Give us better sounds - PLEASE !!
- Thread starter steamcat
- 4,667 comments
- 352,859 views
- 1,629
- Texas
- RC45
- RC45
Yes, and you have fallen into something of a trap.Which I will explain.
Let's say the typical racing sim has 30 unique cars in the stable. And that the sound team has 18 months to get the audio package together for a game's release. This means they have almost three weeks they can devote to each car and get it right.
Let's say that GT5 has 600 unique cars, probably way low, but let's use that. And they worked on the audio for the game for four years, which is probably way long, but let's go with that. This means they have about three days to spend getting the sound right for every car.
Sound like a job you'd want?I mean, even given the fact that they use common soundsets for roughly similar cars which get people complaining they aren't right, it's really ludicrous to think you can get the same quality in one-seventh the time. Want to try and get a week's worth of work done in a day? Not me!
Actually you totally miss the entire point.
Any game (even an amateur hacked mod for rfactor) can have a great immersive sound if the few samples used are CORRECT for the given car.
That is it - period.
No need to take 4800 samples of every type of V8 sound at idle and off throttle... just take 3 or 4 of each - but take the correct bloody ones.
Do not take muffled recordings of a Nissan straight 6 and try tweak them and try pass them off as interior recordings of a push rod V8.
That is the entire point of the complaints against the GT franchise sounds.
They are simply wrong for many of the cars.
Period.
- 1
- Ontario
Really Nice sound 
- 8,723
@ Griffith500 : I posted at hybrid showcase thread, I made Acura NSX Twin Turbo with 11000rpm redline and also have 800HP version which has 14000rpm redline, it has higher pitch but I like how it sounds, almost like formula engine
The 512BB and Miura Twin Turbo seems to have extra sound detail, there's a hint of fuel pump noise or some kind of valve noise on mid range rpm when applying throttle, not sure if the stock non turbo has it too, both are on sports exhaust, installing racing or semi racing kills the extra sound details - gone
I'd be really keen to try that myself. There's potentially something to learn from pushing the samplers way out of their normal range like that. I had no idea this sort of thing had been "unlocked" (can you directly set the redline, or is it a tuning part?). If you're accessing sounds that weren't there on the stock car (I didn't think the 512 and the Miura could be turboded), then I guess something "new" could be happening.
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
Higher rpm is achieved through parts tuning - engine, intake, exhaust manifold, etc. 512BB and Miura turbo can only be done through hex, you really need to drive those I have created, they sound awesome with sports exhaust both in cockpit and chase cam - replay even better.
I just made 12000rpm Honda S2000 '06 with F20C engine from S2000'99 ( a replica of international market version - non US/EU model ) - something that's missing from GT5.
It has twin turbo custom setup, and in replay, it sounds so epic
When the Vtec kicked in at 6000rpm then turbo kicked in at 8000rpm onwards to 12000 ... awesome :kidding:, the sports exhaust sounds so good now, as well as semi and racing. Add me, I'll be putting it on share. I have another project that might interest you, it's a replica of a real tuned car - has Buick Grand National ( GNX ) engine with custom twin turbo pushing 575HP and higher redline.GT5 handle revlimit pretty good - original rpm range still sounds like they used to when stock, but higher range that gets expanded also still sounds fine to me. I can also decrease redline rpm via tuning
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
- 8,723
Higher rpm is achieved through parts tuning - engine, intake, exhaust manifold, etc. 512BB and Miura turbo can only be done through hex, you really need to drive those I have created, they sound awesome with sports exhaust both in cockpit and chase cam - replay even better.
I just made 12000rpm Honda S2000 '06 with F20C engine from S2000'99 ( a replica of international market version - non US/EU model ) - something that's missing from GT5.
It has twin turbo custom setup, and in replay, it sounds so epic
GT5 handle revlimit pretty good - original rpm range still sounds like they used to when stock, but higher range that gets expanded also still sounds fine to me. I can also decrease redline rpm via tuning
I've had a quick peek in the hybrid thread, and it seems the higher NA tuning parts really do shift the torque up high, and raise the rev limit? That's interesting. Interesting that the parts are in the game, but not being used. Why would they not be used? Is it (partly) because the samples don't "reach"?
