Would you say rollover is realistic in this game?

[Big Ron]

This is rollover

You can do the same in LFS. And in my opinion there isn´t any more realistic physics engine when it come to rollovers.

The advantage of LFS is the real time deforming chassis (even when it deforms as a block and does not look realistic at all), that reacts on impacts of crashes

 

[Negrumir]

This is rollover

That it is, but these are better.

(I know, it's my own video, sue me.)

Rollovers on GT5 would be better if they didn't have the car lock to 45 degree angle like they used to on old GT games. The force required to get to that angle is fine, but the force required to exceed that angle is way too high. The rollovers themselves aren't all that bad, but unrealistically preventing us from achieving them is.

 

[Exorcet]

How much realism do you want in a game? If you mean you have to start a race over when you land on your roof that might be considered fine in the shorter races but a few hours into an endurance race that would be considered quite heavy punishment I reckon (unless you're so far in front you only have to watch the remaining hours upside down ).
More real, no doubt but potentially hugely frustrating, maybe the walking element of Photo-mode can be introduced, so you can walk to the pit and choose a new car.......

Frustrating? I don't think so, it means that damage and roll over have meaning. When I'm actually racing, I wish I could wreck my car so badly so that I'd be forced to sit out the rest of the race. And if some people don't want to do that, just switch damage off, there should be options where ever possible.

However

...Many good points...

I agree with a lot of that.

 

[Spade13]

I've flipped my car a few times and I don't think it's that realistic! First off, the car only flips if you hit something or due to some kind of elevation change on your car (such as Trial Mountain) Your car never rolls over by it's own if you do a hard corner, which sucks!

Also, the times you do flip, it seems pretty awkward! First off, there's an unrealistic sense of gravity and the car doesn't flip correctly. It would flip on the front tip of the car in circles and may be do a vertices roll over! Since when do cars roll on the front tip of the car? And what's worse, is that there is no consequence for rolling over your car. You come back, normally, on the track and you continue. You just lost 6 or 7 seconds of your time, and that's pretty much it! This also draws into the damage discussion, that you should get consequences for your idiotic driving, but then again, it would have taken Polophony another 3 years!

It seems that Polophony focused on two things for Gran Turismo 5. The car modeling on the premium cars and the driving physics! The driving physics alone! Still, I'm still enjoying this game, but as I play I keep noticing these flaws in the game that angers me that after almost 6 years, the game is left unfinished!

 

[r0llinlacs]

Rollovers are pretty much non-existent unless you smack a wall at 200 mph.

They should be extremely easy to re-produce, but they just aren't there.

You should be able to take any SUV, raise it, throw some racing softs on, and watch it roll as you try to corner at 35 mph...

 

[alvin23a]

I wouldn't say thats entirely realistic either. Unless the car is lowered or has extremly low prifile tyres a car should not roll over on the grass, even if its going sideways.

A game where rollovers happen easily as soon as you go sideways will be just as bad and unrealtic.

You need to strike a realistic balance. Unless the car is very low or some structual part of it digs into the ground while its moving sideways it should not roll. Most times the car will skimp accross grass or terrain even when moving sideways.

However at speeds of 150mph+ almost anything can happen and you really need to have a good aero model in the game as the wind can easily get under the car if youre unlucky and literally swoop it of its "feet"

i fliped a evo4 6 times on the nurgring gp

 

[deftonesmx17]

I wouldn't say thats entirely realistic either. Unless the car is lowered or has extremly low prifile tyres a car should not roll over on the grass, even if its going sideways.

Interesting, I take it you live someplace where nobody ever wrecks?

I also think you have that backwards. The higher the car and larger the wheels can induce roll, hence why SUV's are known to tip and roll over during accidents or by taking turns too fast.

 

[cohetedor]

What gets me is that they made it even harder to roll your car than it was in the GT5 demos. Remember our first video of rollover where the girl flipped the Fiat 500 twice just taking normal corners on R246? I tried that the other day in Arcade mode and couldn't flip it for the life of me.

 

[xSNAKEx]

Interesting, I take it you live someplace where nobody ever wrecks?

I also think you have that backwards. The higher the car and larger the wheels can induce roll, hence why SUV's are known to tip and roll over during accidents or by taking turns too fast.

I know what you're saying, I agree. But I didnt say cars with a lower centre of gravity are more prone to rolling, its obvious the car with the higher centre of gravity will be more prone to tipping i.e SUVs.

I was only talking about grass, and mainly very minor differences in ride height. A car thats "lower" than another can actually have a higher centre of gravity. I.e you SLAM an SUV right down to the floor and you leave a veyron stock, the veyron will be higher, but less prone to flipping still. From what I have seen, a car will slide accross the grass sideways, unless some strong edge of the car digs into the dirt thats beneath the grass which would cause a lot more friction, hence casing the car to stop much faster in inducing a lift on the side that hasnt dug in. I.e the lowered part, the side of the car or rim coulld easily dig into the dirt beneath the grass where as a car that is not lowered so much will tend to just skimp accross the grass unless it hits a high bit or very rough terrain)

 

[James2097]

Are the roll-over physics realistic?

