GT Sport beta physics discussion - Read the First Post Before Replying

[McLaren]

When two sims are good enough it's difficult to say, and some simulation areas are brighter than others comparing several sims.

Except there isn't always going to be a scenario in which they equal out.

Compare GT Sport as a simulator to iRacing, and it's not even close which is more realistic.

 

[JvM]

Found out that Valtteri Bottas is a former LFS player, his spins in China and some other incidents makes more sense now

Continuing from that, it still must have helped him to beat Lewis.

 

[Scaff]

Hey @Scaff serious question. Has any SIM programmed brake fade well. I could see brake fade for street cars, potentially. But, for race cars it usually isn't an issue because you run the proper brakes for the track you're racing. I never have brake fade issues in the Spec Miata, because I run a hard enough pad and we tend to use the brakes only when we must - corner speed is everything in a Miata.

Here you go.

 

[oneloops]

You don't speak for all sim users, for many, no they were not good enough.

Now stop avoiding the issue, are you actually going to aknowledge that sims can be looked objectively in regard to physics?

Or is the lack of brake fade in any GT actually just a subjective area of how people feel?

Of course, sims can be looked objectively in regard to physics, not only but yes.

The lack of brake fade in any GT is a fact, of course. When this area is integrated in any sim it can be judge how accurate or realistic it is made both objectively and subjectively (based in personal experiences of people who own that specific car for example).

It would be a good thing for GTS if PD includes brake fade in the final game.

Nope.

The statement that Ice Cream is only available in vanilla is not subjective (which an opinion would be), its objectively falsifiable statement of fact.

Its a statement of fact dressed up as opinion.

And we are tasting a vanilla Ice Cream through a digital controller

1.- It's real vanilla or fake vanille (scent) ?
2.- How much % of vanilla is there in that Ice cream ?
3.- What's the quality of that vanilla and the others ingredients ?
4.- Where does that vanilla come from ?

You can answer those questions tasting a vanille Ice Cream through a digital controller ? Because I can't, I could only feel a simulation of vanilla, cannot feel the real vanilla through a digital controller.

Even in real life the perception of that taste changes from one to another person, obviously.

 

[super_gt]

Spoiler: Off topic

So you find this most realistic?

Yes

Reminds me of Out Run and Ridge Racer. Can see why people drift in that game now, makes you feel like a drift king. No ABS, brake balance all the way to rear and still so easily controllable with rears locked on grass, you can just full throttle over kerbs and also go full lock left and right on grass and asphalt without losing control with no need to modulate throttle. Grass looks quite good at least.

So easily controllable but you had to counter steer all the time with controller which allows instant counter steer and this with car which is only 140bhp.

Found out that Valtteri Bottas is a former LFS player, his spins in China and some other incidents makes more sense now.

And I'm ready for F1 then 💡

Edit:

 

[Haitauer]

Has the wall auto correct magic finger been completely removed between v1.05 and now or does it go away at DR C?? Just noticed its not there anymore - at all (1.05 made it less intrusive). If so it is a proof of PDI fiddling with drive assists we dont have control over..

this caught me by surprise - why wont sony/pdi go and buy an engine like this for physics and damage then just slap their AAA graphics over it?

 

[OdeFinn]

Yeah, except what is going on is that you're disagreeing with reality. People can have opinions about a sim, people can't have an opinion about real world physics, as that is something that is a matter of fact. In which this is the discussion.

Yep, but same time they adjust their part of physics fit better experience, tuning their cars, adding more grip/power, adjusting tire pressures etc, just to defeat sharpest edge of real world physics.
So even real world physics are giving different reactions to same car, there's no identical cars in real world, neither identical setups used in any races, always there's at least minimal tolerance differences and those are enough to start butterfly effect in real world physics, giving way different result of handling. Of course main physics directions are there and had to obey, but actual result may vary a lot, even one when pressure 1psi lower than others may cause car to spin counterclockwise instead of all "identical" pressures would spin it clockwise.
Discussion should be stay much higher on physics base, if taking videos to compare you end up always situations where you just don't know all variables and it's not enough to start claim at car should do something instead of doing this and that, if driver makes minimalistic driving input (pedals/wheel) it might change whole case upside down and still everything is going exactly in terms of real-world physics, this is case in real-life and in simulation. When you deal with really good physics engine you might find lot of cases which look truly unbelievable/unrealistic from captured videos, only person who can judge those situations is driver behind wheel, if driver knows physics well and has more than good senses and highly trained reactions and ability to "record" every input/reaction what he did then he can give nearly satisfied explanation how realistic or just good car/simulation worked.
Small example: 4wd car in snow, few millimeter lift on throttle and you can get it oversteer, few millimeter push on throttle with followed correct few millimeter steering move and again you get it oversteer and also one choice to clue front wheels by applying feather touch on brakes and just after in to overdrive, or just correct timing on wheel turns will float your mass to side and you're oversteering. But this is working only if you're running right tire pressures, there's trick how pressures should be to give you easy oversteer. And if you search videos or comments how/why/when 4wd is oversteering you'll find lot of different things, and if you stick on one or maybe two of those cases and clue them to law of physics then other cases became impossible, but just because there's small differences what you have to take in count, but that's just nearly impossible thru second or third person explanations.