Do the "hidden", say, intake manifolds also move the peak torque in the rpm range? If so, that'd be promising for tuning, if it gets uncovered in the next game(s). Even more so if these new sounds do what I think they could!
The only way for me to try your cars is to borrow glitch, right? Which takes hours? I'd rather just learn to put those parts on for myself!
They are indeed already stretched (well, under-sampled, actually - so they're technically "squashed"), but it should only get worse the fewer samples (that is, the data points within the looping "sample" files - ah, words) you actually pick out from the recording, especially if your filtering / resampling is aurally poor.
That's why I need to hear it.
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
I've had a quick peek in the hybrid thread, and it seems the higher NA tuning parts really do shift the torque up high, and raise the rev limit? That's interesting. Interesting that the parts are in the game, but not being used. Why would they not be used? Is it (partly) because the samples don't "reach"?
Do the "hidden", say, intake manifolds also move the peak torque in the rpm range? If so, that'd be promising for tuning, if it gets uncovered in the next game(s). Even more so if these new sounds do what I think they could!
The only way for me to try your cars is to borrow glitch, right? Which takes hours? I'd rather just learn to put those parts on for myself!
They are indeed already stretched (well, under-sampled, actually - so they're technically "squashed"), but it should only get worse the fewer samples (that is, the data points within the looping "sample" files - ah, words) you actually pick out from the recording, especially if your filtering / resampling is aurally poor.
That's why I need to hear it.
I''ll pm you about how to do the borrow glitch in minutes - only need to copy the save to USB stick
, I have several cars on share right now, so you can borrow and drive them or "steal" them 
EDIT : PM sent.
Last edited:
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
Mister PD , i'll be a happy man with this sound and this kind of cockpit cam , with more zoom out settings possibilities and this kind of feeling at the wheel.
The cam FOV can be done in GT5, but you need access to secret menu, I am using custom FOV now, and I can see better than ever before :
Works in latest GT5 version 2.14, secret menu access required - I enabled secret menu after the update to 2.14.
The view angle do not work at course maker tracks ( tested at Toscana )but works on all other tracks.
I use 100% screen angle ( default value for wide ), angle of screen curvature 0 degree, layout 3x1, monitor no 2, 16x9 aspect ratio enabled ( can be disabled - unchecked ), viewing angle Y at between 60 to 65 ( try both, see which one you like or any between ) - 65 makes it sits further back, the lower the value - the closer the cam. Enable temporal aliasing : on ( not sure if it helps with frame rate - the graphics looks the same to me )
Give these a try, I like it so far. For a good laugh, try 301 for view angle Y - the car will be in very awkward position
The options mentioned above, some of them only available when secret menu is enabled. I can PM you if you want more details.
- 7,830
- U S A
- Tetsumura
- Nigel Fox
Personally, I hate that "backseat" view, which is roughly how it seems in most racing games, and why I don't use it in GT5. However, I would point out one thing. Notice how the horizon is so high. near where the rear view mirror would be. This is how most people actually see the road, though the only people who can really understand why I harp on this so much are artists and photographers. They know about "the horizon line," and that the horizon will always be level with your eyes. I recline some in my car, and my eyes are still up near the rear view mirror, and I'm only 6 ft tall.
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
When properly set, it's not "backseat" view, trust me, it's way much better view, both around and in front ( road ).
- 926
- machschnel
If possible, could you post a photo of the "custom" view? I'd be very interested to see if it's worth the effort. Cheers.
- 7,830
- U S A
- Tetsumura
- Nigel Fox
I'm curious now too... and I really want to just blow the day off and hang here, but my dad's house won't clean itself... meh, responsibility. 
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
I'm curious now too... and I really want to just blow the day off and hang here, but my dad's house won't clean itself... meh, responsibility.
I took some pictures, not very good quality, but you get the idea
- 7,830
- U S A
- Tetsumura
- Nigel Fox
Well....... hmm. Gee, it's been so long since I drove in cockpit view that I'm not sure there's much difference. I am about to finally bail and do that GT thing, so maybe I'll come back before bed and see if I like these or not. Nice of you to be so quick with the evidence. 👍
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
You must have forgotten how close the standard FOV even on wide on those cars
I can make it sits further back, I use 65 Y angle setting, higher Y angle will bring the camera even further back I find this is the best setting, a good balance and much more enjoyable to drive and look at. You also get better sense of speed than stock FOV.
