PENALTY SYSTEM IS STILL A PIECE OF ****!!!

[pantherjag]

One thing I have noticed with the lack of a penalty system is that drivers are much more likely to yield in the event of an overtaking attempt.

For example previously you would make a move down the inside and the other driver would desperately try to hold on around the outside and if they had a nose alongside they would leave it in. This could result in a minor contact with car being overtook going off the track when really they have a responsibility to accept they have been passed and drive accordingly and yield.

Game would detect one car had bumped the other off and dish out a penalty. This was the case even before they made penaltys much harsher.

Now cars being passed realise if they just leave it in they run the risk off running out of road going off and other car wont be penalised resulting in drivers accepting being overtook.

To be clear if other car is fully or even half way alongside on exit of corner you need to leave them room I'm more talking about when they just have a nose left inside and just leave it in knowing that the door will inevitably close.

Will be interesting to see what the next update brings regarding penaltys

 

[Voodoovaj]

Svenno, I love your work and respect you as the penalty king. But this is just unfair.

I can't think of a more challenging thing - with my limited knowledge of programming - than making a racing penalty system that gets everything right the instant/moments after it happens.

Plenty of racing incidents are really subjective in their blame. Leaving room and backing out are respectful moves that we'd expect out of good drivers but you can't force it on everyone. It's one of those things about racing that takes a long time to sink in. I mean, I'm deep into my GTS career at this point, and I'm really only beginning to understand how "slow in, fast out" actually works.

Back when GT5 was hacked, you could crank up the AI difficulty and then mess around with it a lot. We learned that the AI is intentionally slow.

My point is that it can be made to go around the track, mistake free. It intentionally makes mistakes to be more like real people. The AI cannot get around the track unless it knows the same things about the track that we do, as in where to brake, where to accelerate, where to pass, and most importantly, how to pass. The AI will back out of a pass if you go deep and follow the line.

People saying that a good penalty system is difficult, or even impossible, are not truly looking into the systems that exist in the game right now and how best to leverage those systems.

When there is an incident where it cannot find concrete blame, then it can do what people do, and take no action. No one in their right mind can fault that.

 

[BallPtPenTheif]

My point is that it can be made to go around the track, mistake free. It intentionally makes mistakes to be more like real people. The AI cannot get around the track unless it knows the same things about the track that we do, as in where to brake, where to accelerate, where to pass, and most importantly, how to pass. The AI will back out of a pass if you go deep and follow the line.

People saying that a good penalty system is difficult, or even impossible, are not truly looking into the systems that exist in the game right now and how best to leverage those systems.

My following point isn't really productive because we really don't know how the game is programmed and I always encourage people to expect more from the developer, not less.

However, just because there are multiple data sets being tracked within the game doesn't necessarily mean that those data sets are commingled across multiple simulation systems. The difficulty or ease of commingling those data sets isn't really relevant though as we should be expecting the best from the developer regardless of the development challenge. We're consumers not advocates for the developer.

So I'm on your side, but I'm just throwing that observation out there.

 

[Voodoovaj]

My following point isn't really productive because we really don't know how the game is programmed and I always encourage people to expect more from the developer, not less.

However, just because there are multiple data sets being tracked within the game doesn't necessarily mean that those data sets are commingled across multiple simulation systems. The difficulty or ease of commingling those data sets isn't really relevant though as we should be expecting the best from the developer regardless of the development challenge. We're consumers not advocates for the developer.

So I'm on your side, but I'm just throwing that observation out there.

Oh, by no means am I saying that these systems communicate, but what I am saying is that the information necessary for a system is possible to obtain because various systems are obtaining that information at the moment, or in recent iterations.

IMHO, the key disconnect between this system working as we'd like it to and it not working effectively is the choice to add leniency for lower ranks.

By focusing on this goal, the system must, by design, NOT WORK properly. For instance, if you assume someone at DR D cannot drive a straight line, or that person brakes early (both of which are possible), then you build in tolerances that won't work at higher ranks. Then, in order to circumvent those tolerances, you build in features to try and compensate. it becomes a mess.