The statement that Ice Cream is only available in vanilla is not subjective (which an opinion would be), its objectively falsifiable statement of fact.

My friend said different opinion to this, can't argue when he said at that tastes just cold with tiny bit of salt. He has "damaged" taste nerves, and he's taste feelings are way different than "most of us".
Fact is just thing where majority of people have decided to believe, example: you might say at diamonds are one of hardest materials in world, but I can say at those are really soft. I'm right and you're wrong. Proof: take imaginary 1km (irrelevant how long, but helps to understand) long diamond and knock on other end and listen on other end, sound will come thru, bending diamond to deliver it's sound waves thru it. So just jelly to me, even light travels thru it, so black thick paper has to be harder..

 

[oneloops]

Yep, but same time they adjust their part of physics fit better experience, tuning their cars, adding more grip/power, adjusting tire pressures etc, just to defeat sharpest edge of real world physics.
So even real world physics are giving different reactions to same car, there's no identical cars in real world, neither identical setups used in any races, always there's at least minimal tolerance differences and those are enough to start butterfly effect in real world physics, giving way different result of handling. Of course main physics directions are there and had to obey, but actual result may vary a lot, even one when pressure 1psi lower than others may cause car to spin counterclockwise instead of all "identical" pressures would spin it clockwise.
Discussion should be stay much higher on physics base, if taking videos to compare you end up always situations where you just don't know all variables and it's not enough to start claim at car should do something instead of doing this and that, if driver makes minimalistic driving input (pedals/wheel) it might change whole case upside down and still everything is going exactly in terms of real-world physics, this is case in real-life and in simulation. When you deal with really good physics engine you might find lot of cases which look truly unbelievable/unrealistic from captured videos, only person who can judge those situations is driver behind wheel, if driver knows physics well and has more than good senses and highly trained reactions and ability to "record" every input/reaction what he did then he can give nearly satisfied explanation how realistic or just good car/simulation worked.
Small example: 4wd car in snow, few millimeter lift on throttle and you can get it oversteer, few millimeter push on throttle with followed correct few millimeter steering move and again you get it oversteer and also one choice to clue front wheels by applying feather touch on brakes and just after in to overdrive, or just correct timing on wheel turns will float your mass to side and you're oversteering. But this is working only if you're running right tire pressures, there's trick how pressures should be to give you easy oversteer. And if you search videos or comments how/why/when 4wd is oversteering you'll find lot of different things, and if you stick on one or maybe two of those cases and clue them to law of physics then other cases became impossible, but just because there's small differences what you have to take in count, but that's just nearly impossible thru second or third person explanations.



My friend said different opinion to this, can't argue when he said at that tastes just cold with tiny bit of salt. He has "damaged" taste nerves, and he's taste feelings are way different than "most of us".
Fact is just thing where majority of people have decided to believe, example: you might say at diamonds are one of hardest materials in world, but I can say at those are really soft. I'm right and you're wrong. Proof: take imaginary 1km (irrelevant how long, but helps to understand) long diamond and knock on other end and listen on other end, sound will come thru, bending diamond to deliver it's sound waves thru it. So just jelly to me, even light travels thru it, so black thick paper has to be harder..

You're right, even scientifics facts are changing through the time, because all we messure is an artificial abstraction of a physical event.

The way we messure telemetry changes every decade, and some predictions and simulations fail when they put into real world, for example Honda's engines in F1 over last years.

