POLL: What do you expect from the camber fix?

[FussyFez]

What do you expect from a camber fix?

Given that we have seen a clear response from the majority of the community, that camber is indeed, not working as it should be, what would you like if/when they do patch it?

My ideas are that they can either make 0.0 less grippy than currently, and make the maximum amount of attainable grip with perfect settings equal to what we currently experience with 0.0

Or, grip at 0.0 could stay the same, and any increased grip from correct camber values would lead to more grip than we are currently seeing.

I personally would like to see the current 0.0 grip as the maximum attainable with good camber settings.

Which would you prefer, or do you have other ideas?

Just to be clear, I am taking about lateral grip. Not traction.

 

[subsist]

I like the idea of the 0.0 being the base as it is now for the maximum camber grip. I don't think we need any more grip.

So if they do change the camber, I'm with you. Good camber settings should be about the grip that 0.0 is giving now.

 

[TonyB66]

It should be made to work as it would in the real world just as described in the settings menu, otherwise what's the point of it being there at all. This is supposed to be a driving simulation game.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Cars are already faster on the same tires than they were in GT5 so adding more grip with camber doesn't make sense to me. 0.0/0.0 should be less grip than it is now, after an update, with properly working camber giving more grip. I'd be surprised though if it was even patched tbh.

 

[subsist]

It should be made to work as it would in the real world just as described in the settings menu, otherwise what's the point of it being there at all. This is supposed to be a driving simulation game.

Yes, that would be nice and that is what everyone is waiting for.

But what is being asked is, if they do fix camber, should it apply more grip than 0.0 value already provided? I.E If the perfect camber setting for the car is 1.5/1.5 it should apply the same grip as 0.0 applies now, and 0.0 setting would of course be of lesser grip

 

[Verbal]

I would expect (though not necessarily want, but you can always use less grippy tires) more grip if they fixed it. I'm afraid I however don't expect this issue to be very high on their priority list , if it's at all on their radar.

 

[FussyFez]

So a mixed bag so far.

I'm also thinking that it probably won't be touched, but it should, considering they adjusted MR cars (probably) due to complaining.

Here's hoping it will see a patch. If it does, in all honesty I don't care exactly what grip levels are used, just as long as the effects are linear with what we expect in the real world.

 

[mlbguy4life]

Cars are already faster on the same tires than they were in GT5 so adding more grip with camber doesn't make sense to me. 0.0/0.0 should be less grip than it is now, after an update, with properly working camber giving more grip. I'd be surprised though if it was even patched tbh.

i dont think they will fix it...

 

[Stotty]

Please don't give cars any more grip... road cars already feel arcadey on SH.

 

[Vagabond]

Camber works doesn't it? IE it changes the angel of the wheel relative to the road surface. What's wrong is down to the tyres' behaviour and the way the game calculates inertia. There is no quick fix to what's wrong with this - its fundamental to the current physics model which clearly has some bizarre quirks.

 

[FussyFez]

Camber works doesn't it? IE it changes the angel of the wheel relative to the road surface. What's wrong is down to the tyres' behaviour and the way the game calculates inertia. There is no quick fix to what's wrong with this - its fundamental to the current physics model which clearly has some bizarre quirks.

Please, do go on...

I'm no game developer, but as far as I'm aware, what we see on the screen, isn't what the physics engine is actually doing, it doesn't work quite like that. But please do correct me if I'm wrong.



How does the physics engine interpret this?


I'm not trying to be an arse, I'd like a valid opinion, with a little more explanation into why you don't think it's a simple, camber specific bug, and is in fact a huge issue with physics?

 

[Vagabond]

Please, do go on...

I'm no game developer, but as far as I'm aware, what we see on the screen, isn't what the physics engine is actually doing, it doesn't work quite like that. But please do correct me if I'm wrong.

View attachment 114507

How does the physics engine interpret this?


I'm not trying to be an arse, I'd like a valid opinion, with a little more explanation into why you don't think it's a simple, camber specific bug, and is in fact a huge issue with physics?

I wouldn't even like to guess at what changing the camber does either to the tyre model or to the suspension geometry to have the result shown in the picture... and in all honesty I couldn't attempt to answer how the game is interpreting that result either. That's not very helpful I realise but the are so many apparently fundamental issues with the 'new' GT physics in terms of inertia, gravity, friction... and that's without throwing in the potential issues when you introduce tyre and suspension dynamics.

I'm not trying to be an arse either although I suspect I sound like one without offering a detailed explanation My point was/is that what is wrong is not simply a case of fixing a camber glitch. Predicting the effect of changing one aspect of a cars dynamics should be simple enough if the physical laws that govern its behaviour are constant. They appear not to be however and that leaves an apparently chaotic system that throws out some bizarre result. If I manage to tie down what I think is wrong, I'll be happy to try and explain... I used to think it was just the tyres but I now think it goes far beyond that and reaches into GTs actual 'laws of physics.' IE, gravity, friction, inertia.

