Kazunori Yamauchi Says Tire Physics Remain One of Gran Turismo’s Biggest Challenges

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jordan
  • 46 comments
  • 6,479 views
I still don't understand why. GT will never be a hardcore sim like iRacing. It also won't ever be the most sim title on it's own platform.

It's as dumb as microslop
It seems against the spirit, though to not chase more realism. They still want to go that way as evidenced by GT7 being more realistic than previous games, by accounts I've seen.
 
It seems against the spirit, though to not chase more realism. They still want to go that way as evidenced by GT7 being more realistic than previous games, by accounts I've seen.
There are far more embarrassing elements in this game than the physics that they should go after if they want realism....

And as I said in another post: why not simply give advance notice, instead of letting players waste hundreds of hours tuning their cars for nothing?
 
There are far more embarrassing elements in this game than the physics that they should go after if they want realism....

And as I said in another post: why not simply give advance notice, instead of letting players waste hundreds of hours tuning their cars for nothing?
Sure, but I was mostly talking about the physics. I get what you're saying, other things should be focused on to improve things that are further away from realistic than the physics.

Advance notice would indeed be a good idea.
 
Here's what I'm struggling with: Why did PD feel the extreme need to change the physics. I haven't heard mass complaints. I haven't seen "pros" saying "wow this is bad" so why keep iterating when it was working fine?

It's like the IT worlds obsession with continually changing user interfaces. I don't need a new 'Ribbon' for Excel I need Excel to be the same it's always been. Add a new feature sure then change the UI but like MS changes things just to change things.
I feel PD does exactly the same.
It's not about addressing complaints. It's about enhancing the experience and increasing the realism.
 
I'd say game balance is an even bigger one, because the nerfs to certain cars in 1.71 were hilarious and relegated them to uselessness.


GT7 runs on PS4 base. You can't run iRacing nor LMU on a PS4.

PS4 run Assetto Corsa Competizione in 30 FPS yes but it did run.

I remember running on very old laptop on similar performance level as ps4 - rFactor 2 which has more complicated physics than iRacing. It really isn’t that of a big deal in terms of requirements.
 
GT8 will not come any soon... 2028 I guess.
 
Two things I would test in gravel/ snow to simulate the dig-in of the tire. Make the physics think the contact patch gets drastically bigger on lateral movement - if the code has determined also the size of the contact patch on the roads side, make that laterally bigger in the parts of the track where the track is supposed to be softer.

One could also try using the lateral slip overheating of the tire as grip multiplier, so that more the tire slips/loads sideways the more grip it gives. This is ofcouse a circular problem, as the more grip you get the lest the tire slips, which would then reduce the grip.

It is extremely rare to get correct feeling of tires digging in to gravel/snow in games. They always feel like there is only hard and dusty gravel and icy hard "snow" roads. I guess game physics are not there yet..
 
Last edited:
Also reading the article, Kaz says that it now takes eight months to complete one car instead of nine months (270 days).

It can be assumed that development on cars are one month faster than previously stated.
 
Also reading the article, Kaz says that it now takes eight months to complete one car instead of nine months (270 days).

It can be assumed that development on cars are one month faster than previously stated.
Strange, I thought it used to be six months. But that makes sense, since it apparently took them a maximum of eight months for the Peugeot 9X8.
 
You can make a great tire model even on PS4, look at Wreckfest, physics are amazing, even with all the cpu needed for all car damages.
 
Here's what I'm struggling with: Why did PD feel the extreme need to change the physics. I haven't heard mass complaints. I haven't seen "pros" saying "wow this is bad" so why keep iterating when it was working fine?

It's like the IT worlds obsession with continually changing user interfaces. I don't need a new 'Ribbon' for Excel I need Excel to be the same it's always been. Add a new feature sure then change the UI but like MS changes things just to change things.
I feel PD does exactly the same.
Gr3 speaking it was the closest to "good" it has ever been. It was nearly fairly balanced between MR and FR cars with just a few little touches needed to bring pointlessly obsolete cars into competitiveness. But it's all to suit whatever agenda they have going on, which is almost impossible to know at any given time.

When things get like this, we have to revert to "game theory", no pun intended. We have to look at who this ultimately benefits, why and what the process is. It always comes down to money.

This is of course giving PD the benefit of doubt that they are merely incompetent. They do still waste a lot of resources on stuff no one ever wanted. They would rather spend time on creating more crappy paid content or My First Gran Turismo than securing a deal to get additional classic tracks and filling the void they some manufacturers have. McLaren amongst others is massively underrepresented. But no, we get 2 Japanese rust buckets, a shopping trolley and another fridge freezer manufacturer car.
 
Last edited:
Gr3 speaking it was the closest to "good" it has ever been. It was nearly fairly balanced between MR and FR cars with just a few little touches needed to bring pointlessly obsolete cars into competitiveness. But it's all to suit whatever agenda they have going on, which is almost impossible to know at any given time.