Short answer: no.
Long answer: no wucking fay.

The fact it is so monumentally difficult to roll your car, just screams out that Kaz never really wanted to incorporate rolling into a GT game. It isn't part of his narrow vision, but was something (which explain why damage is also so lame) American gamers put pressure on him to include. So we get the most neutered damage and roll-overs despite finally having console hardware that can calculate such things very easily.

 

[SigmaViper11]

Not surprising. I've flipped the X1 end over end. Dive it up cape ring, that jump just before the loop. At a solid speed the car skids on its nose then falls over onto its roof.

 

[analog]

...Are you aware that it can be an OPTION that can be turned off ?

Frustrating? I don't think so, it means that damage and roll over have meaning. When I'm actually racing, I wish I could wreck my car so badly so that I'd be forced to sit out the rest of the race. And if some people don't want to do that, just switch damage off, there should be options where ever possible.

Fair enough, I forgot anything can be optional I guess, and to be honest I agree a rollover or damage being semi-permanent (as in that particular race) would have more meaning, just used the example of the endurance races as they are mostly a daunting prospect as they are right now (mostly the time it takes though).
In fact I wished damage would remain after the race too, meaning you'd have to pay to get them repaired (not sure many would use this if it was optional though, some things should perhaps be forced ).

Oh, and the easiest way to roll over a car in GT5 is to take a stock Fiat 500 F and take a few corners at relatively high speeds.

 

[GTOne2Three]

Now that I think of it, roll over isn't as bad as the rest of the system. First they gotta work on damage.

PD forgot 3 basic principles to damage:
1: Panels should fall off of all cars, not just a certain class.. That's better than the car looking like they're part are melting right off..
Hence, Castrol Supra's retarded cousins:

(not my photo)

2: Windows, mirrors, tail, and headlights are breakable. It's a basic law of physics in the real world.

The Biggest Offender:
3: The amount of damage is not based on how many times you crash, but on the force of the crash.

Polyphony, please take your logic pills.. Please..

 

[analog]

Panels should fall off of all cars, not just a certain class..

But it's only possible right now on one class (Premium) due to the way they're modelled (separate parts instead of the solid model Standard cars).

 

[GTOne2Three]

But it's only possible right now on one class (Premium) due to the way they're modelled (separate parts instead of the solid model Standard cars).

I'm saying for all premiums. So far the only cars that are fun to wreck are WRC. My dumba* was trying to get the bumper to finally fall off of a skyline and no knowing that the hanging bumper would never come off. Just hang there.

It's like PD climbed a huge staircase but stop and sit down on the 2nd to last stop. Just get rid of that that last indestructible bolt that's holding on to the bumper.

 

[mini_roofer_S]

3: The amount of damage is not based on how many times you crash, but on the force of the crash.

Polyphony, please take your logic pills.. Please..

I disagree. Head on crashes dont do all that much compared to trying to PIT a car on indy at 200 MPH. When you try pitting a car at that speed look at the reverse cam. you'll see the bumper spreading apart towards the car your pitting. Its actually pretty funny, try it.

edit: I have the citreon rally car BTW. I got my drivers side door off, but after a half hour I couldnt get the passenger door off. It wouldnt even open for that matter. Is this because passenger doors on rally cars are welded shut for better frame stability? Or is this just crazy thinking and PD is dumb?

 

[Shant J.]

I have yet to roll a car. Hell, even the VW bus corners like it's on rails. I don't get it.

 

[timeatkuu]

I have yet to roll a car. Hell, even the VW bus corners like it's on rails. I don't get it.

This speaks my mind.

 

[Big Ron]

Now that I think of it, roll over isn't as bad as the rest of the system. First they gotta work on damage.

PD forgot 3 basic principles to damage:
1: Panels should fall off of all cars, not just a certain class.. That's better than the car looking like they're part are melting right off..

If you look seriously at the ingame models, you would have noticed, that there can´t be panels falling off.

The reason is: they didn´t modeled the chassis underbody carefully enough. You can notice it, when your bumpers are deforming. You can easily see the street through the columns. If the bumpers would fall off, there wouldn´t be visible anything but the street. You also see it at the WRC-cars.

 

[vrooom]

If you look seriously at the ingame models, you would have noticed, that there can´t be panels falling off.

The reason is: they didn´t modeled the chassis underbody carefully enough. You can notice it, when your bumpers are deforming. You can easily see the street through the columns. If the bumpers would fall off, there wouldn´t be visible anything but the street. You also see it at the WRC-cars.

And this along with other things proves how unsuitable for future games GT5's assets will be (higly doubt that there will ever be a GT6) despite the claims on the contrary.