THIS is where the impossible creeps into the equation. It is impossible to have different rules for participants who are believed to be on equal footing.

The only way this would have ever worked is if people in a different DR rank from you are all a ghost. Which, to be honest, is actually a decent idea. Super Monaco GP on the Sega Genesis had an AWESOME mechanic where you did not have to win races. You simply had to beat your rival. So, GT could use that concept in single player and Sport Mode to allow people to compete together. DR D's only need to beat the other DR D's, and so on, until you get to DR A. I'd combine DR A, A+, and S into one group. Everyone outside your group is a ghost to you.

People would still score points for their finishing position, but you wouldn't get people of lesser rank making a mess of things.

It's not that dissimilar from class racing in sports cars.

 

[Sven Jurgens]

My following point isn't really productive because we really don't know how the game is programmed and I always encourage people to expect more from the developer, not less.

However, just because there are multiple data sets being tracked within the game doesn't necessarily mean that those data sets are commingled across multiple simulation systems. The difficulty or ease of commingling those data sets isn't really relevant though as we should be expecting the best from the developer regardless of the development challenge. We're consumers not advocates for the developer.

So I'm on your side, but I'm just throwing that observation out there.

That's what I always disliked about the switch to object oriented programming. I'm more from the era of code to the metal, re-purpose everything, everything is freely available by everything else. The most useful tool was pointer casting and we still used that in combination with pointer arithmetic to get around class restrictions lol. Anyway that's way off topic.

But true, AI, ghosting and penalty system are likely different systems, made by different departments, with little communication between them. The AI is likely directly tied to the simulation system while ghosting seems to be event based, which would explain the split second of ghosts becoming solid between events. (eg transition from ghosted for being perpendicular to direction of travel to going too slow). While the penalty system seems to be a higher level script language that only has knowledge of simple absolute states like contact, car off and position loss.

Still the gear indicator flashes before a turn, stops flashing when you have slowed down enough. It's dynamic and adjusts when you approach a corner at a different speed after a crash or serving a penalty. There's valuable knowledge there that is not used at all.

Anyway, these different departments need to sit down together and come up with a solution.

Meanwhile, getting rammed off and spun by nose stickers who used to have an average SR below 50 before the patch. Another vast resource of information PD willfully ignores.

 

[stpatty]

Just had a go at Dragon Trail in between FIA races there. Started 3rd, finished 11th. Got put off at the top of the track on laps 1, 2 and 4.

I'd quite like to get the 15 clean races bonus, but I think I've had three clean races total since the new penalty system was introduced. How strict is it about offtracks? Do you lose the bonus if you go off track at all, even if it's not cutting a corner?

 

[Voodoovaj]

Just had a go at Dragon Trail in between FIA races there. Started 3rd, finished 11th. Got put off at the top of the track on laps 1, 2 and 4.

I'd quite like to get the 15 clean races bonus, but I think I've had three clean races total since the new penalty system was introduced. How strict is it about offtracks? Do you lose the bonus if you go off track at all, even if it's not cutting a corner?

Yes, going off track for any reason pretty much does away with your CRB (at least in this iteration)

 

[WheelmanSteve]

I've gotten the CRB after being massively punted, almost like a consolation prize. (IMO, total CRB's should be counted, not consecutive...)

 

[Rangeraus]

Having zero penalties only works when you are racing with people you can trust.

This person is in top split FIA races at the moment... not exactly the profile of someone who has their head screwed on.

 

[Redneckchef]

So these are the people I have had in most of my races at DT the last 2 nights. There is absolutely no reason these people should be able to keep SR S at this point. I have seen plenty of deliberate punts from them, and been the victim of a few as well. It is really screwing with matchmaking when in one of my last races a very clean and fast A driver I have seen a lot is on pole with one of these guys behind him and was basically begging in pre-race chat for a clean race.

