Update 2.10 - Major PP changes

  • Thread starter Thread starter crazy206
  • 774 comments
  • 73,247 views
Something we ALL should consider -

This massive Performance Points change at such a late stage in GT5's life might be due to some experimentation on GT6.

This could be a "feeler" of sorts for PDI to gauge the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of this new system as it is applied in Gran Turismo outside of their own internal testing.

Just a thought I had.
 
Something we ALL should consider -

This massive Performance Points change at such a late stage in GT5's life might be due to some experimentation on GT6.

This could be a "feeler" of sorts for PDI to gauge the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of this new system as it is applied in Gran Turismo outside of their own internal testing.

Just a thought I had.

Good point.👍
 
Something we ALL should consider -

This massive Performance Points change at such a late stage in GT5's life might be due to some experimentation on GT6.

This could be a "feeler" of sorts for PDI to gauge the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of this new system as it is applied in Gran Turismo outside of their own internal testing.

Just a thought I had.

That isn't a clever way to test something, especially if you're not sure it's going to work properly.
 
@Toronado
Come to me with something of meaning. RESULTS..

Go back and re-read my test post. That's RESULTS for you, conclusively showing that PP are broken for FR cars. Either you have to have the PP limit ~40 lower for FR to get the same performance, or at the same PP, the FR cars put ~4s on everything else at Deep Forest.

Granted, anybody doing an organized series can work around this (by slapping a ~40 PP handicap on FR cars), but the point is, they shouldn't have to, and it's not necessarily practical for other situations where less control is exercised. Bottom line is, PD did a very shabby job of testing the changes before introducing them and the result is that PP are broken.
 
Something we ALL should consider -

This massive Performance Points change at such a late stage in GT5's life might be due to some experimentation on GT6.

This could be a "feeler" of sorts for PDI to gauge the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of this new system as it is applied in Gran Turismo outside of their own internal testing.

Just a thought I had.

That's a great philosophy if you are Joe's Lawnmowing trying out a new John Deere, not a $5Billion gaming franchise. Only a franshise headed for the toilet would "test" their system out like this on customers and not just do extensive inhouse testing. And remember, the customers still playing the game, the ones affected by this update, are the most loyal and dedicated fans of the franchise. One afternoon and a room full of gamers paid in potato chips and soda would have punched a thousand holes in this update. There simply was no internal testing, period.
 
Clk touring car ued to max out @ 648pp, is now 588. Still 625hp & 1000kg.
Tried to catch a Commodore in a 530pp race lately?
Some cars, including Corvettes & the XR8 falcon now have a huge advantage, you simply can't catch them.
 
Go back and re-read my test post. That's RESULTS for you, conclusively showing that PP are broken for FR cars. Either you have to have the PP limit ~40 lower for FR to get the same performance, or at the same PP, the FR cars put ~4s on everything else at Deep Forest.

Granted, anybody doing an organized series can work around this (by slapping a ~40 PP handicap on FR cars), but the point is, they shouldn't have to, and it's not necessarily practical for other situations where less control is exercised. Bottom line is, PD did a very shabby job of testing the changes before introducing them and the result is that PP are broken.

I read your results not Tornadoes, not sure if he did post anything on testing any new broken in cars. In some aspects I do agree though not all. In all the system did thrown a lot of the cars out of place that people tuned.Though I myself don't see that much of a change. Maybe it's because I don't add gobs of power and de-tune my cars to get greatest amount of torque with very little power. (That's just me) Yes PD should had done further testing and gave us a statement detailing the changes but they didn't and we must live with it.

I can somewhat understand if they didn't have time to do a well detailed test due to the amount of people they have employed. Now if they dropped this on us to test in via, online racing, online TT's, drift events and races events. They should have gave a detail brief stating why and what was changed. I cleared all the negative from my mind about this matter and looked at it from another point.