[/totally unhelpful]

 

[Verbal]

I'm no game developer, but as far as I'm aware, what we see on the screen, isn't what the physics engine is actually doing, it doesn't work quite like that. But please do correct me if I'm wrong.
View attachment 114507

I don't know the circumstances which lead to that image, but I'd guess what we're seeing here is actually a correct representation of the physics engine doing something it just wasn't meant for. For instance, 99.999% of the time it would be perfectly reasonable to only model the vertical stiffness of the tire itself without the massive increase you get if the deformation gets so large that the belt touches the rim. If now for some reason you have some very large vertical forces, say during a rollover, the tire would be crushed and there should be contact of the belt with the rim. But this contact isn't modeled, so stiffness stays low and deformation becomes larger than the tire height itself, with the rim ending up below the road surface.

 

[FussyFez]

Thankyou both for the responses.

I must apologise as I seem to have mislead you.

The picture has nothing to doing with camber, it happened during extreme shock compression on landing from a 2 wheel 'kerb launch pad' incident. I corrected the impending roll, and the car slammed back down extremely violently, with that as the result.

I posted it as an example of the visuals being different to what the physics engine is doing.

Is it a simple case of 'clipping' like clipping through a wall in a FPS game?

Have a couple more to make it a bit clearer as to the circumstances.

 

[Azure Flare]

To be fixed, thats what should happen.

 

[Z1-AV69]

I don't know the circumstances which lead to that image, but I'd guess what we're seeing here is actually a correct representation of the physics engine doing something it just wasn't meant for. For instance, 99.999% of the time it would be perfectly reasonable to only model the vertical stiffness of the tire itself without the massive increase you get if the deformation gets so large that the belt touches the rim. If now for some reason you have some very large vertical forces, say during a rollover, the tire would be crushed and there should be contact of the belt with the rim. But this contact isn't modeled, so stiffness stays low and deformation becomes larger than the tire height itself, with the rim ending up below the road surface.

Great theory! But regarding the graphical representation what you saw was never what your car is driving on. It got better in GT6 compared to 5, but there are still lots of simple errors. At Bathurst for example the track markings run through the tyres, above the ground, if the tyre is on them. My guess is still that instead of deformation the tyre shoulder vanishes below the track surface. And there are also all kinds of bugs with surfaces. In never saw something like that picture at that track position though.

 

[gnargsly]

It would end one of the most entertaining threads ever, the current bitch fest that is our Camber thread!!! Lots of cars have a stock camber setting. We had to change it to 0.0 to get some realistic grip. A fix should return the effect it had in GT5 where increased camber will help grip.

 

[RampageRacing]

A fix should return the effect it had in GT5 where increased camber will help grip.

Up to a point and then grip should lessen. We don't want everyone driving "stanced" cars because more camber always gives more grip. Ain't so!

 

[gnargsly]

Hey! Let's not turn this thread into a bitch fest either!!! Yeah, of course up to a point, then grip lessens.

 

[P_Lav]

Honestly, I believe that the visual model and the physics model are independant, and by only providing a means of adding negative camber, and not positive, the physics values are reversed. So when you add camber, it still visually shows negative camber on the 3d model, the suspension reads it as positive camber, hence why adding camber only reduces cornering speeds, not adds to a point, and then drops off. So any extra grip provided by camber should be added on to the base value of 0.

 

[PruvuwrongGT]

Too bad you cant recast your votes, things might be changing as they used a ninja update to fix camber, it works now

 

[killerjimbag]

Here we go again!

 

[PruvuwrongGT]

Yup, seems I can prove camber and caster are both in GT6 and working as they should, the problem is, I cant force people to understand how these things work, just show the fact they do.

 

[Verbal]

Yup, seems I can prove camber and caster are both in GT6

Of course they are, that has never been the point

and working as they should

They aren't. But as any explanations you've given on how you think they should work have been pure BS, how would you know.

, the problem is, I cant force people to understand how these things work

Good insight. So stop it then.

, just show the fact they do.

Many people have shown already that they don't. You on the other hand haven't offered anything but insults, attitude and condescension.

 

[donpost]

Anyone else reminded of this?:

 

[FussyFez]

Too bad you cant recast your votes, things might be changing as they used a ninja update to fix camber, it works now

Any confirmation on this?

What tests did you do to conclude that it's working more realistically?

 

[faceman557]

^^Don't listen to him ^^ It's JACK, he's baaaack.

 

[FussyFez]

^^Don't listen to him ^^ It's JACK, he's baaaack.

Indeed.

I was reading the thread, noticed Mr Napier return, but quoted the other post without looking at the poster.

When I realised, I felt quite silly. But sod it.

Was there a ninja update at all?

I don't have Internet at home, so take my PS to update when I know there are updates.

I haven't done any since 1.04 and the 4wd fix.