Shift 2 vs GT5 input lag video
- Thread starter pgagoober
- 59 comments
- 14,590 views
- 1,787
- RomKnight
http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/posts/list/165/5526240.page
The link above is being used for S2U Bug reports. Everyone start posting...
The link above is being used for S2U Bug reports. Everyone start posting...
ocd1920
Premium
- 88
My take is this. I bought a PS3, a DFGT with pedals, and a Bob earl seat for GT5, way back in '09. All my other driving had been on a PC with a Thomas wheel. Started back when Grand Prix Legends came out. With the PS3 and the DFGT, I ran all the way through GT Prologue, then bought a copy of NFS Shift. Seemed to me that it was a bit more of an arcade game when compared to GT but I did like the online setup and it was a lot of fun. Ran through it and arrived at level 50. Then out comes GT5, finally. Golded all the A-spec except a few of the endurance races. Out comes NFS S2U. Using the DFGT, the cars drive like my ex-mother-in-law's 26ft cadin boat with an outdrive on about 1/4 plane, or just idling along. It is the worst driving sim I have experienced of late. They are like driving a planing hull that's not on plane.
Now the DFGT does have a dead spot in it which makes driving the GT5 karts a chore. I have ordered a Fanatec Porsche 911 GT3 RS V2 Wheel along with ClubSport pedals which I will attached to the Bob Earl seat. I feel like the gears in the DFGT are beginning to wear because it does have a lot of miles, and I also want the smoothness of a belt. But from what I have been reading, this game is flawed when on the PS3 platform. Hope there is a patch, soon, or that tells me that NFS doesn't really care. After all, NFS Hot Pursuit had no support for wheels at all, at least the DFGT and from what I could find out, they did not have a lot of interest in supporting wheels, at least Logitecs.
Now the DFGT does have a dead spot in it which makes driving the GT5 karts a chore. I have ordered a Fanatec Porsche 911 GT3 RS V2 Wheel along with ClubSport pedals which I will attached to the Bob Earl seat. I feel like the gears in the DFGT are beginning to wear because it does have a lot of miles, and I also want the smoothness of a belt. But from what I have been reading, this game is flawed when on the PS3 platform. Hope there is a patch, soon, or that tells me that NFS doesn't really care. After all, NFS Hot Pursuit had no support for wheels at all, at least the DFGT and from what I could find out, they did not have a lot of interest in supporting wheels, at least Logitecs.
ocd1920
Premium
- 88
Last night, I got fed up with it, and then went back and used one of my Lambros for the GT5 seasonal at Periphery. Just to give myself what I thought would be an advantage, an went ahead and put on a set of soft racing rubber. What would have been a runaway race by me turned into a fiasco. I was turning in early, way early, and then the back end was heading south. I got very upset and finally turned the whole thing off, went and turned on MLB Network and watched the highlights of Opening Day.
- 10,403
- GTP_Spag69
- spagetti69
pgagoober
Site Sponsor
- 415
- AZ
- BadManTurismo
Check out the other thread discussing this - it has been fairly conclusively proven that the game engine is receiving the wheel input very quickly but is taking its sweet time about doing anything with it. It's not the wheel, and as you should have noticed above, the DS3 has a 0.4 second lag also!!
pgagoober
Site Sponsor
- 415
- AZ
- BadManTurismo
More testing, and I think this nails it down once and for all. There has been some very constructive discussion in JJ72's thread here : https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=197102
Many folks have been testing various theories and eliminating possible causes and solutions along the way. One very interesting theory put forward by Imari (I believe) was that the suspension could be modeled in such a way that it takes a little time for the suspension to load up after the wheel is turned. That could account for the delay incurred before the car actually starts to rotate. Makes perfect sense as a soft suspension could indeed allow this to happen in real life. If that were true it could in theory point to a potentially very good physics engine, just with inaccurately modeled suspensions. eg. The car I was using for the videos is the Lamborghini LP640. I'm pretty sure they didn't reuse the suspension from a Crown Vic, as crazy as they are over there!!!