(Looking at it as a software engineer/programmer and not a GT 5 driver)

If the change was done due to us because of what we have done to our cars since the majority of the GT 5 users wanted the power limiter from GT 5 Prologue added to GT 5 so be it, the beast was asked for and we got. And now it's playing havoc with the system and the tunes. As a developer it would be the best interest of the company and for the brand to get every part correct. Especially a gaming company that is neck deep in the racing community. With all the data taking from countless miles clocked buy the VR drivers, tunes developed, power reduced, data taken from REAL world racing. Compile them together, go through the data to find the correct formula for the PP system. Get a base test to see what comes to light. Then I would let the users take a crack at and what they come up with what new cars they'll drive and so on.

Now that the system is out we should take advantage of this. If you don't see it as I do then look at it this way.

We all want to prefect GT 6 title right? (Right) Now how are we going to get that if we complain that they system is broke due to it took all of our favorite cars and thrown them out of wake. Mad some cars slower or faster, yes I can see that in the lobbies. This is why I always ask the top what drivers what they have on their cars. And yes all of them had them decked out with the works or some had to remove parts just to meet the class number. All I'm running is a stage 1 or stage 2 motor, so yes those cars will be faster it's a given fact. But the fact still remains that we got this system and instead of chanting "IT'S BROKEN" we should be picking it apart to see where the fault is at if any. If we don't see where they faults are if any the majority are still going to state it's broken. The system only has been out for two weeks or so and we haven't made any impact on what has changed, only thoughts.

PD can only do so much in the little time they have and I think they turned to the 2.5 million GT 5 VR drivers to help them test the new system. We're the one's that try to beat the system so I feel we're the one that should test it. We may get another PP update IF we can prove that the system is broken who know's. But I do know this that the last PP update raised the power on a lot of cars. The way I found out was when I bought a new S15 and RM it, build it to a stage 1 broke it in and then compared it to my other RM S15 and noticed that the 2.06 RM S15 had 412hp at 100% power and the 2.05 RM S15 had 388hp with a stage 3 motor. Once I seen that I started to pick it apart, I needed to know what was changed in every car. It took me a year to do it and I developed a math formula to break apart the system.

I found a grouping system and in-vane tried to share it with the community, but no one took a bite at it to see what it had to offer. Then a few weeks later we get this new system. From there everything just snowballed, everyone went nuts.:crazy: In all we got a new system and we must deal with it until we do something about it.
 
PD can only do so much in the little time they have and I think they turned to the 2.5 million GT 5 VR drivers to help them test the new system.

I have no sympathy for this argument whatsoever. It took me all of an hour to show a serious defect, doing basic testing of a small sample of cars. It's a level of testing that should have been done in-house. There's no excuse for the patch issuing without that minimum level of testing. This kind of sloppiness is the sort of thing I'd expect of a small developer producing a specialized title, not a well-known developer of a multi-million-copy seller.

If the issue were that there were a few cars with a modest performance edge, I could live with that, it would at least qualify as "we're not quite perfect yet but we're working on it". But a >10% PP error over an entire class of cars? Inexcusable.
 
@MrWednsday
I can see 5% maybe 7% after further testing, though I'm still open until my testing is done. I did find some other odd ball cars out of place which shouldn't be.:ouch:

Though so far I see a lot of different cars hitting the track and in different class. One car that thrown me for a loop was seeing a Vantage V12 in the 450 pp class. I'm not sure how much that car was de-tuned because the driver was kicked from the room for using the car.
 
It's over 10% in the 350 to 400 PP range. A ~360 PP FR car performs like a ~400 PP non-FR car. Everything I've seen says this is an FR problem, not a handful-of-particular-cars problem.

Maybe it's a fixed amount rather than a percentage. I'm planning to try a test around 500 PP or so, because I'm still curious about how the issue scales.
 
I haven't started testing the 400 or 450 cars just yet, still testing the 500 to 600 class. Those cars in lobbies are all over the place. I'll be able to start testing that class soon. At the moment I'm testing a 370Z build to a stage 2 motor with the whole works. A little under pp for the 500 class but it has performed nicely in that class. I won 8 out of 9 races with that car. Lost buy a car and half to Chevy-Rider in a stock BMW CSL with a stage 3 weight reduction on it. In all a good test, though the Zed will gain more power when it reaches full break in and a oil change.