 

[ROCKET JOE]

Having zero penalties only works when you are racing with people you can trust. ...

I'd gladly race people with a long time proven and meaningful ( hard to game ) high SR ... without knowing them.
Sadly the current SR system is nowhere near.

 

[PaoloMX]

I'd gladly race people with a long time proven and meaningful ( hard to game ) high SR ... without knowing them.
Sadly the current SR system is nowhere near.

Obviously the SR system is broken now, but even before Xmas it was much too easy to gain SR. You could have 1 race C (2 max) and recover your level. It should be much harder than that.

If PD worked on getting the SR scoring right then you really could trust that S drivers were going to be clean and E drivers were going to be chaotic battering rams. This would negate the need for perfect penalties because you were with like minded racers and, like was said earlier, just getting the obvious penalties right would be ok.

 

[duo_sabre_07]

I believe I have a good idea to share:
This is kinda like the reverse of hotboxes in a versus fighting game.

In the picture displayed, 5-10-15 is the measurement of the impact for each vehicle.
Basically it works like this:
The stronger the impact, the stronger the penalty (the amount of seconds depends on how strong the collision), the player committing the hit on purpose is forced to slow down immediately at very low speed and is immediately ghosted.

I've also thought of other implementation to make the game register other factors:
A small tap without being a prolonged nudge (3-4 seconds) can be ignored.

*A nudge could be 3-4 seconds.

But if a small tap becomes prolonged nudge (3-4 seconds) it becomes a penalty which will force the player to slow down immediately at very low speed and is immediately ghosted.

If a small tap is repeated 3 to 4 times it becomes penalty.

The game can tell if cars are spun out and/or about to pit in.
I believe that if a car is to spin out of control/loss of traction/loss of balance, the car is immediately ghosted.
If a car is about to exit from pit lane, it should be ghosted for about 1 and half seconds/ with a different color indication above the car indicating the car is rejoining the race.

I believe that if they implement this idea, it might improve the game just a bit, by that's my opinion (my two cents on this).

*Please note: the rectangle that has the numbers 5-10-15 is the representation of a car.

 

[breeminator]

Back when GT5 was hacked, you could crank up the AI difficulty and then mess around with it a lot. We learned that the AI is intentionally slow.

My point is that it can be made to go around the track, mistake free. It intentionally makes mistakes to be more like real people. The AI cannot get around the track unless it knows the same things about the track that we do, as in where to brake, where to accelerate, where to pass, and most importantly, how to pass. The AI will back out of a pass if you go deep and follow the line.

People saying that a good penalty system is difficult, or even impossible, are not truly looking into the systems that exist in the game right now and how best to leverage those systems.

While it knows how to get around the track, it doesn't know it accurately enough. Forza has a very accurate dynamic driving line, where the colour changes to red when you should brake, but while it's very accurate, it's not 100%, sometimes you learn it's best to brake a touch earlier or later than it shows. So it would need to allow enough variation in braking point to allow for those small errors, but the problem is you only need to deviate from the ideal braking point by that small amount to take out the car in front or behind. Yes, it could catch major deviations, but not someone braking a teeny bit late to push the car ahead wide, or a teeny bit early to force the car behind to bin it off the track to avoid contact. The visible indicator of where GTS thinks we should brake is the double cones, and they're often further away from the ideal braking point than the Forza driving line colour changes are. And all that is before we allow for things like different tyre compounds, different amounts of wear, different cars, different brake bias settings, and people legitimately braking earlier but more gently to save their tyres.

 

[Sven Jurgens]

@duo_sabre_07 Force of contact is difficult to determine, the same as position of contact. Lag and forward prediction make the game play out differently on the 2 clients involved. Hence the often weird ping pong physics in collisions. What you see is the result of your forward predicted car colliding with their real time car, while they see the result of their forward predicted car colliding with your real time car. The hit can be on your rear penal on your console, yet on the front panel on theirs. Just a little bit of lag can mean your car brakes a couple meters later on their console, carries more speed and makes an exaggerated hit which to you looks like that car suddenly takes off like a rocket for a tiny touch. Nudges are also often the effect of lag. You shouldn't drive too close since even a tiny lag spike can have big results.