So, to test this all out I decided to run the same tests again but this time while viewing the actual tires on the car rather than the initial rotation of the vehicle as seen from inside the cockpit. The results are very interesting.
S2U : First hint of tire movement after input : 0.433 seconds
GT5 : First hint of tire movement after input : 0.233 seconds
That 0.2 second gap is pretty much exactly the same gap as seen from inside the cockpit with the car in motion. Therefore we can only conclude that the additional 0.2 second overhead occurring in S2U is taking place in the software and is not a side-effect of suspension loading or any other physics-related quirk. Simply put, it takes S2U almost twice as long as GT5 so translate user input into vehicle reaction. In my view that can only be sloppy coding and the only fix is a patch. I'd be happy to be proven wrong but I think we're running out of options here.
Here are the videos, first S2U :
And now GT5 :
Many folks have been testing various theories and eliminating possible causes and solutions along the way. One very interesting theory put forward by Imari (I believe) was that the suspension could be modeled in such a way that it takes a little time for the suspension to load up after the wheel is turned. That could account for the delay incurred before the car actually starts to rotate. Makes perfect sense as a soft suspension could indeed allow this to happen in real life. If that were true it could in theory point to a potentially very good physics engine, just with inaccurately modeled suspensions. eg. The car I was using for the videos is the Lamborghini LP640. I'm pretty sure they didn't reuse the suspension from a Crown Vic, as crazy as they are over there!!!
So, to test this all out I decided to run the same tests again but this time while viewing the actual tires on the car rather than the initial rotation of the vehicle as seen from inside the cockpit. The results are very interesting.
S2U : First hint of tire movement after input : 0.433 seconds
GT5 : First hint of tire movement after input : 0.233 seconds
That 0.2 second gap is pretty much exactly the same gap as seen from inside the cockpit with the car in motion. Therefore we can only conclude that the additional 0.2 second overhead occurring in S2U is taking place in the software and is not a side-effect of suspension loading or any other physics-related quirk. Simply put, it takes S2U almost twice as long as GT5 so translate user input into vehicle reaction. In my view that can only be sloppy coding and the only fix is a patch. I'd be happy to be proven wrong but I think we're running out of options here.
Here are the videos, first S2U :
And now GT5 :
This is not good business practice...I'm a partner in a business and we deliver the best product we can. It's a good product which does the job well, and people come back to us because we advertise ONLY WHAT WE CAN DELIVER. No more, no less.
Our clients are happy they get the product they want and come back for more. And it WORKS FOR THEM!
So what is the point releasing this game as it is? My thoughts are that they don't give a ****, they obviously know about the input lag. Hence the embargo on reviewers views before the game was released.
What would you do? : (1) " The handling's rubbish, let's make it better, we've almost got the best driving game on the planet". or (2) "The handling's rubbish, let's call it a day, go for a beer and watch the cash roll in! "
Shame. Big big shame. I'm actually appalled.
I want my 40 quid back
Our clients are happy they get the product they want and come back for more. And it WORKS FOR THEM!
So what is the point releasing this game as it is? My thoughts are that they don't give a ****, they obviously know about the input lag. Hence the embargo on reviewers views before the game was released.
What would you do? : (1) " The handling's rubbish, let's make it better, we've almost got the best driving game on the planet". or (2) "The handling's rubbish, let's call it a day, go for a beer and watch the cash roll in! "
Shame. Big big shame. I'm actually appalled.
I want my 40 quid back
I wonder what the real drivers said about this issue? Tommy Milner, Vaughn Gittin etc.
Drivers: Well, you know its a nice game, but something is wrong. The input has some heavy delay. Do you think this is okay? It's not good for precise driving.
Devs: Yeah, don't worry. Its only 0.4 seconds...
Drivers: But, don't you think people will notice it too and possibly don't like it?
