Why is GT7 treating all gearboxes like automatics?

[eran0004]

I did a test spamming the downshift button while braking. Did three braking tests over a lap and the results look very consistent. In this case the rpm after each allowed downshift is at around 7500 rpm +/-100 rpm. For reference, the rev limiter for the car kicks in at around 7600 rpm.

I also noticed that if you downshift while coasting or accelerating, you're allowed to downshift at a higher engine speed, so it appears to work a little different when you're braking.

 

[pikietana]

It prevents downshifting full scale rpm but never know when. Really illogical.

 

[Sir Crashalot]

Going back to the origin of this condition... PD had discovered that an unfair advantage was being used as players were downshifting at high RPMs as engine braking to slow down quicker than brakes alone which is not fair.

So PD altered the programming to prevent downshifting at high RPM.

I agree with everything except the "is not fair" part. Since anyone could do it, it was still fair. Not realistic, but fair.

 

[PowerJunkie]

Going back to the origin of this condition... PD had discovered that an unfair advantage was being used as players were downshifting at high RPMs as engine braking to slow down quicker than brakes alone which is not fair.

So PD altered the programming to prevent downshifting at high RPM.

Explain how it was not "fair"...you could get on the game and do the exact same thing. It was available to everyone with no cost.
Don't get me wrong, the shifts from 5th to 1st in a split second needed addressed, but they hammered a solution.

 

[cleanLX]

I've only experienced this new game feature once... and it was because I had missed my braking point and was spamming the downshift paddle in a panic... the game refused the shifts... which makes sense.
The rest of the time when I'm under controlled braking, and timing my downshifts correctly, it's never a problem.

So to correct the unrealistic(unfair?) advantage in the game of being able to select unrealistic downshifts, they chose to simply not allow the shift...
Probably a better solution than implementing a more realistic feature that would allow said overrev'd downshift, which would result in the rear tires not rotating at the same speed as the the vehicle-ground speed relationship, causing them to loose traction, and spin the car into a (often times) end-swapping wreck... but certainly into a slide which in most (dang near all) cases would be uncatchable.

The best example I can think of to showcase the consequences of dowenshifting outside of properly timed situation is when in 2017 Mr. Hamilton requested/made a downshift too early at Interlagos (in qualifying) and went screaming off track and wrecked the car into the barrier... that folks, is what requesting/making a downshift too early looks like.
It's all right there on the steering wheel, he selects 5th gear too soon, and, Yipee... he's along for a ride.



I'm sure the Internets have many video's showing similar situations, but that is the one I'll never forget... he was so dominant back then and to see him make a mistake was very rare...

 

[Voodoovaj]

Explain how it was not "fair"...you could get on the game and do the exact same thing. It was available to everyone with no cost.
Don't get me wrong, the shifts from 5th to 1st in a split second needed addressed, but they hammered a solution.

It's the same as the people who say track limits are "unfair" because they're following some ruleset from outside the game. I agree that there was never an unfair advantage since everyone could do it, they merely chose not to.

As I've said, the game has all the components needed to prevent this behaviour if that is truly the intent. Damage the engine, force players to go the GT Auto and rebuild their engines, lock the drive wheels in an over rev situation, etc. Why add this feature when there are already under utilized features?



I have a DSG box in real life and I rarely use it because it feel horrible. I play games to escape the real world, not carry over the horrible parts of it.

Heck, while we're at it, why not include a divorce simulator as well? If you play for too long, trigger a "divorce" in game and lose half your garage to your "ex"...maybe Sarah could pop up to inform you...or Sarah's legal representative. Then force the sale of your most prized cars to pay the legal bills. The point is, some realism can make the game worse. This downshift "fix" is one of them.

 

[M Stark]

PD should’ve introduced a subtle tactile feedback through the wheel whenever downshift protection is engaged. I’m surprised they haven’t done it already.

 

[km666]

Civil engineering.

Stick to designing car parks.

 

[eran0004]

Stick to designing car parks.

I assume that means you think you're some kind of authority in the field of materials science. Do you have any credentials? Because it seems like you're only good at flinging poo around.

 

[PowerJunkie]

I assume that means you think you're some kind of authority in the field of materials science. Do you have any credentials? Because it seems like you're only good at flinging poo around.

To be honest, at this point with the conversation, I am convinced, you are just arguing/debating, just to do it.

 

[eran0004]

To be honest, at this point with the conversation, I am convinced, you are just arguing/debating, just to do it.

How so?

 

[daan]

Stick to designing car parks.

Play the ball, not the man. Try to have a discussion without throwing insults.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I'm not sure why you and others are assuming an extreme overrev scenario, it'd be around 500-1000rpm per downshift, which on a lot of rev happy motors would represent the new limiter ceiling that a remap/chip/standalone would unlock anyway. Spinning a H22 upto 8000rpm isn't overstressing anything. The gearbox would call it a day long before the engine does.