To accurately determine what would have really happened you will need the server to play it out with both of your cars synchronized on absolute time. Then it can determine where a hit would have taken place and what the force would have been.

However that raises the question of responsibility. Are you responsible for what happens on your console, also responsible for what happens on their console, and responsible for what happens when things are synchronized in time. I've had penalties where I never made contact with the other car, yet they had 3 yellow bars and since my steering/brake input arrived late on their console my car on their console punted them off while I completely missed them on my console. (GR.1 woes at Sarthe) I have a couple of those gifs where I'm already alongside the other car when it suddenly takes off and disappears into a barrier. The other console would tell on me and I got a penalty for something out of my control (lag)

Hence it is better to look at things that you have more control over like did you enter the corner too fast, did you leave room, did you have a reason to suddenly brake, did you come from off road, did you steer into the other car etc. This is where fuzzy logic comes in, one or both of the consoles involved record a collision. They need to exchange that information and come to an understanding why it happened, who is more to blame. Who wasn't leaving room, who came in too fast, who is sliding out of control, who is most off the direction of travel. When in doubt, ie the scales don't tip enough to one side, shared blame.

Penalty time could also be based on the time lost by the victim (if the system can tell with certainty who the victim is, otherwise shared blame). For example a clear cut dive bomb, car enters a corner too fast, not being able to make it without going wide or sliding wildly etc. A collision occurs with a car that was within the speed range and following a normal line in the corner. Check the time difference between the aggressor and the victim when both are back up to speed, there's your penalty time. If the aggressor gives the position back, no penalty time (still SR Down), however if the aggressor goes off road after collision, give them a bigger penalty anyway for dangerous driving.

While it knows how to get around the track, it doesn't know it accurately enough. Forza has a very accurate dynamic driving line, where the colour changes to red when you should brake, but while it's very accurate, it's not 100%, sometimes you learn it's best to brake a touch earlier or later than it shows. So it would need to allow enough variation in braking point to allow for those small errors, but the problem is you only need to deviate from the ideal braking point by that small amount to take out the car in front or behind. Yes, it could catch major deviations, but not someone braking a teeny bit late to push the car ahead wide, or a teeny bit early to force the car behind to bin it off the track to avoid contact. The visible indicator of where GTS thinks we should brake is the double cones, and they're often further away from the ideal braking point than the Forza driving line colour changes are. And all that is before we allow for things like different tyre compounds, different amounts of wear, different cars, different brake bias settings, and people legitimately braking earlier but more gently to save their tyres.

Thus SR Down for both when contact happens and neither grossly miss their braking points. That would be an improvement over letting the car behind getting away with it and giving the car in front a penalty. It doesn't have to be perfect, it just needs to stop being wrong more often than right, while deducting SR for contact when there is doubt.

 

[breeminator]

Thus SR Down for both when contact happens and neither grossly miss their braking points. That would be an improvement over letting the car behind getting away with it and giving the car in front a penalty. It doesn't have to be perfect, it just needs to stop being wrong more often than right, while deducting SR for contact when there is doubt.

I think what could work might be a sliding scale proportionate share of the penalty. So the game could decide the total amount of penalty to be given out by the force of contact. Then it could split that penalty between the two cars based on how far away from the ideal speed and location profile they both were, and their relative position, accounting for inside and outside. So if both cars brake earlier than where it thinks they should, but the car ahead brakes earlier by a larger amount, it might get 80% of the penalty, and the other car gets 20%. This allows for its ideal location not being correct because it would be looking at who is further away from it. Or for overtaking side contact, it could use the amount of overlap to determine the percentage. But if it can't correctly choose who to give the 100% to in the current system, it's obviously not using the right criteria to make a sliding scale work either. But the idea is that getting it wrong with a sliding scale would hopefully not be AS wrong as giving the penalty entirely to one driver.