Sure they modeled the stitches for the interior of the cars (that's mad and a very bad way to spend resources) but they didn't model the cars in a way they could accept in the future a realistic damage model (for example engine bay) or the suspension components of the cars (wheels falling off etc). They didn't need to be 100% precise (as they were with the stitches) they just needed to keep a balance. 💡

Enjoy GT5 for what is worth, there won't probably be another...

 

[Big Ron]

And this along with other things proves how unsuitable for future games GT5's assets will be (higly doubt that there will ever be a GT6) despite the claims on the contrary.

Sure they modeled the stitches for the interior of the cars (that's mad and a very bad way to spend resources) but they didn't model the cars in a way they could accept in the future a realistic damage model (for example engine bay) or the suspension components of the cars (wheels falling off etc). They didn't need to be 100% precise (as they were with the stitches) they just needed to keep a balance. 💡

Enjoy GT5 for what is worth, there won't probably be another...

Yeah, for me the cockpits are really way overmodeled and not necessary. Would be even cooler when they modeled suspension parts and underbody parts....or even the backside of the wheels (that is so ridiculous)

 

[Zoom!Zoom!]

Some complain about the lack of damage in GT5 and now we got damage it's very hard to find any open room online with damage set on heavy. Most of either no damage or light. I believe it's the same with rollovers.
Only a few would noticed or care if GT5 did have realistic rolling over. Why would PD waste so much time trying to produce realistic roll overs when one a small faction of gamers would even care while most would turn the feature off?

 

[Obli]

The rollover physics make the car look like a block of balsa wood... and as someone said, it's as if it's happening on the moon.

I'm glad that rollover is in. For GT, that is a landmark inclusion and one that is welcome as far as I am concerned. It just needs improving.

For the person that mentioned being unable to rollover, I believe you cannot roll cars online (if you happened to be online).

 

[Uxi]

Now that I think of it, roll over isn't as bad as the rest of the system. First they gotta work on damage.

PD forgot 3 basic principles to damage:
1: Panels should fall off of all cars, not just a certain class.. That's better than the car looking like they're part are melting right off..

Definitely. I always wanted road hazards from previous crashes to be a factor in the next lap. Driving over that jagged piece of fender could lead to a flat and the need for a pit call!

2: Windows, mirrors, tail, and headlights are breakable. It's a basic law of physics in the real world.

Yeah, I would really want to see this. And the link to mods: weight reductions and replacing the windows with lexan and removing headlights and taillights entirely...

The Biggest Offender:
3: The amount of damage is not based on how many times you crash, but on the force of the crash.

I dunno... it should be pretty complicated based on the dynamics of each individual crash. I'd love to see bent rims, borked alignments, etc... but we should also have things like bent valves and broken rods from over-revs/misshifts that we don't have either. Snapping axles and fried clutches from a crazy ultra high rpm clutch drop...

 

[DEADLIST]

my first roll was @ nurburgring gp circuit while doing the X1 challenge...on my first try, i barely nipped the first turn rumble strips and barrel rolled...very weird to earn a trophy for that misfortune. and it took me 10 hrs after that to pass the event.

 

[NFSCARBON1]

Some complain about the lack of damage in GT5 and now we got damage it's very hard to find any open room online with damage set on heavy. Most of either no damage or light. I believe it's the same with rollovers.
Only a few would noticed or care if GT5 did have realistic rolling over. Why would PD waste so much time trying to produce realistic roll overs when one a small faction of gamers would even care while most would turn the feature off?

This relates to mechanical damage. If your in a laggy room online with full damage half the cars end up undrivable after the first few turns. When hotlapping or testing it also causes problems. Most rooms set it to light damage as it repairs itself after a while. The body damage stays the same whatever you set the damage to.

 

[gtsmashbros]

I think the main problem is the absence of underside aerodynamics. If a Super GT spins into reverse at 200 mph, most of the aerodynamic devices would generate the opposite (i.e. 100 pounds of downforce, will now be 50 or so pounds of lift in reverse). Another thing is the shape of the body. The underside of the rear is sloped upwards, and would pick the car off the ground.

That's my theory.

 

[NFSCARBON1]

I think the main problem is the absence of underside aerodynamics. If a Super GT spins into reverse at 200 mph, most of the aerodynamic devices would generate the opposite (i.e. 100 pounds of downforce, will now be 50 or so pounds of lift in reverse). Another thing is the shape of the body. The underside of the rear is sloped upwards, and would pick the car off the ground.

That's my theory.

You are right, but the effects wouldn't be as great as you'd think. The rear end of the car would definately experiance lift but i don't think it would be great enough to flip the car. Now if the car became airborne during the spin, the flat bottom would catch the air and possibly flip the car.

 

[gtsmashbros]

Correct. But that doesn't even happen.

 

[VBR]

I'd say that roll over looks pityfully bad & totally unrealistic.


👎👎👎