The Zed is at 490pp.

(Addition)

The car has 456hp/8000rpm and 333ft-lb/6000, with 208.7 miles on it. If I do a oil change now the power will rise to 467hp at 494pp. I'm going to wait until the clock get around 250 or 260 miles before the oil change to make sure it fully broken in.

(Addition)


I may have found something in the PP system. The system may have a handling formula added to it, not sure until I test the different area cars with in the same group number. I've seen some cars that are decades apart in the same group number. Which I find very strange.
 
Last edited:
Is there a PP number where odds are even?

Yup, two of them. Zero, and whatever the PP is for the X2011.

I have no sympathy for this argument whatsoever. It took me all of an hour to show a serious defect, doing basic testing of a small sample of cars. It's a level of testing that should have been done in-house. There's no excuse for the patch issuing without that minimum level of testing. This kind of sloppiness is the sort of thing I'd expect of a small developer producing a specialized title, not a well-known developer of a multi-million-copy seller.

If the issue were that there were a few cars with a modest performance edge, I could live with that, it would at least qualify as "we're not quite perfect yet but we're working on it". But a >10% PP error over an entire class of cars? Inexcusable.

Well said:tup:👍

@MrWednsday
I can see 5% maybe 7% after further testing, though I'm still open until my testing is done. I did find some other odd ball cars out of place which shouldn't be.:ouch:

Though so far I see a lot of different cars hitting the track and in different class. One car that thrown me for a loop was seeing a Vantage V12 in the 450 pp class. I'm not sure how much that car was de-tuned because the driver was kicked from the room for using the car.

Tune a Vantage for 500PP and compare it's Specs to any (ANY) car in your garage pre 2.10. The power boost is massive, way beyond anything rational. Most of the good cars pre-2.10 were boosted very little or at all and most of them are irrelevant now.

I haven't started testing the 400 or 450 cars just yet, still testing the 500 to 600 class. Those cars in lobbies are all over the place. I'll be able to start testing that class soon. At the moment I'm testing a 370Z build to a stage 2 motor with the whole works. A little under pp for the 500 class but it has performed nicely in that class. I won 8 out of 9 races with that car. Lost buy a car and half to Chevy-Rider in a stock BMW CSL with a stage 3 weight reduction on it. In all a good test, though the Zed will gain more power when it reaches full break in and a oil change.
The Zed is at 490pp.
(Addition)
The car has 456hp/8000rpm and 333ft-lb/6000, with 208.7 miles on it. If I do a oil change now the power will rise to 467hp at 494pp. I'm going to wait until the clock get around 250 or 260 miles before the oil change to make sure it fully broken in.

Cars are fully broken in at 200 miles. So now you'll have a good handling, well balanced, grippy FR, probably fully weight reduced, with nearly 500 hp at less than 500PP. Do you really think any of the serious contenders pre-2.10 with their 350-420hp output at the same weight or a bit lighter are going to keep up? 500 HP is what many good 550PP cars had a month ago.

By your own numbers I don't see how you can't see the system is broken.
 
Cars are fully broken in at 200 miles. So now you'll have a good handling, well balanced, grippy FR, probably fully weight reduced, with nearly 500 hp at less than 500PP. Do you really think any of the serious contenders pre-2.10 with their 350-420hp output at the same weight or a bit lighter are going to keep up? 500 HP is what many good 550PP cars had a month ago.

By your own numbers I don't see how you can't see the system is broken.

I'm not done testing, so I can't give you a good judgement. I'm not going on just a few cars or the cars ringer cars pre 2.10. I'm testing a total of 50 cars with different power train, power, and parts. Giving a true result just from a few cars is pointless to me.
 
I'm not done testing, so I can't give you a good judgement. I'm not going on just a few cars or the cars ringer cars pre 2.10. I'm testing a total of 50 cars with different power train, power, and parts. Giving a true result just from a few cars is pointless to me.