 

[John G]

I'd honestly rather that any initial contact between cars was effectively ghosted, than the current non-penalty rubbish we have now.

If PD are going to give up trying to stop dirty players, then clean players should not be penalised.

Dive bombing would immediately stop if they couldn't actually hit anyone!

Of course, it won't help improve any genuine players racecraft, but some people just aren't interested in clean racing

 

[Sven Jurgens]

I think what could work might be a sliding scale proportionate share of the penalty. So the game could decide the total amount of penalty to be given out by the force of contact. Then it could split that penalty between the two cars based on how far away from the ideal speed and location profile they both were, and their relative position, accounting for inside and outside. So if both cars brake earlier than where it thinks they should, but the car ahead brakes earlier by a larger amount, it might get 80% of the penalty, and the other car gets 20%. This allows for its ideal location not being correct because it would be looking at who is further away from it. Or for overtaking side contact, it could use the amount of overlap to determine the percentage. But if it can't correctly choose who to give the 100% to in the current system, it's obviously not using the right criteria to make a sliding scale work either. But the idea is that getting it wrong with a sliding scale would hopefully not be AS wrong as giving the penalty entirely to one driver.

It was like that in one of the iterations of the penalty system. However the mistake PD made was solely basing it on force of contact and position of contact without checking with the other client. Lag hugely impacts those two. In one of the versions you would still get 1 sec as the car in front getting punted, but at least the car punting you got 10 sec. However that version also gave out 10 sec penalties for touching the bumper of the car so softly you had to step through the replay frame by frame to find the tiny anomaly in speed exchange between the two cars.

That system needed to be refined with speed and relative position (and communication between clients, which was added later), but was thrown out for the contact + car off system.

Anyway I don't think penalties are all that useful, hence reserving them for the worst (and easiest to detect) offenses feels right. Frequency of contact and SR Downs for losing control / not staying on the road are a much better way to determine SR. Penalty zones only create more incidents and should be reserved for the worst, not used for every minor thing that SR can sort out over time.

In the end, the purpose of the penalty system is not to protect you. When you can avoid a dive bomb, do avoid it. Don't turn in anyway expecting the other car to get a penalty. But the dive bomb should still get SR Down regardless whether he hits anyone. Go wide, slide to make the corner. touch a wall, SR Down. Can't avoid it, both SR Down. Outrageous dive bomb, penalty for the punter. Rather just ghost and give SR Down + penalty. If the game deems you to dangerous to remain solid on your own account, SR Down should be handed out!

 

[Voodoovaj]

While it knows how to get around the track, it doesn't know it accurately enough. Forza has a very accurate dynamic driving line, where the colour changes to red when you should brake, but while it's very accurate, it's not 100%, sometimes you learn it's best to brake a touch earlier or later than it shows. So it would need to allow enough variation in braking point to allow for those small errors, but the problem is you only need to deviate from the ideal braking point by that small amount to take out the car in front or behind. Yes, it could catch major deviations, but not someone braking a teeny bit late to push the car ahead wide, or a teeny bit early to force the car behind to bin it off the track to avoid contact. The visible indicator of where GTS thinks we should brake is the double cones, and they're often further away from the ideal braking point than the Forza driving line colour changes are. And all that is before we allow for things like different tyre compounds, different amounts of wear, different cars, different brake bias settings, and people legitimately braking earlier but more gently to save their tyres.

You're totally missing the point.

This is racing. This isn't surgery. Contact WILL happen.

If you get hit hard enough to be punted off track, the person behind gets a penalty based on the force imparted on your car, just as it was early on in the system's history. The person behind is supposed to be responsible for avoiding rear end contact. If you follow someone too close into a braking zone and you hit them, then you should be punished. Whether they brake early or not is STILL your problem to deal with.

What we are talking about is detecting the people that are intentionally acting outside the expected norms, for instance, brake checking. There is a distinct and detectable difference between brake checking and braking early.

