game is just dumb.. Let me guess, he thinks the PS3 will look much and much better? Or does he think that produces PS2 graphics aswell? And not having a HDTV is not an excuse either, because I still play on a "old" widescreen SDTV and Xbox 360 games still look way better then Xbox or PS2 games.. Only the (crap) resolution is still the same, that's all..

FM2 is on par with PGR3 in terms of graphics imho.. Maybe not as flashy and more bland, but from a technical point of view it's on par.. And that says a lot considering PGR3 was 30fps and not even native 720p, and FM2 is 60fps and native 720p.. And when PGR3 came out the next-gen was new and special, now 1,5 years later we're kindof used to it, so when a game like FM2 comes out that bassicly looks the same as PGR3 it's not that special anymore..

And that's also why I still prefer my PC when it comes to the best graphics in games.. It's a never ending process of better graphics on the PC (if you keep it uptodate and play the latest games), where gameconsoles only come out with a better generation of hardware every 5 years orso, and the progress made in between by systemoptimization is very minor compared to the ongoing progress on the PC..

I highly doubt that FM2 runs at 720p, because from a resolution point it looks the same like PGR3. FM2 definitly has not less jaggies than PGR3. When i look at NFS Carbon it looks so much crisper, there are almost no jaggies, the color transition is much much better (transition from bright to dark colors). So when i consider all these things i bet with you they go the same way like PGR3 (600p).
Also FM2 has absolutly no AF, but PGR3 has some kind of optimized AF. FM2 has no HDR, but PGR3. So from a technical point Forza can't keep up with PGR3. And 60FPS doesn't make the game more technical advanced. Then you could as well say that a XBOX 1 game that runs with 120FPS on the 360 is more technical advanced than a 360 game than runs with 30FPS. This is certainly not the case. And i think it's a much harder job for PGR3, because it's always streaming highres textures (consuming much memory). Regarding to textures, PGR3 is light-years in front of FM2.
And just remeber: The age of the jaggies with the 360 is over, because it's 4free