The whole idea is extra engine braking. As I said, some motors can handle it a few extra rpms, some can't. Hell some cars will lock the axle under engine braking at mild revs, TVRs and Fords used to.

Not that I need to add to eran0004's very reasoned series of responses, but also want to add overrevving an engine OFF throttle imparts very different loads through the components than overrevving an engine on throttle.

Peak connecting rod loads on throttle: Compressive @ low RPM WOT conditions, through the "beam" of the connecting rod - this is inside the regular operation envelope. (This is peak cylinder pressure)

Peak connecting rod loads off throttle/overrun: Tensile @ high RPM no load (manifold vacuum) conditions, transferred to the rod bolts - this is outside the regular operation envelope. (This is peak reciprocating inertia without counteracting cylinder pressure)

Put another way, connecting rods are designed to withstand compressive loads that exceed those generated at redline under power, because their worst compressive loading occurs at lower-RPM, high-pressure conditions. Rod bolts, by contrast, experience their highest tensile stresses during high-RPM, low-pressure conditions such as aggressive downshifts, and those conditions often represent or exceed their maximum design stress.

 

[Nakano219]

As I've said, the game has all the components needed to prevent this behaviour if that is truly the intent. Damage the engine, force players to go the GT Auto and rebuild their engines, lock the drive wheels in an over rev situation, etc. Why add this feature when there are already under utilized features?

The problem is, this isn't aimed at singleplayer. It's absolutely primarily a bandaid for Sport Mode.

So GT Auto doesn't matter, and any repercussions for doing it that would actually have consequences to someone's race will get complained about by the elite drivers and get reverted post-haste (see also: any time they try to set damage to strong).

 

[Voodoovaj]

The problem is, this isn't aimed at singleplayer. It's absolutely primarily a bandaid for Sport Mode.

But, as has been brought up several times, why? It wasn't an exploit.

Also, again, break the engine. Even with damage on weak (which it is in Sport Mode) having a broken engine will cost you time. Ergo, people will avoid breaking engines. I repeat, this is the worst possible way to address this issue.

If you want to discourage a behaviour, there needs to be either a repercussion for that behaviour, or a benefit to avoiding that behaviour. Making it feel like shifting is broken achieves neither goal. Again, spam the downshift as rapidly as possible and you'll get your perfectly timed downshift. It feels like an 1980's video game, not a "driving sim"

 

[Sir Crashalot]

It doesn't really effect me much, so far I had only three occasions where I couldn't shift down. But I still don't get why they did this.
It's definitely not realism. First, because realism clearly isn't a priority for PD and second, because it's simply not realistic.
So did they do it because of TTs? Doesn't make sense either....it wasn't unfair, since anyone could do it. Yes, there were some people complaining, but it wasn't that much from what I have seen and it would have taken PD more than 3 years to realize this. And people are also complaining about the abuse of track limits. But no change here AFAIK. So nope, I don't think that the reason.

So, as so often, I have no idea, why they did it. PD is definitely one of the stranger companies in this business. But hey, they're pretty successful for beeing a strange company😉


PS: Next time Kaz is in Austria I will track him down and have a nice smalltalk with him. I'm sure he's more than happy to discuss things like this with a loyal player 😄

 

[Sir Crashalot]

Some time has passed and I've driven more different cars and I feel like the implementation of this feature is a bit inconsistent. I didn't really adjust my playstyle and on many cars I don't see any difference, the "downshift protection" never triggers. But on some cars (one example being the swapped FTO with the racing transmission) it's very obvious.

BTW: Because there was a lot of talk here about engine stress and over revving: Some ppl may not even be aware of this and I myself almost forgot about it, but there is already a engine/drivetrain damage mechanic in the game. You have to crash really hard to trigger it and I've only seen it 3 or 4 times in the 2500+ hours I spent on the game. So if PD wanted they could also have used this to prevent "abuse" of high rev downshifts.

 

[NAXEHT]

Okay...just got done. Made a video with three clips/examples.....what I wrote in the description...
A brief video showing how inconsistent the down shifting is now that Polyphony Digital did and update to the downshifting to eliminate an exploit. I do understand what they are trying to accomplish, but to steal a phrase another player said, they 'fixed' this with a hammer instead of a screwdriver. The first clip shows trying to downshift literally as fast as possible, multiple clicks of the paddle. Very slow timed shifts, rev limiter not engaged a single shift. The second and third clip shows how the downshift will take in an unwanted circumstance and go up high enough to hit the rev limiter and break the rear tires loose. This is the problem, there is no predictability in the down shifting.....it's a crap shoot, you might get the down shift, you might not.

Agreed, the “fix” is really weird and applied in very odd way, I don’t think it really works that well at all and honestly would like to see it reversed. It was very notable in that C 63 TT in particular, sometimes it was like it completely refused to downshift. Really annoying.