Also the way vibrations are transmited to the chassis are almost impredictable in every single bump at track, simulators do an abstraction of that, all is rounded to feel realistic if game developers are talented enough to integrate it well in the whole physic system.

Game testers drive real cars in other to better recreate the driving feeling of that car, if they are talented enough they can include that feel into the game. Some cars are better recreated than others because of the subjective perception factor in driving each car that is scripted into the sim-code.

If only facts and data matters, game tester don't have to drive those cars to influence and adjust their code.

Even quality tyres change from a tyre to another from the same manufacturer and the same specifications.

 

[PzR Slim]

My friend said different opinion to this, can't argue when he said at that tastes just cold with tiny bit of salt. He has "damaged" taste nerves, and he's taste feelings are way different than "most of us".
Fact is just thing where majority of people have decided to believe, example: you might say at diamonds are one of hardest materials in world, but I can say at those are really soft. I'm right and you're wrong. Proof: take imaginary 1km (irrelevant how long, but helps to understand) long diamond and knock on other end and listen on other end, sound will come thru, bending diamond to deliver it's sound waves thru it. So just jelly to me, even light travels thru it, so black thick paper has to be harder..

What a complete and utter load of rubbish.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Of course main physics directions are there and had to obey, but actual result may vary a lot, even one when pressure 1psi lower than others may cause car to spin counterclockwise instead of all "identical" pressures would spin it clockwise.

Do you have an example of this?

When you deal with really good physics engine you might find lot of cases which look truly unbelievable/unrealistic from captured videos, only person who can judge those situations is driver behind wheel, if driver knows physics well and has more than good senses and highly trained reactions and ability to "record" every input/reaction what he did then he can give nearly satisfied explanation how realistic or just good car/simulation worked.

@Scaff isn't making comparisons from video. He's playing all these games hands-on and offering the direct feedback from said experiences.

How many of these games have you played?

Fact is just thing where majority of people have decided to believe, example: you might say at diamonds are one of hardest materials in world, but I can say at those are really soft. I'm right and you're wrong. Proof: take imaginary 1km (irrelevant how long, but helps to understand) long diamond and knock on other end and listen on other end, sound will come thru, bending diamond to deliver it's sound waves thru it. So just jelly to me, even light travels thru it, so black thick paper has to be harder..

Wow, that's an excellent example of how little grasp you have on the English language. Or reality, really.

 

[Tornado]

My friend said different opinion to this, can't argue when he said at that tastes just cold with tiny bit of salt. He has "damaged" taste nerves, and he's taste feelings are way different than "most of us".
Fact is just thing where majority of people have decided to believe, example: you might say at diamonds are one of hardest materials in world, but I can say at those are really soft. I'm right and you're wrong. Proof: take imaginary 1km (irrelevant how long, but helps to understand) long diamond and knock on other end and listen on other end, sound will come thru, bending diamond to deliver it's sound waves thru it. So just jelly to me, even light travels thru it, so black thick paper has to be harder..

As unsurprising as it is that you would be the one to bring up a ridiculous example like this, what you're failing to realize is that "your friend" would still be wrong.

this caught me by surprise - why wont sony/pdi go and buy an engine like this for physics and damage then just slap their AAA graphics over it?

Soft body physics are obscenely computationally expensive.

 

[G.T.Ace]

this caught me by surprise - why wont sony/pdi go and buy an engine like this for physics and damage then just slap their AAA graphics over it?

Because this is not how game development works.

 

[Scaff]

Of course, sims can be looked objectively in regard to physics, not only but yes.

The lack of brake fade in any GT is a fact, of course. When this area is integrated in any sim it can be judge how accurate or realistic it is made both objectively and subjectively (based in personal experiences of people who own that specific car for example).

It would be a good thing for GTS if PD includes brake fade in the final game.

Then why do you keep attempting to reject what is objectively measurable with your 'feels'?

And we are tasting a vanilla Ice Cream through a digital controller

1.- It's real vanilla or fake vanille (scent) ?
2.- How much % of vanilla is there in that Ice cream ?
3.- What's the quality of that vanilla and the others ingredients ?
4.- Where does that vanilla come from ?

You can answer those questions tasting a vanille Ice Cream through a digital controller ? Because I can't, I could only feel a simulation of vanilla, cannot feel the real vanilla through a digital controller.

Even in real life the perception of that taste changes from one to another person, obviously.

