are Gt4 physics being redone?

[road kill]

ok im wondering are they going to redo the physics or re use the one from gt4?


as we all know they dont actually test drive the cars anymore...(over 600+ cars)

so they dont have time to feel out every single car in the game... Even gears and rev limiters are pre decided by the computer

so what will they do for gt5?...same thing? from what i saw of that gt5 vid on the new gt5 track the phsics look about the same -__-

 

[Wolfe]

GTHD:Classic has the same exact engine from GT4. GTHDremium is supposed to have a new engine. I'm hoping for competent physics this time around, but I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.

I'm not sure this warranted its own thread, but I'll leave that up to someone with a blue banner beneath their avatar to decide.

 

[road kill]

well its probably not but then where else could i ask...there should be a miscallenous question thread lol

but yeah having a computer generate handling physics and gears etc doesnt seem very realistic to me ...

 

[Raitziger]

though they will mostly use same data gathered for gt4,that does not mean they cant get more out of it by using PS3.

 

[Eric.]

but yeah having a computer generate handling physics and gears etc doesnt seem very realistic to me ...

Huh? A computer is always going to be doing that in a simulator. If you don't want a computer to generate physics and other things you better get a real race car.

 

[Dave A]

but yeah having a computer generate handling physics and gears etc doesnt seem very realistic to me ...

Could you clairfy what you mean by this.

 

[isamu]

can I ask what people find wrong with the physics in the Gran Turismo games?

 

[Dave A]

They arn't as realistic as most people think they are. Granted they are very good but some people think they are the be all and end all of racing game physics. They are not. In all fairness getting any more calculations out of the PS2 wasn't going to happen, but I'd have gladly had PD keep GT3's graphics model and had the physics improved further. Gaems like RFactor, Drivers republic and Liver for speed all offer a far more realistic physics engine. Some people don't like to accept that, almost as though it's a personal matter. The put my opinion in a nutshell so to speak, I think PD have done well with GT4 but the game has glaring flaws, I've been spoilt by other games that arn't limited by the PS2's power. Once I'd got used to these other games going back to GT4 was a shallow experience for me.

 

[Tenacious D]

Liver For Speed won't work with my gaming PC, so I think I'll stick to console gaming. Not to leave out the fact that to get LFS complete, you have to spend about $45 for 19 cars and 9 tracks, almost all fantasy stuff, which is about the price of that in extra content in GTHD. Except for the fact that you'd also get 30 cars and 2 tracks of GT5 content, and not a fantasy car among them. And the added bonus I'm all about, it will work as advertized, totally plug n play.

Anyway, after GameSpot got some hands on time with Gran Turismo HD, they had this to say:

From a gameplay standpoint, the physics of Gran Turismo HD have progressed to the point that Yamauchi believes they will need to add multiple difficulty levels to appeal both to the hardcore GT users and those new to the series. The GT HD demo, for example, featured both a normal driving mode and a "professional" setting, which had less grip on the tires, twitchier acceleration, and cars that were simply more "squirrely" under braking. Damage, which Yamauchi jokingly referred to as "the homework [Polyphony Digital] always forgets to turn in", will be in GT HD at some point, though Yamauchi was careful to point out that different cars may suffer differing levels of damage. To appease manufacturers, the game might feature extensive damage on race-trimmed vehicles, while only minimal or cosmetic damage on the everyday factory street models, but this is all still up in the air at this point.

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/driving/granturismo5/news.html?sid=6158178&q=gran turismo hd

So it looks indeed like this isn't going to be simply GT4, thanks to having a system as powerful as a cutting edge gaming PC.

 

[Gabkicks]

but the physics are so much better . and there's multiplayer and its out right now. So if you enjoy realistic physics and good racing, LFS is the game for you

 

[Poverty]

People laud about LFS physics but to me I dont think they are all that realistic. Its like in one department LFS is great, but in others a bit crap. Either way all racing cars are mightly far off the real thing.

 

[Dave A]

And you've first hand experience of the real thing? Either way, for racing cars you have GTR, GTL and RFactor that cover thoes bases better than anything else. Gran Turismo is attempting to be too much of a jack of all trades at times, in stead of being the best at one thing it's imo average at them all. You can't complain about the content, no sir-ee but I just realy get thrown off when I try to get the car to do something it should do and something else happens, it's most noticalbe in the race cars. The road cars with the road tyre's arn't too bad, I can enjoy driving them, though they still arn't as good as FS, NKP, RF or DR promises to be. The one area LFS fails at mostly is in terms of content, it's the weakes of any sims I have that arn't in testing phases.