Devs: Thats non of your business. Just say that the game is fantastic, ok!? Here is the money.
Drivers: Ok.
Drivers: Well, you know its a nice game, but something is wrong. The input has some heavy delay. Do you think this is okay? It's not good for precise driving.
Devs: Yeah, don't worry. Its only 0.4 seconds...
Drivers: But, don't you think people will notice it too and possibly don't like it?
Devs: Thats non of your business. Just say that the game is fantastic, ok!? Here is the money.
Drivers: Ok.
- 300
- spapadillion
pgagoober
It's worth mentioning that these numbers include the lag inherent to the TV used in the test, as well as that present in the games themselves. While it doesn't give us the exact numbers for the input lag alone, what it does show is that S2U is a full 1/5 of a second behind GT5 in reaction time. Apalling, to say the least.
ocd1920
Premium
- 88
Back in the late 1970's or very early 80's, GM came out with a new 98 Oldsmobile. My father bought one. It had a 4sp automatic with 4th being overdrive. There was no lockup in 3rd gear. The transmission would downshift from 4th to 3rd at the slightest hint of an increase in torque, even if caused by a gust of headwind. It would constantly hunt between 3rd and 4th. The fix? Dealers were advised to instruct the owners to leave the car in 3rd gear unless driving on level ground at freeway speeds.
When Ford released the Bronco II, the design and engineering people at Ford told marketing that the vehicle had several flaws that needed to be corrected before hitting the showrooms. Marketing said, "hell, no! It's going now!" The reason was that Ford was loosing market share to the Chevy S-10 Blazer. Later, when the automotive press began reviewing the Bronco II, they noticed these flaws and commented on how the vehicle was not up to the level of the GM product. Everything that was pointed out by the press was found in the design and engineering files at Ford that were explained to Ford marketing.
I have an idea that the same has happened here. NFS S2U needed a further bit of development but that would have pushed back the release date and I don't think EA wanted to be viewed in the same light as Sony and PD were with the GT5 situation.
My opinion? The game is not worth the money as it is right now. It is not a driving sim, it is an arcade game. The physics are ridiculous. I was more impressed with the first version. The only thing going for S2U, IMO, is the hype...and I think that is waning.
When Ford released the Bronco II, the design and engineering people at Ford told marketing that the vehicle had several flaws that needed to be corrected before hitting the showrooms. Marketing said, "hell, no! It's going now!" The reason was that Ford was loosing market share to the Chevy S-10 Blazer. Later, when the automotive press began reviewing the Bronco II, they noticed these flaws and commented on how the vehicle was not up to the level of the GM product. Everything that was pointed out by the press was found in the design and engineering files at Ford that were explained to Ford marketing.
I have an idea that the same has happened here. NFS S2U needed a further bit of development but that would have pushed back the release date and I don't think EA wanted to be viewed in the same light as Sony and PD were with the GT5 situation.
My opinion? The game is not worth the money as it is right now. It is not a driving sim, it is an arcade game. The physics are ridiculous. I was more impressed with the first version. The only thing going for S2U, IMO, is the hype...and I think that is waning.
- 6,356
- Michigan
- DaveTheStalker
dmanaenk
Early turn is is fine if you're doing time trials or practice runs. If you need to adjust your steering mid turn, you're (or the car right next to you) screwed.
Just as NTG, they decide to not have a beta test and we pay the price!
- 2,091
- Glasgow
- Flaw3dGenius23
- 6,356
- Michigan
- DaveTheStalker
pgagooberMore testing, and I think this nails it down once and for all. There has been some very constructive discussion in JJ72's thread here : https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=197102
Many folks have been testing various theories and eliminating possible causes and solutions along the way. One very interesting theory put forward by Imari (I believe) was that the suspension could be modeled in such a way that it takes a little time for the suspension to load up after the wheel is turned. That could account for the delay incurred before the car actually starts to rotate. Makes perfect sense as a soft suspension could indeed allow this to happen in real life. If that were true it could in theory point to a potentially very good physics engine, just with inaccurately modeled suspensions. eg. The car I was using for the videos is the Lamborghini LP640. I'm pretty sure they didn't reuse the suspension from a Crown Vic, as crazy as they are over there!!!