Way to utterly avoid the point.

Do you believe that the phrase "In my opinion Ice Cream is only available in vanilla" is an opinion or a statement of fact?

Yep, but same time they adjust their part of physics fit better experience, tuning their cars, adding more grip/power, adjusting tire pressures etc, just to defeat sharpest edge of real world physics.
So even real world physics are giving different reactions to same car, there's no identical cars in real world, neither identical setups used in any races, always there's at least minimal tolerance differences and those are enough to start butterfly effect in real world physics, giving way different result of handling. Of course main physics directions are there and had to obey, but actual result may vary a lot, even one when pressure 1psi lower than others may cause car to spin counterclockwise instead of all "identical" pressures would spin it clockwise.
Discussion should be stay much higher on physics base, if taking videos to compare you end up always situations where you just don't know all variables and it's not enough to start claim at car should do something instead of doing this and that, if driver makes minimalistic driving input (pedals/wheel) it might change whole case upside down and still everything is going exactly in terms of real-world physics, this is case in real-life and in simulation. When you deal with really good physics engine you might find lot of cases which look truly unbelievable/unrealistic from captured videos, only person who can judge those situations is driver behind wheel, if driver knows physics well and has more than good senses and highly trained reactions and ability to "record" every input/reaction what he did then he can give nearly satisfied explanation how realistic or just good car/simulation worked.
Small example: 4wd car in snow, few millimeter lift on throttle and you can get it oversteer, few millimeter push on throttle with followed correct few millimeter steering move and again you get it oversteer and also one choice to clue front wheels by applying feather touch on brakes and just after in to overdrive, or just correct timing on wheel turns will float your mass to side and you're oversteering. But this is working only if you're running right tire pressures, there's trick how pressures should be to give you easy oversteer. And if you search videos or comments how/why/when 4wd is oversteering you'll find lot of different things, and if you stick on one or maybe two of those cases and clue them to law of physics then other cases became impossible, but just because there's small differences what you have to take in count, but that's just nearly impossible thru second or third person explanations.

And?

No one is talking about a granular level here and I'm sure we are all well aware that tolerances exist, however what is being dismissed here based on 'feel' and 'if I don't have fun its not realistic' is not a granular level of detail, its basics.

Oh and the bolded part, your car tyres will vary in pressure by that much just by you sitting in it, even more so as you drive it dependent on a wide range of factors, but they are not going to influence things to the degree you claim for a 1ps difference, and I strongly suggest you provide some proof of that after the last trip to fantasy land you made with a similar level of absurd and unsupported claims.

My friend said different opinion to this, can't argue when he said at that tastes just cold with tiny bit of salt. He has "damaged" taste nerves, and he's taste feelings are way different than "most of us".

And how does that make 'In my opinion ice cream is only available in vanilla' an opinion?

It doesn't.

You are presenting an argument that has no basis in the question asked or the subject being discussed.

Fact is just thing where majority of people have decided to believe,

No its really not.

That would make Santa, Unicorns and the Tooth Fairy objective facts, and they are not.

Facts are testable, repeatable and falsifiable.

example: you might say at diamonds are one of hardest materials in world, but I can say at those are really soft. I'm right and you're wrong. Proof: take imaginary 1km (irrelevant how long, but helps to understand) long diamond and knock on other end and listen on other end, sound will come thru, bending diamond to deliver it's sound waves thru it. So just jelly to me, even light travels thru it, so black thick paper has to be harder..

What grade of diamond is it? How loud is the sound? What frequency is the sound? Why are you relating the hardness of an item (which is measurable on the Mohs scale) with its ability to transmist sounds when they are actually directly inverse?

That's right the harder a material is the better is transmits sound!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_sound

You're right, even scientifics facts are changing through the time, because all we messure is an artificial abstraction of a physical event.

Nope again.

Please read up on the scientific method, how evidence works in science and how it can be applied to the world around us, because between the two of you some rather fundamental abuses of it are being perpetrated.

The way we messure telemetry changes every decade, and some predictions and simulations fail when they put into real world, for example Honda's engines in F1 over last years.

And yet they still do it, I wonder why that is?

Your bias to dismiss simulation kind of forgets the sheer number of times it works and is unaware of how it fits into the science of motorsport engineering.