 

[road kill]

Could you clairfy what you mean by this.

well what I mean is since like gt2 they stopped actually testing the cars out and now since theres way more cars the computer generates the physics ....

so what I mean is that the gear ratio's most likley aernt accurate since the computer just generates them...

 

[Dimitrov]

well what I mean is since like gt2 they stopped actually testing the cars out and now since theres way more cars the computer generates the physics ....

so what I mean is that the gear ratio's most likley aernt accurate since the computer just generates them...

Did you ever watched the "Making or GT4"?

 

[Scaff]

well what I mean is since like gt2 they stopped actually testing the cars out and now since theres way more cars the computer generates the physics ....

As has been mentioned the Making of GT4 DVD that was packaged with GT4 Prologue (which unfortunately did not get a release in the states) quite clearly shows the development team testing cars, I also know that cars owned by members of the Pistonheads forum were tested for GT4.

so what I mean is that the gear ratio's most likely aernt accurate since the computer just generates them...

While a couple of the cars in GT4 have gear ratios that are incorrect, I find this far more likely to be the result of input error. I mean the manufacturers supply PD with the car data, why would they then go and get a programme to 'generate' them?

That makes no sense at all.

I've also tested a few GT4 cars in 0-30, 0-60 and 0-100 times and compared them to real-world data and they come damn close, which would be unlikely if they were way out. I carried out in-depth gear ratio tests on the GT4 Celica when looking at compression braking and those figures were almost spot on.

GT4 0-100-0 Test 1
GT4 0-100-0 Further tests
GT4 Compression Braking Test


Regards

Scaff

 

[Wolfe]

And you've first hand experience of the real thing? Either way, for racing cars you have GTR, GTL and RFactor that cover thoes bases better than anything else...

...The road cars with the road tyre's arn't too bad, I can enjoy driving them, though they still arn't as good as FS, NKP, RF or DR promises to be. The one area LFS fails at mostly is in terms of content, it's the weakes of any sims I have that arn't in testing phases.

I've tried GTR, GTL, RFactor, and NetKar, but I always come back to Live for Speed. Sure, the sounds, graphics, and presentation of GTR/GTL are top-notch, but the physics feel a bit lacking, probably because the games are based on an old engine that was designed for a completely different kind of "car" (GTR was originally a mod for EA's F1 2002, called GTR2002). I just don't get the same feeling of driving a car as I do with Live for Speed.

As for RFactor, there are plenty of people who say that it's better than Live for Speed, but I just don't get it. Like GTR/GTL, it's very similar to EA's F1 games (since ISI was the developer who made them), perhaps using the same basic engine that GTR is based on, and its graphics and sound are very good...but the cars don't communicate with me even slightly. Perhaps this is exacerbated by the fact that I only tried the demo when it first came out, and never looked back. I don't know if the game has improved significantly since then.

I haven't tried NetKarPro, but NetKar was very disappointing...almost as bad as RACER. No communication from the car whatsoever, chronic understeer, and a very hard-to-use interface...Is NetKarPro a million times better?

I have high expectations of Driver's Republic, but something tells me that it won't disappoint me.

Anyway, getting back to the topic of console racing sims, there's always Enthusia, which falls short of GT4 in graphics and content, but is better in terms of sound and physics.

 

[suzq044]

from what i've been hearing.. its basically going to be a GT4 online.. with a few more cars & a bit better graphics.. GT5 is still coming out.. this is an interim project i guess. I hate to use this as a simile - but like ME was between 98 and XP for windows.. I'm not sure about damage or anything like that.. all i've been hearing is the basic stuff.

[again, from what i've been hearing, not confirmed by any means of the word]

-- the only thing i find wrong about the physics in the game is you cant really do some things that you could do in reality - for instance, the 'computer' doesnt allow donuts, or realistic collision because it simply acts like a cube hitting another cube... thats how game modeling works, so i'd i'd just like to see some more realistic 'boundaries' on the vehicles.. and maybe some damage. [ie Forza]

-- Personally, i'd like there to be a game made that was a cross between the Need For Speed series, GranTurismo and Forza.. The customisation[physical not just technical] and wrecks[dynamic, not just bouncing off of a boundary like a bumpercar] of Need For Speed, the look and feel of Gran Turismo [tracks/setup], and the collision and damage of Forza [bumpers/splitters/wings fall off, glass breaks off, dents.. etc].

 

[Gabkicks]

suzq, you have too low expectations when it comes to physics . but you are not alone. thats how most people who only play gran turismo are.