 

[PowerJunkie]

Agreed, the “fix” is really weird and applied in very odd way, I don’t think it really works that well at all and honestly would like to see it reversed. It was very notable in that C 63 TT in particular, sometimes it was like it completely refused to downshift. Really annoying.

Yes, there is no reliability to it. I feel, reverse the restriction by 50%, or 30% at the least. This would bring the predictability back AND prevent the insta-shift 5th to 1st.

 

[fastone371]

Bikes have slipper clutches to reduce wheel hop into the corners (which you see in the motard video), because "over revving" engine braking is key to entering the corner. I put the over "revving" in quotes because the rev limiters stop over revving and damaging the engine. The slipper clutch saves the gearbox.

You said...

...and I showed you that it was. Now you know.

Since GT7 is a car racing game with no motorcycles I was reffering to cars, not bikes. I'm baffled why bikes would even be mentioned here, what does that have to do with GT7???

 

[Voodoovaj]

Since GT7 is a car racing game with no motorcycles I was reffering to cars, not bikes. I'm baffled why bikes would even be mentioned here, what does that have to do with GT7???

You said "I didn't know over revving while downshifting to aid rotation was a skill." - I showed you that it was.

Yes, there is no reliability to it. I feel, reverse the restriction by 50%, or 30% at the least. This would bring the predictability back AND prevent the insta-shift 5th to 1st.

Spam the downshift. That's what I do now. I tap it like it's a fighting game or something until I get the gear I want. This isn't a fix, it's a worse issue.

 

[fastone371]

You said "I didn't know over revving while downshifting to aid rotation was a skill." - I showed you that it was.

Its your story, tell it how you want.

 

[NevilleNobody]

This is getting seriously annoying now, I don't feel like my changes are inappropriate but the issue is absolutely chronic into the second chicane at Monza in the Audi, every second shift fails, it's so unpredictable.

 

[Voodoovaj]

Its your story, tell it how you want.

and yet

I didn't know over revving while downshifting to aid rotation was a skill.

Knowledge is power.

 

[Met Entso]

It's annoying but it's necessary.

 

[Sir Crashalot]

It's annoying but it's necessary.

Necessary because?

 

[Voodoovaj]

It's annoying but it's necessary.

Is it? Why is it necessary? Because there was a use case that they didn't like?

It's not necessary, it is annoying, and there are MANY much better solutions to whatever issue they were trying to address. Imagine that they simply removed manual...that would have fixed the issue as well. Would it have been a necessary fix or a poor decision? I vote for poor decision.

That's what this "fix" is. It's a poor decision.

 

[Sir Crashalot]

One more thought about this (may have been mentioned before):

It takes away a lot of fun from some of the swaps, like the Beat or the old Abarth. Those cars figuratively have no brakes, so you had to rely on excessive engine braking.
And in my opinion those swaps were never meant for serious driving/racing, they pretty much just exist to have fun.

 

[TBR 427]

A note from testing this in the 650 Gr3 car: Normally 1st gear gets to about 115kph then bounces off the rev limiter, but you can downshift from 2nd to 1st geat at about 125, maybe 130 kph. So it still allows maybe 10% extra rpm than it should. Not horrible but also not completely absurd (like letting it pull an additional 40% higher rpm than redline).

So having the gearbox computer ignore dumb ideas from the meatbag behind the wheel sounds perfectly reasonable.


In theory the optimal is running it at redline and progressively releasing the clutch so as to not force RPMs above redline, which may also be happening somewhat. Then engine braking is at maximum and at equilibrium with the acceleration force passed through the clutch.



If anyone wants a good example of how NOT to do it, the Ferrari F430 with the F1 gearbox is something to check out. The engine simply cannot gain or lose RPM fast enough to keep up with the changing demands from the rear wheels and gearbox.

Under hard acceleration coming out of corners, changing up, the engine has too much inertia, keeps the RPM too high, and can light up the rears. It's barely dropping past 8,000rpm when, if rev-matched properly, it should be doing 6,000rpm. That extra engine speed chirps the rears like a L-plater dumping the clutch.

And worse, under hard braking and through turn-in, the engine cannot gain RPM fast enough to rev-match on aggressive downshifts. It's still flicking upwards past 7,500rpm when the gearbox is expecting 10,000rpm. So then the drivetrain all connects, the rears aren't locked, but still spinning 25% slower then they should, which causes a bit loss of rear traction and can cause a spin. Again, like a L-Plater who doesn't blip and thinks the clutch is on or off.

 

[PowerJunkie]

You said "I didn't know over revving while downshifting to aid rotation was a skill." - I showed you that it was.

Spam the downshift. That's what I do now. I tap it like it's a fighting game or something until I get the gear I want. This isn't a fix, it's a worse issue.

I tried that for a short while, and for me, it only adds to the unpredictability of the shift to aid in rotation for turn in, simply because you don't when it will take. Just aggravating is all it is now. However, I have been retraining myself to just learn when the car will go down a gear.