In one ear and out the other. -_- In all honesty though, share the cross powertrain results after you're done rebuilding your cars and testing. Im curious to know what you find after all of this. :odd:
 
I'm not done testing, so I can't give you a good judgement. I'm not going on just a few cars or the cars ringer cars pre 2.10. I'm testing a total of 50 cars with different power train, power, and parts. Giving a true result just from a few cars is pointless to me.

If you would trouble yourself to listen, we could help you.

No man is an island.

At 425pp, please test the Merc 190e evo II, and any MR (excluding the Ruf 3400s) car, or any FF car.

Start from there and come back and tell us how fair the new PP system is.

The new system is crap – plain and simple.

I am currently hosting with FR and Ruf 3400s’s banned.

I did unban the FRs tonight when I dropped the PP to 400 because I wanted to run my bellet and toyota 2000gt. It was still a cluster 🤬, and a lot of people complained and left.
 
The pp has changed a lot, more than I realized at first. You’re going to get upset when I say this (smiling while typing) The Performance Points System is NOT and I repeat Not Broke. It’s almost where it needs to be because of us and what we have been doing. So in turn we have been helping to improve the next GT title. Let me explain before you go off calling me this and that. While I was breaking in a Honda S2000 ’06 at 329hp 1060kg with 476 Performance Points for a final test against a Honda Integra Type R (DC5) ’04 at 304hp 999kg with 479pp. I know you thinking here we go, but just bear with me.

While getting the final mils on the S2000 I noticed a Volkswagen catching me, I could tell which model it was but I know it was a hatch back. Then it got me thinking of a race that I had earlier today in a FF run running at 450pp if my memory serves me right. There was a yellow Honda Civic Type R that was leaving every car behind and it made me think of the blue Honda Fit Time Attack Car the Shunk2 build some time ago. Then I started thinking of the results of that time attack event and then it flipping hit me. All of you have been saying it. “The FR cars are faster and the higher CC motors” Then I thought “There’s no bloody way they didn't. That’s too large of a formula to add to GT 5 there no way.” then I went off track. Got back on track at the ring to finish the final lap because I was so puzzled and excited to find out if it’s true and how it was installed.

Before I get to what the formula does let me tell you where it came from. We all know of the Black Bird, Lockheed’s baby the SR-71. The SR-71 was the first every plane to be developed and tested on a computer before it was modeled for the wind tunnel then to full scale, even though it was a crude one for it time it rung in a new age of testing and design. What this formula did was measured the possible forces of Mass-Force-Thrust Force-Force Heat-Force Gravity Load and possible Aero reactions. From that formula they were able to possible weakness in the Titanium under stress and other factors and determination a solution to correct the matter. One thing they were able to find out from the formula was how the Titanium flex’s under heat but they wouldn't know until they had full scale test. Now move to the late 80’s going into the 90’s where we seen a massive performance increase in car’s motor’s and in racing. That formula has filtered down from the aviation and adapted to the car world. Cars are starting to be tested on computers before they ever hit the road. As the cars evolved so did the formula, this formula determines the best possible outcome for a design and test it against Mass-Force- Thrust Force-Force Heat-Force Gravity Load. That program also has the ability to find a weakness in the drive train. In point power, but what there is also another formula.

As engine started to be developed on computers as well, engineers were able to determine the possible horse power-torque. Now with these two formulas working together engineers are able to design a car beat it on the VR track to see weakness of the chassis, suspension, motor and drive train all under Mass- Force-Force Heat-Force Gravity Load to determine what will break before it breaks on the track. Now to the part that’s going to throw everyone their heads. I believe PD has gotten a simplified version of that formula for GT, and they have been installing the first bits of code to test the reaction with the Power Points system. We got the first code in the 2.06 update when we got that massive horse power increase. If some of you still have any old RM S15 look at the hp. If it hasn't changed during the updates it still should be at 388 either with a stage 3 turbo or without, can’t remember. Build a newer RM with a stage 1 and you’ll see the increase. Through 2.06 to 2.09 they have been working and testing the engine displacement or CC code. It may be in the final in house test, now to the drive trains.