Last edited:
- 362
- London
- MadHax
- M8DH8X
Is there another way of getting into that secret menu without hacking the game save?
If that's the only way of doing it then i'd rather leave it alone because I could get banned by PD.
Those angles look much better to me, it's good to know there is an option to play around with FOV but if it could get me banned then it's a no no.
Still can't understand why PD did not give that to us as an option along with more wheel options as standard options to go through.
If that's the only way of doing it then i'd rather leave it alone because I could get banned by PD.
Those angles look much better to me, it's good to know there is an option to play around with FOV but if it could get me banned then it's a no no.
Still can't understand why PD did not give that to us as an option along with more wheel options as standard options to go through.
- 7,830
- U S A
- Tetsumura
- Nigel Fox
To be honest, I want the field of view to be much more forward than that. My autocrossing/racing relative - who shall forever remain nameless for personal druthers - and I had a talk on this subject a couple of weeks ago. We concurred that, because of the way our brains work - other brains may vary, the focus of perception narrows the "conscious" field of view to the top of the windshield and some measure of the instrument panel. And I've made an effort a number of times to judge how much of it I could see while driving, and I could barely see them. The rear view mirror was also outside of my "conscious focus."
I know all brains are unique so there could be a lot of variation in this area, but I have a feeling that if tests were done with little lights in different locations while driving with a number of people, the results would be somewhat like what I perceive.
Anyhow, time for a little Bible study...
I know all brains are unique so there could be a lot of variation in this area, but I have a feeling that if tests were done with little lights in different locations while driving with a number of people, the results would be somewhat like what I perceive.
Anyhow, time for a little Bible study...
- 3,096
- Sweden
Nice. I wish PD would at last make the FOV adjustable.I took some pictures, not very good quality, but you get the idea
- 8,723
I quite like the extra wide view shown; whether I can drive like that is another matter (lower pixel precision where you need it; it's not 1:1 in terms of the angle subtended by objects on the screen vs. what they would be in the real car - like looking through binoculars the wrong way).
Another problem with the narrow FoV is the lack of speed sensation; triple monitors help there. Yet another issue is that you can't see anything horizontally, so it's like driving with blinkers on - triple screens help there, too. If they can improve the head-tracking, I'd be well happy with the single screen - 1:1 scale and at least the ability to easily look left and right. A decent HMD would rock on that front by adding more peripheral vision as well.
Apparently, yes, to a degree (set up as a "client" and tweak the FoV settings). But you can't make it much wider than it already is on "wide".
Oh, I thought I should say you were right about the extra pitch shifting above the redline not being noticeable (to most people; it's definitely "worse" as I suspected). That's only because the samples are already pitched a fair bit at redline anyway, but when you're right up there, you may as well only have one sample. Obviously-looping samples do sound terrible in that regime, though, but they shouldn't exist in the first place.
Another problem with the narrow FoV is the lack of speed sensation; triple monitors help there. Yet another issue is that you can't see anything horizontally, so it's like driving with blinkers on - triple screens help there, too. If they can improve the head-tracking, I'd be well happy with the single screen - 1:1 scale and at least the ability to easily look left and right. A decent HMD would rock on that front by adding more peripheral vision as well.
Apparently, yes, to a degree (set up as a "client" and tweak the FoV settings). But you can't make it much wider than it already is on "wide".
Oh, I thought I should say you were right about the extra pitch shifting above the redline not being noticeable (to most people; it's definitely "worse" as I suspected). That's only because the samples are already pitched a fair bit at redline anyway, but when you're right up there, you may as well only have one sample. Obviously-looping samples do sound terrible in that regime, though, but they shouldn't exist in the first place.
- 21
- Tass
- unrealnoise
Damn it, i can't belive this ******* sounds... The engine sounds terrible - again... 👎
- 932
- Peoria, AZ, USA
- MattZR1_81
I...just...I am at a loss for words right now.
It really sounds utterly terrible. The Z4 GT3 deserves so much more. I have hope that this will change, but my hope is fading fast. It really worries me because it is getting closer to release and no sign of any improvement in the sound department thus far.
Last edited:
Similar threads