So, to test this all out I decided to run the same tests again but this time while viewing the actual tires on the car rather than the initial rotation of the vehicle as seen from inside the cockpit. The results are very interesting.
S2U : First hint of tire movement after input : 0.433 seconds
GT5 : First hint of tire movement after input : 0.233 seconds
That 0.2 second gap is pretty much exactly the same gap as seen from inside the cockpit with the car in motion. Therefore we can only conclude that the additional 0.2 second overhead occurring in S2U is taking place in the software and is not a side-effect of suspension loading or any other physics-related quirk. Simply put, it takes S2U almost twice as long as GT5 so translate user input into vehicle reaction. In my view that can only be sloppy coding and the only fix is a patch. I'd be happy to be proven wrong but I think we're running out of options here.
Here are the videos, first S2U :
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=880mQkROdqk">YouTube Link</a>
And now GT5 :
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0G9YJ_fbmQ">YouTube Link</a>
Almost like driving on tires nearly fully deflated.
- 232
- CANADIAN12345678
I tryed driving a FWD GTR in LFS with the tire pressure at a minimum. While I did have bad steering response (along with the sidewalls getting really hot) it was not: I turn, .5 seconds pass, the car turn.
I was more like: I turn, the tires immediately but kinda slowly start getting into the same heading as the rims.
And even then the time between turning the wheel and the car turning was not even half as worse as in S2U
- 4,323
Interesting...
have you tried with a view where you can see the wheel of the car? It would be interesting to compare how quickly the game actually recieves and processes the input (ie how fast the in game wheel shows response to your wheel turn) vs how fast a visible reaction to the cars direction kicks in.
Also what kind of display are you using? Have you calibrated it for lag on the input you are using (maybe try a game that doesn't feel laggy, then see what the results are of a similar test to verify)? Some display get drastically more lag depending on input and even on resolution due to how their scalers handle the picture.
Also any similar comparison to look at throttle and brake response times?
have you tried with a view where you can see the wheel of the car? It would be interesting to compare how quickly the game actually recieves and processes the input (ie how fast the in game wheel shows response to your wheel turn) vs how fast a visible reaction to the cars direction kicks in.
Also what kind of display are you using? Have you calibrated it for lag on the input you are using (maybe try a game that doesn't feel laggy, then see what the results are of a similar test to verify)? Some display get drastically more lag depending on input and even on resolution due to how their scalers handle the picture.
Also any similar comparison to look at throttle and brake response times?
Last edited:
pgagoober
Site Sponsor
- 415
- AZ
- BadManTurismo
The last videos I posted were of the tire reaction, which is really all I care about but you can see the in-car wheel reaction in the same video to an extent. It does seem that the cockpit wheel view is synced with the actual tire reaction but whether it is or not is really beside the point. The videos above clearly show the lag from initial steering input to reaction of the vehicle, which is what we need to have addressed.
I used the same display with the same settings for both S2U and GT5. I guess in theory it's possible that the PS3 is scaling the GT5 content to 1080p faster than my TV scales the 720p S2U content to 1080p. However, Imari's videos clearly show the steering slider in telemetry moving much much sooner than the car reacts so I doubt scaling is the issue. Besides, I'm using a Samsung C630 which has one of the best scalers in TVs these days afaik, ignoring reference level gear of course.
- 13,979
- Adelaide
- Neomone
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=5136832#post5136832
Brake testing videos.
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=5136918#post5136918
Brake testing results.
Throttle testing would be tough to do, it's hard to judge when a car has just started moving. But it's probably a reasonable assumption that it's the same response time as the brakes.
The results I got were faster than the steering tests, but that's probably mostly down to the brake input being far more digital and the reaction being perfectly visible.