As we all know drive train all have their weakness. The one major weakness for front well drive car is power to weight transfer. (Mass-Force) But had great traction at medium to low speeds but couldn't handle great’s amount of power. Rear wheel drive cars major weakness is also weight transfer but has been counter balanced with the placement of the motor and transmission but still deals with the weakness of forward motion. (Thrust Force) But still has great acceleration out of the whole. For wheel drive has the best of both. Great traction due to the front wheel and with rear wheel creating a wheel dive platform that gets out of the whole like mad but it worse weakness. Even though it’s fast but once it get to its limits of the drive train it will slow. We may have gotten the drive train code which has limitation factored in. This is why FR cars are so bloody fast mainly the higher CC cars, even though a FR car has it’s weakness it has the lost factor when it comes to Thrust Force. Now here it comes... The whole trouble is our tuning, yes I said our tuning. Just wait, before the 2.10 update the majority of the cars were even right. Reason why was due to these missing formulas. If they got a crude version of this formula and installed a simple version of it within the GT 5 code then this is the first of the drive train update. Now to the test between the FR and FF which will surprise the crap out of you.

As I stated before both cars have been tuned to a stage one motor and has the works installed, no turbo or supercharger added to increase power. I ran five laps time attack session at Tsukuba because it a well balanced track. And if you mess up there is now place to make it up at. I pushed both cars to the limit, here are the times. In the Honda S2000 0:57.291, in the DC5 0:57.848. First thought from you “YEAH RIGHT!!” I have included some photos. One is of the timing board and the other two are the specs of the cars. I have also included and zip that contains the replay data that can be viewed in the GT5 Data logger so you can see the results for your self’s. Now to GT6…

This code will be in GT6 we are testing the reactions now, we asked for the realest sim as possible so here we go, so let’s get to it. Rebuild your stable and heat those time trails and tracks. Let work to get the best GT title ever!!



TimeBoard_zps8b0089bc.jpg
S2000_zps07bc9d67.jpg
DC5_zpsc30ce185.jpg

To view the replay just upload to your PS3 and start GT5. Enjoy.👍:)
(Addition)
This got me thinking about COBB tuning again..:dopey:

(Another Addition)

Almost forgot.. (sleepy)

I shouldn't have to inform you of of this but I will any way. With these factors in place it's all down to the tune of the whole car in a whole. FF cars can only handle so much power, FR cars can control great amounts of power but lose traction at the start, 4WD car will withstand even more power than a FR car but slows do the the weakness of the drive train. So in turn building a car to a stage 3 is building a drag car in my eyes due to the high rpm power curve. Where all dragsters make there power. De-tuning them only lower the power but not the torque. For the best results and the best racing build the car within it's limits if you like now, unless you planning to time attack on line not against the GT5 events, ( Due to the is logged) Drag or ball out nuts.
 
Last edited:
C12 Callaway and Jag XFR are overpowered now... just test it at 480 / 520 pps... lol
 
I did plenty of testing. I set a "base" time in an online lounge on my favourite track - Cape Ring Periphery, with one of my favourite cars - Mobil 1 NSX at 620pp. Then ran a clk touring at 580pp - 1.5 seconds per lap quicker despite the pp deficit. I needed the Weider HSV010 at 640pp to beat it. Before 2.10, I used to race my clk at 620pp & my NSX was faster. Not all FR cars have had their pp dropped, Weider HSV is still same. RM Corvette still same, but Corvette C5-R used to be a 650pp car if you stripped the downforce out of it, now maxed out at 602.
Getting a bit off topic here, but I reckon the ballast & power limiter ought to be limited to 50kg & 10%. I'm tired of seeing people running cars that are bought at 630+pp being run at 580 & under & people runing GT500 cars at 550pp & under. If you take a 650pp car & strip 50pp of power out of it, it still has the tyres & downforce to handle 700+hp, but it's been reduced to 550-600hp, you might as well have skid recovery turned on. You're supposed to tune 'em UP, NOT DOWN!!!!!!!!
 