Also the way vibrations are transmited to the chassis are almost impredictable in every single bump at track,

No they are not. That's why shaker rigs exist and have done for a very long time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_post_shaker

simulators do an abstraction of that, all is rounded to feel realistic if game developers are talented enough to integrate it well in the whole physic system.

Game testers drive real cars in other to better recreate the driving feeling of that car, if they are talented enough they can include that feel into the game. Some cars are better recreated than others because of the subjective perception factor in driving each car that is scripted into the sim-code.

Ah so you're one of those that subscribes to the 'its the PD magic that no one else can recreate' school of false logic.

People have been making that claim for years about them, yet the physics engine still has some rather big holes in it.

By all means keep going with it, just don't claim it as a fact and don't attempt to use it as a way to dismiss what is objectively testable (as its not going to be accepted as carrying equal weight at all).

If only facts and data matters, game tester don't have to drive those cars to influence and adjust their code.

How did PD drive the Red Bull, concept, one off museum pieces and Vision cars?

Even quality tyres change from a tyre to another from the same manufacturer and the same specifications.

Within strict and measurable tolerance ranges governed by law. Not that it has anything at all to do with this.

We are not talking about tolerance differences here (and despite what was claimed above, no 1psi difference in a tyre is not going to see cars spinning in different directions).

 

[oneloops]

Ah so you're one of those that subscribes to the 'its the PD magic that no one else can recreate' school of false logic.

People have been making that claim for years about them, yet the physics engine still has some rather big holes in it.

By all means keep going with it, just don't claim it as a fact and don't attempt to use it as a way to dismiss what is objectively testable (as its not going to be accepted as carrying equal weight at all).

False logic ? Let me a big LOL.

The same false logic when people can feel "magic" listening music or driving their favourite car in real life ?

Human beings, luckily, aren't only logical.

Thinking only about logic is boring. Life is logic and fun and magic and art. I prefer enjoying those 4 sides of life and in every activity I do (like racing sims).

 

[Johnnypenso]

Yep, but same time they adjust their part of physics fit better experience, tuning their cars, adding more grip/power, adjusting tire pressures etc, just to defeat sharpest edge of real world physics.
So even real world physics are giving different reactions to same car, there's no identical cars in real world, neither identical setups used in any races, always there's at least minimal tolerance differences and those are enough to start butterfly effect in real world physics, giving way different result of handling. Of course main physics directions are there and had to obey, but actual result may vary a lot, even one when pressure 1psi lower than others may cause car to spin counterclockwise instead of all "identical" pressures would spin it clockwise.
Discussion should be stay much higher on physics base, if taking videos to compare you end up always situations where you just don't know all variables and it's not enough to start claim at car should do something instead of doing this and that, if driver makes minimalistic driving input (pedals/wheel) it might change whole case upside down and still everything is going exactly in terms of real-world physics, this is case in real-life and in simulation. When you deal with really good physics engine you might find lot of cases which look truly unbelievable/unrealistic from captured videos, only person who can judge those situations is driver behind wheel, if driver knows physics well and has more than good senses and highly trained reactions and ability to "record" every input/reaction what he did then he can give nearly satisfied explanation how realistic or just good car/simulation worked.
Small example: 4wd car in snow, few millimeter lift on throttle and you can get it oversteer, few millimeter push on throttle with followed correct few millimeter steering move and again you get it oversteer and also one choice to clue front wheels by applying feather touch on brakes and just after in to overdrive, or just correct timing on wheel turns will float your mass to side and you're oversteering. But this is working only if you're running right tire pressures, there's trick how pressures should be to give you easy oversteer. And if you search videos or comments how/why/when 4wd is oversteering you'll find lot of different things, and if you stick on one or maybe two of those cases and clue them to law of physics then other cases became impossible, but just because there's small differences what you have to take in count, but that's just nearly impossible thru second or third person explanations.



My friend said different opinion to this, can't argue when he said at that tastes just cold with tiny bit of salt. He has "damaged" taste nerves, and he's taste feelings are way different than "most of us".
Fact is just thing where majority of people have decided to believe, example: you might say at diamonds are one of hardest materials in world, but I can say at those are really soft. I'm right and you're wrong. Proof: take imaginary 1km (irrelevant how long, but helps to understand) long diamond and knock on other end and listen on other end, sound will come thru, bending diamond to deliver it's sound waves thru it. So just jelly to me, even light travels thru it, so black thick paper has to be harder..