 

[road kill]

As has been mentioned the Making of GT4 DVD that was packaged with GT4 Prologue (which unfortunately did not get a release in the states) quite clearly shows the development team testing cars, I also know that cars owned by members of the Pistonheads forum were tested for GT4.



While a couple of the cars in GT4 have gear ratios that are incorrect, I find this far more likely to be the result of input error. I mean the manufacturers supply PD with the car data, why would they then go and get a programme to 'generate' them?

That makes no sense at all.

I've also tested a few GT4 cars in 0-30, 0-60 and 0-100 times and compared them to real-world data and they come damn close, which would be unlikely if they were way out. I carried out in-depth gear ratio tests on the GT4 Celica when looking at compression braking and those figures were almost spot on.

GT4 0-100-0 Test 1
GT4 0-100-0 Further tests
GT4 Compression Braking Test


Regards

Scaff

well i was just going off of what ive heard and i thought it was true because well with 600 cars did pd actually sit down and test drive every car in the game?

and after looking at your tests i see your point but im wondering did they actually go and test out the normal street cars like the silvia a skyline etc?

 

[extreme car]

if GT4 physics is being redone on the GT:HD premium I'm so not going to buy PS3 till the real GT5 coming out...

 

[Slurm]

I've also tested a few GT4 cars in 0-30, 0-60 and 0-100 times and compared them to real-world data and they come damn close, which would be unlikely if they were way out. I carried out in-depth gear ratio tests on the GT4 Celica when looking at compression braking and those figures were almost spot on.

GT4 0-100-0 Test 1
GT4 0-100-0 Further tests
GT4 Compression Braking Test


Regards

Scaff

The thing is, they can get cars to be about the same speed in a straight line, and even round a track, but it doesn't mean the physics are perfect. If you jumped in a racing car with 600hp and no traction control, it would NOT track in a perfectly straight line under full throttle away from the line, ala Gran Turismo.

The physics in GT4 is nice, in that it's fairly predictable and is very, er analogue, but the grip threshold is completely unreal (ie cars transition seamlessly between traction and slipping). This makes it pretty boring to play imo and more real physics will be a big improvement.

 

[JTSnooks]

PD tests as many cars as they can, but what they get from those tests have to be put into numbers to be used in the game. Every bit of performance of a car can be broken down into numbers (spring rate, damping rates, weight and weight distribution, static/dynamic tire grip, torque, clutch grip, etc.), which can then be put into a program to reproduce the exact performance. Of course, this only works for a video game, because you don't need things like steering feel, brake feel, or shifter feel/sloppiness in a videogame. So as long as PD can get those numbers, they in fact don't need to drive the cars to make sure the performance matches. It may feel a little different from the real car, but that's probably because some of the numbers are a little off. Manufacturers don't often publish the spring rates of their cars. So the cars that PD can't drive, they try to get these numbers from the manufacturers and put the cars in.

As for the Enthusia comment, I find Enthusia's physics to be pretty crappy. No, GT4's not perfect, and Enthusia does deal better with tire grip/slip, but besides that one difference GT4 seems to have the more complete and realistic physics engine.

Now as for the topic of the thread, hopefully they will at least expand the physics engine of GT4 to include a lot more factors (road irregularities, for instance, which are what cause a car under hard acceleration to slide to one side or the other) to make it more realistic. I think the basis is there, but they really need to work on the grip levels of the tires, and the transition from static to dynamic grip. If they can't modify it sufficiently, then they'll need to start over again, but I think they have enough to work with.

 

[Tenacious D]

Considering that the PS3 is a multicore architecture - heck, it's about as multicore as you can get!, with a massively powerful CPU and six available SPEs (one runs the OS) all running over 3ghz, Polyphony can divvy up work among those processors as they see fit. Other developers are using the SPEs for various tasks such as bot A.I., physics, graphic duties, all manner of things, so Polyphony have a wealth of overwhelming processing horsepower available to manage whatever they want. I expect that from GameSpot's experience with Professional Mode and the cars acting "squirrelier," that it looks like this is going to be a Gran Turismo which may even make a few PC nuts happy.

 

[Gabkicks]

i hope you are right...

 

[Tenacious D]

Well, look at a couple of game series. Need For Speed and Project Gotham Racing. How have they progressed as they went to more powerful systems? I must admit that I'm only impressed with the graphics of both, but to be honest, they have improved in their physics and a sense of realism too. They aren't realistic, less so than GT4, but they're designed for the Fast n Furious nuts anyway, where an easy, pretty drift is the whole point. Meh.