 

[larrybr07n]

Everyone outside your group is a ghost to you.

That wouldn't allow you to learn race craft though, you could take literally any line you want and that's not at all true in a race situation with other cars.

They need to exchange that information and come to an understanding why it happened, who is more to blame.

That information exchange could also suffer because of lag, server overload and such. We all have many interesting and valid ideas on how to solve the penalty/ranking systems but despite the possible solutions, one of the biggest challenges for PD here is building systems at scale, that's not easy at all.

Penalty zones only create more incidents and should be reserved for the worst

I totally agree. For minor offences, you should be allowed to keep driving and gets seconds added at the end of the race, for everything else, you should be forced in the pit and get out of the way.

 

[Voodoovaj]

That wouldn't allow you to learn race craft though, you could take literally any line you want and that's not at all true in a race situation with other cars.

You'd still need race craft within your group. The only thing that would be different is that you wouldn't have someone who is trying to jump ranks make a terrible move on you (if you are in a different rank).

"Any line you want" had better be the fast line or you aren't going to get ahead. If anything, I see this as a better way of learning.

Let's say a B driver and an A driver are racing for position. There's no risk of collision and that B driver is seeing where the A driver is braking, turning, etc. By the time they are on equal footing, that B driver will have (hopefully) improved.

Either way, it would be better than having someone ambitiously run into you, and it's just an idea for mixed group racing, which is where I think most of the issues occur.

 

[Racer294]

We have not yet been told that Turn10 has purchased Polyphony. These are the changes.




Sarcasm...I hope

 

[Voodoovaj]

We have not yet been told that Turn10 has purchased Polyphony. These are the changes.




Sarcasm...I hope

It has to be, or someone doesn't understand the nature of either studio.


This was posted on today. This is the kind of reverence that Sony and PD need to have if GTSport is to actually be an true "e-sport" title.

https://www.ea.com/games/fifa/fifa-...cipline-update-december-13-2019?es_p=10860102

I think this is where the penalty system direction some what fell apart. It likely started as a band-aid type of feature on top of the base game, but they may have realized that it needs to be a core element that needs integration throughout the game.

 

[Sven Jurgens]

That information exchange could also suffer because of lag, server overload and such. We all have many interesting and valid ideas on how to solve the penalty/ranking systems but despite the possible solutions, one of the biggest challenges for PD here is building systems at scale, that's not easy at all.

I totally agree. For minor offences, you should be allowed to keep driving and gets seconds added at the end of the race, for everything else, you should be forced in the pit and get out of the way.

That information exchange is not time critical, who cares if the penalty shows up 10 seconds later. It's not much info to exchange either, time stamp, force and contact position recorded on each client, speed / deviation from the expected speed before collision, clear road ahead distance (catch brake checks), angle to the expected direction of travel before collision (side swipe / barge pass), percentage of grip before collision (out of control slide / spin), time since last off-road (bad track re-entry), time since last wall bounce, time since last hit by another car (forgiveness, report secondary collision back to other car's client), percentage of overlap recorded at end of braking zone / start turn-in, percentage of overlap recorded at apex / corner exit, x,y position on the road before collision (leave room)

Now the two clients can compare notes and determine if one of the two was grossly out of line to assign a penalty, if neither or both are out of line -> shared blame. That eliminates the influence of lag and only when observation on both clients match up in such a way to assign blame on one car with over 90% certainty, then trigger a penalty. Otherwise SR Down for both, or add a small penalty for the one more than 60% wrong.

You can build on that with more info like time since last change of position on road (catch swerve blocking) but it's fine as a simple SR Down for both.

It's not that much work, simply record timestamps of events when they happen, then exchange those like insurance information. To determine fault a few crucial bits of history are needed instead of looking at the results after lag had its influence and the drivers had time to cry foul. (Driving themselves off or against a wall)

 

[breeminator]

You're totally missing the point.

This is racing. This isn't surgery. Contact WILL happen.