When things get like this, we have to revert to "game theory", no pun intended. We have to look at who this ultimately benefits, why and what the process is. It always comes down to money.

This is of course giving PD the benefit of doubt that they are merely incompetent. They do still waste a lot of resources on stuff no one ever wanted. They would rather spend time on creating more crappy paid content or My First Gran Turismo than securing a deal to get additional classic tracks and filling the void they some manufacturers have. McLaren amongst others is massively underrepresented. But no, we get 2 Japanese rust buckets, a shopping trolley and another fridge freezer manufacturer car.
I’m sure you read the article. Look how long it takes for content to be added to GT7 compared to earlier GT games. If they didn’t utilise the cars from GT SPORT, imagine the complaining about the game having less cars than the first, third and GT Sport.

Kaz said players didn’t take well to the newness he tried with GT Sport. It’s much lengthier to try to bring back everything. Also, Kaz forgot players still play the old games. He’s trying to balance nostalgia and introduce new players to the franchise.
If he could add one car per two hours I’m sure would, but that ain’t happening.

He’s hitting and missing with some things and the team have half assed with other things. I’m glad he’s in his shoes and I’m not, people proabably wouldn’t want the Gran Turismo I’d make.

By the way, not only does Hyundai manufacture freezers, they also manufacture tanks. Maybe we’ll get one in the game before a freezer.
 
Need a link for that Porsche livery in the article. That thing looks sharp!

Edit: Nvm 😂
 
Last edited:
This was a very interesting read @Jordan30057, thanks for sharing the EVO article and this insight about Yamauchi-san's development with the GT series. Just to give my two cents, I feel the physics, despite the current 1.71 have a long way to go and its unique to hear the development cycles of such cars and tracks in the game and how long it takes to develop. Yikes, 4yrs for nurburg is ouch dev time!

Kaz mentions this also....
"Cars have become more and more complex over the years. You have all these different types of electronic management systems. So there’s a lot of different controls that go into the drivetrain and the differential and everything. Those types of systems tend to be unique for every different car. Take all-wheel-drive systems – it’s different when you look at Volkswagen, then Audi, Nissan or BMW. And you can say the same thing about EVs as well, that you can control even more precisely. In the Polestar 5 on the ice track, the dynamics of the way they move was completely different to, say, the Porsche Taycan."
I agree and somewhat disagree with him here, I feel that PD do need to look at other developers on how they adapt their newer physics models to better emulate car models and specifically car configurations whether they be a setup for FR, MR, RR or EV base weighted cars in the game. They still have had a hard time doing this and with the inclusion of the Canadian snowy tracks in GT7 to not fully be able to emulate good snow driving dynamics in a game, or shud I dare say Rally in general. This has been a sore bum element for years with GT titles....

He kinda even admits it here....in the Evo article.
‘The way the contact point changes is something that we can’t really figure out so easily. You have things like heat affecting the grip, and the tyre wear affecting the grip. The level of grain that happens when you have certain conditions on the track, it’s something that we just don’t have yet.’

There have been countless older games, whether they be "Arcadey" like Sega Rally 1 & 2, or more focused games like Colin Mcrae Rally or Richard Burns Rally that master the dynamic handling physics of cars so sweet with very limited CPU and GPU power. The PS5 is a tank in comparison to that older hardware and I feel that PD may not have even scratched the surface. Maybe PD needs to utilise their collaboration with Dunlop and other tyre manufacturers to utilise the tyre data (if they do) to emulate such good tyre models, because right now as other members have said it purely grounded on guesswork on how certain car models handle. There is also a real lack of weight to certain cars in the model handling dynamics in GT7. Certain updates have made some cars a joke with air in the sky floating bugs, while can be amusing they should not be the case.

I will highlight here a good comparison with a game that has to me a superior physics model which is WReckfest, a brilliant game for consoles and PC, that early on started out relatively small and grew and got bigger and better in development and to play.

Compared to being ruled over by the Sony overlords for GT. Wreckfest feel relatively tiny and indie as a title in the early days of 2012-13.

When KAZ mentioned of them being a bit more laid back nowadays to the development of GT games prior to titles like GT5 is interesting. That is a good sign because, "studio meddling" can seriously ruin a games cycle going forward into GT8 and the future.

This video shows here how a relatively small studio produced a game that to me in terms of tyre & driving dynamics is far superior to a title like GT7 in it's most current build (v1.71).

PD can look at these games such as this, for insipiration, and still improve on building. This game, wreckfest, depsit eit being very fun & entertaning on vehicular carnage & slaughter, has more of a "Simulation" feel on tyre and handling dynamics than any game cud ever be. Kaz can look at this dynamci and think about how they use the resources they have to achieve his goal of a purer driving sim.

This video is very interesting:


Also at the 2:30 point it makes ma laugh about the penalties hahahaha!!! Come on GT do better!!!
 
Back