No more drugs for Zuel, he's clearly lost the plot.
LOL Drugs LOL
Have you viewed the replay yet? Just asking..

Everyone wanted to know what went airy with the PP, I found the only possible collusion to this problem. I shared it take it as you wish. I'm of to bed..
 
Only add a stage 3 engine mod if you're building a drag car, that is your big conclusion in how the PP system isn't broken? Cracking stuff, PD haven't made a mistake, we have by adding parts we should only use for drag cars. Well if only PP had informed us, none of this would be an issue.

It really is remarkable that still your argument that people are wrong to say the PP system is broken is because we're applying stage 3 engine upgrades, turbos and superchargerd when we shouldn't be. Somehow that is still our fault.
 
Last edited:
@Zuel check post 307 and you'll find a listing of cars showing how much their PP was changed by V2.10. The S2000 all had almost no adjustment to their PP meaning their performance only received a minor bump at a given PP. Try testing some of the cars that saw 50-60+ reduction in PP verses unaltered cars at their new PP ratings and you'll see the major mess this is.

As far as your ramblings about the SR71 and computers etc. STOP IT! Your always blathering on about thorough testing and wanting to see the results, well start doing some relevant testing yourself and post the results. Saying you tested two cars which were only minorly affected by the update is neither conclusive nor does it show the kind of in depth testing you have tried to demand from other people.

I'll even give you a good place to start...try testing the BMW Z4 against your Integra type R and show us how even and what a good job this update is.
 
Just from the first few responses, some of your outlooks are still the same. I gave you my best theory, the best mathematical, physical theory. All the facts are there, you all have been yelling about it all the whole time. FR car are crazy fast now, 4WD are in the middle and FF drive cars are the bottom. Yes I know a lot of cars didn't change in number. Though if these formulas are being used in a simplified form then yes not all of the cars will change, it’s a given.

I shared my thoughts and a theory of a possible reason for the major PP decrease or increase in cars. I’m not saying anything negative about the tuning. Though I am saying for the best possible performance on the track tune within the cars true limits, if you don’t want to you don’t have to. You can continue to tune the way you have knowing that you’ll have to do all that tuning to cars that you don’t know very well. I shared photos of the timing which shows proof in time, the replays that you can surely view in the GT 5 data logger to see the results live for your self’s.

Has anyone even looked at the replays in the GT 5 Data Logger to see and judge the results for them self's?
:confused:
 
The pp has changed a lot...snip of a lot of stuff that doesn't mean anything...

Man you sure put a lot of effort into missing the point entirely but I can see the light. I give you another 2 or 3 days and it might start to click.


Great name...can't believe they let you in with that...lol.
 
You tried two cars, one that was completely unaffected by the update (Integra), and one that was barely touched by the update (S2000).

You picked the shortest, twistiest and one of the least used (from what I see online) tracks available bar Kart Space.

As has been done by myself and others, try using longer, more popular tracks and in one of the cars that actually had a large alteration to it's PP. That's why my collection of 415PP FR cars from V2.10 are now 7-7.5 seconds faster around a 3.1 mile circuit than when they used to be at 420PP in V2.09. A reduction of 5 PP and being 7 seconds faster does not make sense, especially when other cars (FF, 4WD, MR), have been left unchanged.

When you equate that to a 3 or 4 lap race, there will be many other cars that won't even make the count down timer for the end of the race.

When you are in a room with relatively skilled drivers who are using what are still regarded as fast cars (FR-S/86GT etc, which also received a boost in the new PP system), can enter the pits mid-race and tap out a conversation on your keyboard, and still emerge as the leader on just lap 4 of a normal circuit, then you know something is wrong.

I have no idea how you can still not grasp this, Zuel. I get the feeling that if Stephen Hawking came in, presented you with the most scientific test and results from this new system and told you the system is broken, you would ignore it all.
 
I have no idea how you can still not grasp this, Zuel. I get the feeling that if Stephen Hawking came in, presented you with the most scientific test and results from this new system and told you the system is broken, you would ignore it all.

Not if Steve read Zeul's test results..:sly:
 
Back