If you get hit hard enough to be punted off track, the person behind gets a penalty based on the force imparted on your car, just as it was early on in the system's history. The person behind is supposed to be responsible for avoiding rear end contact. If you follow someone too close into a braking zone and you hit them, then you should be punished. Whether they brake early or not is STILL your problem to deal with.

What we are talking about is detecting the people that are intentionally acting outside the expected norms, for instance, brake checking. There is a distinct and detectable difference between brake checking and braking early.

I fundamentally disagree with this, it's not how people race in real life, nor how top players race in the game. If you want to be in a position to overtake if the person ahead makes a mistake, you need to follow extremely close, and people do it all the time. It's legitimate to assume the car in front will drive as fast as they can around the track, indeed you have to make that assumption to drive at a high level, both in the game and in real life. The difference between doing this, and intentionally deviating from it enough to cause the following car a problem can be very small. And hitting someone but not enough to cause them to leave the track is still a problem. I'm not going to re-watch the 2 videos to check, but doesn't it say it's supposed to be non-contact?

 

[Racer294]

If you watch BTCC, IMSA or Blancpain, any real series. The cars make contact. But, they do not react like they do in GTS. If someone hooks your rear end, yes you'll spin around. But when a small or moderate door bang sends you to Pluto, that's broken. That's not part of the penalty system, but it leads into mindset and correcting bad racing behavior. Before the last patch and Laguna update, the penalty system was pretty OK, it only needed a small tweak.

 

[larrybr07n]

If you watch BTCC, IMSA or Blancpain, any real series. The cars make contact. But, they do not react like they do in GTS. If someone hooks your rear end, yes you'll spin around. But when a small or moderate door bang sends you to Pluto, that's broken.

True and that's because the car weight model of Gran Turismo it's not really realistic. Also, for that collision model to be realistic you would need damage on because of course when contacts happen in real life part of the energy is absorbed by the car itself and lost through the shell flexing and breaking.

In Gran Turismo the shell doesn't flex or break so all that energy on contact naturally shoots you in space

 

[Sven Jurgens]

If you watch BTCC, IMSA or Blancpain, any real series. The cars make contact. But, they do not react like they do in GTS. If someone hooks your rear end, yes you'll spin around. But when a small or moderate door bang sends you to Pluto, that's broken. That's not part of the penalty system, but it leads into mindset and correcting bad racing behavior. Before the last patch and Laguna update, the penalty system was pretty OK, it only needed a small tweak.

Real life does not have latency. The reaction you see after contact is from your forward predicted car (compensated for latency) colliding with the other car on their console. You see the result of that collision forward predicted on your console (compensated for return latency) Driving close works in RL since there is no latency. At a little lag spike and a tiny bump becomes a wrecking ball.

I'm in a weird spot right now. Too slow to really keep up with the A+/A rooms I get matched in (1:47 range pace for me vs 1:46 range the rest) yet due to being good at avoiding dirty moves as wrecks my DR won't drop. It makes for a bunch of boring races where I hardly every get to actually race someone. Just playing dodge that car currently.

 

[oneloops]

True and that's because the car weight model of Gran Turismo it's not really realistic. Also, for that collision model to be realistic you would need damage on because of course when contacts happen in real life part of the energy is absorbed by the car itself and lost through the shell flexing and breaking.

In Gran Turismo the shell doesn't flex or break so all that energy on contact naturally shoots you in space

Car weight model of Gran Turismo it's very realistic but not in some cases of collisions.

Because GTS is not a real collision simulator. Neither it is iRacing for example if you watch some iracing collision videos on youtube.

But car weight model of Gran Turismo it's very realistic itself.

 

[Krypton78]

I hope PD uses this break (because penalty system is practically off) and keeps now a calm head and takes the necessary time to make the possible best version. Many versions had good atempts, it should be at least possible to combine those parts which are not in conflict with each other. Considering a 2 year history with many aplied versions of penalty systems, they must have more then enough data now. They have to decide what they want. Ist more a philosophy problem then a technical/ programing problem is my feeling.