Some people say that Gran Turismo hasn't progressed at all when it transitioned to the PS2. You can't reason with them, so the rest of us who took in all the goodies the now archaic PS2 gave the series, the PS3 can only mean exponentially greater things on an exponentially more powerful system. To say otherwise is to ignore the entire history of game development.

 

[Tornado]

Well, look at a couple of game series. Need For Speed and Project Gotham Racing. How have they progressed as they went to more powerful systems? I must admit that I'm only impressed with the graphics of both, but to be honest, they have improved in their physics and a sense of realism too. They aren't realistic, less so than GT4, but they're designed for the Fast n Furious nuts anyway, where an easy, pretty drift is the whole point. Meh.

What?!?! The physics and sense of realism for the Need For Speed series went down the toilet after Porsche Unleashed. The NFS series before HP:II and the series including and after HP:II are like night and day. The series was a clever mix of sim and arcade elements and had a fine sense of realism. Post-Porsche Unleashed games have no realism whatsoever.

And PGR hasn't really made to much in the way of advances in realism or physics (other than graphics) since MSR originally came out on the Dreamcast in 2000.

Some people say that Gran Turismo hasn't progressed at all when it transitioned to the PS2. You can't reason with them, so the rest of us who took in all the goodies the now archaic PS2 gave the series, the PS3 can only mean exponentially greater things on an exponentially more powerful system. To say otherwise is to ignore the entire history of game development.

Viper Racing came out in 1998. GP Legends came out in 1998. Sports Car GT came out 1999. All of these excel in at least one way over GT4, as does GT3 which came out in 2001 but was essentially a modified version of the physics engine in GT1; which came out originally in 1997. Advances in console power does not automatically result in better physics so much as simply creating a better physics engine does. Now, sure, you'd be hard pressed to get a Genny to run even the physics engine of GT4, but the advances have been far less than what you are implying.

 

[Wolfe]

What?!?! The physics and sense of realism for the Need For Speed series went down the toilet after Porsche Unleashed. The NFS series before HP:II and the series including and after HP:II are like night and day. The series was a clever mix of sim and arcade elements and had a fine sense of realism. Post-Porsche Unleashed games have no realism whatsoever.

And PGR hasn't really made to much in the way of advances in realism or physics (other than graphics) since MSR originally came out on the Dreamcast in 2000.

Viper Racing came out in 1998. GP Legends came out in 1998. Sports Car GT came out 1999. All of these excel in at least one way over GT4, as does GT3 which came out in 2001 but was essentially a modified version of the physics engine in GT1; which came out originally in 1997. Advances in console power does not automatically result in better physics so much as simply creating a better physics engine does. Now, sure, you'd be hard pressed to get a Genny to run even the physics engine of GT4, but the advances have been far less than what you are implying.

+1. I would +Rep if the system allowed me to give you some. 👍

As for the Enthusia comment, I find Enthusia's physics to be pretty crappy. No, GT4's not perfect, and Enthusia does deal better with tire grip/slip, but besides that one difference GT4 seems to have the more complete and realistic physics engine.

Considering the fact that a car's only direct interaction with the road surface is its tires, correct tire-modelling pretty much makes or breaks a sim. What more are you looking for? If you're disappointed with the inertia, weight-transfer, and/or suspension modelling of Enthusia, I would have to disagree, but I can understand if you're disappointed in the inaccurate gearing and/or power specs, which can lead to quarter-mile discrepancies of up to 1-1.5 seconds when compared to the real thing ...then again, that's not really "physics."

 

[red7]

recently played lfs demo with a ps2 type dual analog pad. Frustrating, but within 20-30 laps I found what i wanted in gt4. I don't know really think gt5 will get this serious though. We'll see hopefully pd will end up putting in a super extreme sim mode for the hardcores:tup:

 

[JasBird]

More realistic doesn't necessarly mean that the game is more difficult. I find it's the other way around in many cases. The more realistic the easier the game is to play, because it feels more natural just like when you drive in real life and gives you more feedback.

 

[Dave A]

That depends how many powerful cars you've driven in real life and pushed to the limit. I can quite hoenstly say that if I drove a 300bhp sportscar anywhetre near as hard as I do in GT4 irl I would probably crash. I'm not some guy who could have been some big race driver if I wanted, there's a reason most people arn't and it's not because it's easy to drive a car close to the limit.

I do agree that a more realistic game feels more natural, but that doesn't make it easier. I've played some very, very easy games that didn't feel natural and some hard ones that did.