You're right, even scientifics facts are changing through the time, because all we messure is an artificial abstraction of a physical event.

The way we messure telemetry changes every decade, and some predictions and simulations fail when they put into real world, for example Honda's engines in F1 over last years.

Also the way vibrations are transmited to the chassis are almost impredictable in every single bump at track, simulators do an abstraction of that, all is rounded to feel realistic if game developers are talented enough to integrate it well in the whole physic system.

Game testers drive real cars in other to better recreate the driving feeling of that car, if they are talented enough they can include that feel into the game. Some cars are better recreated than others because of the subjective perception factor in driving each car that is scripted into the sim-code.

If only facts and data matters, game tester don't have to drive those cars to influence and adjust their code.

Even quality tyres change from a tyre to another from the same manufacturer and the same specifications.

You guys realize that April 1st was some time ago right? I believe diamonds are soft and I'm right and you're wrong? Scientific facts are changing all the time? I just can't take these responses seriously.

 

[Scaff]

False logic ? Let me a big LOL.

Excellent, so you will be able to provide a detailed rebuttal based on sourced evidence that they can.

Or are you now limited to basic mocking in place of an actual ability to articulate a replay that will stand up to scrutiny?

 

[oneloops]

Excellent, so you will be able to provide a detailed rebuttal based on sourced evidence that they can.

Or are you now limited to basic mocking in place of an actual ability to articulate a replay that will stand up to scrutiny?

I've explained it a little late, editing, sorry.

Then why do you keep attempting to reject what is objectively measurable with your 'feels'?

I don't reject it, I add the "how it feels" importance to what is objectively measurable in the quality of a sim.

Your bias to dismiss simulation kind of forgets the sheer number of times it works and is unaware of how it fits into the science of motorsport engineering.

Talent, intuition and creativity works the sheer number of times too.

No they are not. That's why shaker rigs exist and have done for a very long time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_post_shaker

That can help to develop and improve the race car, the feels, intuition and creativity of the driver and engineers can help, and in fact it does too.

How did PD drive the Red Bull, concept, one off museum pieces and Vision cars?

Because they can use calculations, approximations, creativity and imagination, like with the others reals cars. The result is an approximation.

You guys realize that April 1st was some time ago right? I believe diamonds are soft and I'm right and you're wrong? Scientific facts are changing all the time? I just can't take these responses seriously.

Did you ever study philosophy or psychology in your life or not ? Or even listened about it ?

 

[Haitauer]

What a complete and utter load of rubbish

Now thats what i call an argument.. 👍

 

[PzR Slim]

All of this to defend a chosen favourite. What a sad, pathetic existence to lead.

Now thats what i call an argument.. 👍

I like to call a spade a spade 👍

 

[Haitauer]

Because this is not how game development works.

Well it should...

a chosen favourite

What? we are getting religious next?

Some might have favourites, but most of us i think have played gt, pcars, ac - you name it. Id say the likes of pcars and ac are better simulators, but i prefer GT as a game. Well atleast gt5/6 as gts is still an open case.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Now thats what i call an argument.. 👍

How else do you characterize someone saying diamonds are soft because they believe it to be so?

 

[Famine]

Firstly, all the chatter on what science is and isn't belongs in the Opinions & Current Events forum.

Secondly, please don't take it to that forum either, because the amount of tosh being spouted in here is just embarrassing.

 

[oneloops]

All of this to defend a chosen favourite. What a sad, pathetic existence to lead.



I like to call a spade a spade 👍

Fail. I enjoy some parts of AC others of PCARS and others of GT. Sometimes some areas are excellent in those 3 sims.

I don't care about which is the best, I've already said that overall AC physics are more realistic than GT.

 

[EDK]

Hey @Scaff serious question. Has any SIM programmed brake fade well. I could see brake fade for street cars, potentially. But, for race cars it usually isn't an issue because you run the proper brakes for the track you're racing. I never have brake fade issues in the Spec Miata, because I run a hard enough pad and we tend to use the brakes only when we must - corner speed is everything in a Miata.

Agree with what you are saying here, I have a lot of track time with 1.5-2 hour stints in different race prepped cars and have never once experienced fade in those cars. With proper pad compounds, cooling, and racing brake fluid, fade is a non-event. Even in heavier cars than a Miata.

But also agree that modeling fade on a road car that does not feature upgraded brakes is realistic. Road compounds and fluid are not designed with the rigors of racing in mind. Once you compound that with lack of adequate cooling, fade is inevitable.

 

[lancia delta hf]

Chris specifically says at the beginning that he was not impressed with the initial build of the car in-game. They developed the car specifically around his word.

Marketing talk or not is beside the point; oneloops statement is false. You absolutely can prove 1 simulator is more realistic than another. @Scaff has displayed multiple times over the years, usually referencing GT's simplistic tire model as a major key to why the game can't quite stand up to other sims (majority PC) that unsurprisingly, run more advanced tire models.

When i watched that trailer for the first time yesterday and heard him say the car felt way off, i thought to myself : brilliant marketing! Now everyone will lap up what will undoubtedly be his next line i.e but now it's like the real thing!. It's a classic tactic.

 

[Motor City Hami]

Here you go.

Thanks for doing this test @Scaff . Great video! Interesting to see the color indicators on the brakes.

Test one from 300 F and blueish green, turned green around 500 F and stayed green through 928 F.

Test two from 735 F and green to yellowish around 1200 F, topping out around 1260 F at the very end of braking.

Test three from 880 F and green to yellowish around 1200 F and topping out around 1400.

Says to me that the color indicator is set too wide. When would you ever hit full yellow or even red? Seemingly never.

Know that this ended up a little off topic for GT Sport so I'll try to bring it back in. I have said a number of times that I hope PD is playing games like Project Cars and AC so that they can truly compare GT to their competition. Project Cars again continues to impress me. And I agree with you that brake fade on street cars should definitely be into GT Sport, it GT wants to pay off the marketing line, "The Ultimate Racing Simulator."

 

[Scaff]

I've explained it a little late, editing, sorry.

I would suggest you finish what you want to say in a post before you hit submit in future.

I don't reject it, I add the "how it feels" importance to what is objectively measurable in the quality of a sim.

Your posting history to date shows otherwise, you have on a number of occasions placed what you 'feel' well above what is objectively demonstrable.

Talent, intuition and creativity works the sheer number of times too.

None of which will work without the science behind it.

That can help to develop and improve the race car, the feels, intuition and creativity of the driver and engineers can help, and in fact it does too.

Worked on the development of many cars?

As once again, without the science behind it, then its not going to work.

Because they can use calculations, approximations, creativity and imagination, like with the others reals cars. The result is an approximation.

So they make it up.

 

[oneloops]

Your posting history to date shows otherwise, you have on a number of occasions placed what you 'feel' well above what is objectively demonstrable.

Your posting history to date shows that what is objectively demonstrable is very much important that "how it feels" driving a simulator. That your vision of physic simulations, and others have others visions and differents ways to feel realism through a digital controller. No problem.

Worked on the development of many cars?

As once again, without the science behind it, then its not going to work.

I agree, it works with both sides together.

 

[Scaff]

Thanks for doing this test @Scaff . Great video! Interesting to see the color indicators on the brakes.

Test one from 300 F and blueish green, turned green around 500 F and stayed green through 928 F.

Test two from 735 F and green to yellowish around 1200 F, topping out around 1260 F at the very end of braking.

Test three from 880 F and green to yellowish around 1200 F and topping out around 1400.

Says to me that the color indicator is set too wide. When would you ever hit full yellow or even red? Seemingly never.

Know that this ended up a little off topic for GT Sport so I'll try to bring it back in. I have said a number of times that I hope PD is playing games like Project Cars and AC so that they can truly compare GT to their competition. Project Cars again continues to impress me. And I agree with you that brake fade on street cars should definitely be into GT Sport, it GT wants to pay off the marketing line, "The Ultimate Racing Simulator."

I tend to look at it on PCars Dash, which is a UDP app and on that it goes to full red (and is dynamic based on the car in question).

As I don't use the telemetry when racing I've not noticed.

I do however agree that it should be in place in GTS (and for that matter AC).

 

[Haitauer]

it GT wants to pay off the marketing line, "The Ultimate Racing Simulator."

Marketing line is just what it is. I dont see gt going there as its not as profitable market as casual gaming - unless they can accomplish both. Fingers crossed to that. 👍

Has any of you had a chance to test the dirt tracks? How is the grip there? Not seen in eu beta yet.. even though im not holding my breath after playing Dirt Rally