Gran Turismo 6 general Physics Discussion(as well as video)

[atledreier]

Can't wait to try the Toybaru twins in the demo. I've tracked mine on both trackday rubber and the stock eco-rubber.

 

[VBR]

I hope they give better feedback on what the car is doing through the wheel...If they can get that right I'll be really happy. Of course I'd like to see the handling of the cars be true to life also.

That's the 2 most important aspects of a simulation to me; the accuracy of the physics model, & how it translates through a FFB wheel. They've done an awesome job so far with the new suspension model, let's hope they improve the sensation for wheel users also.

 

[oink83]

That's the 2 most important aspects of a simulation to me; the accuracy of the physics model, & how it translates through a FFB wheel. They've done an awesome job so far with the new suspension model, let's hope they improve the sensation for wheel users also.

Yeh agreed. It's one thing making the suspension look realistic graphically, and another thing feeding that back to the player so we can feel those differences. Hopefully we will get more feedback through the wheel

 

[shirakawaa]

Also, one thing are "ideal" double wishbone suspensions in track day cars and race cars, and another, more mundane suspensions on normal and/or older road cars. The former are easier to simulate, and a simplified modeling will often be believable and accurate enough for the intended uses.

 

[analog]

Also, one thing are "ideal" double wishbone suspensions in track day cars and race cars, and another, more mundane suspensions on normal and/or older road cars. The former are easier to simulate, and a simplified modeling will often be believable and accurate enough for the intended uses.

Which also make me wonder if the fact a car originally comes equipped with double wishbones or MacPherson struts for example is also taken into account when upgrading to a custom suspension (in that they choose double wishbone as a default improvement or that they improve the existing configuration).
Right now that seems mostly or completely irrelevant.

 

[Ferrari458Italia]

The difference in physics from GT6 and GT5 is tremendous. I can barely play GT5 now that I've seen GT6 physics haha

 

[Christian_C]

Also, one thing are "ideal" double wishbone suspensions in track day cars and race cars, and another, more mundane suspensions on normal and/or older road cars. The former are easier to simulate, and a simplified modeling will often be believable and accurate enough for the intended uses.

Which also make me wonder if the fact a car originally comes equipped with double wishbones or MacPherson struts for example is also taken into account when upgrading to a custom suspension (in that they choose double wishbone as a default improvement or that they improve the existing configuration).
Right now that seems mostly or completely irrelevant.

You assume that a double wishbone setup is automatically better? I'd say that's not so. A half hearted double wishbone setup wont be a match for a properly optimised macpherson strut. Remember, it's a lot more than just what it says on the outside that matters.

In regards to transitioning from what you call a 'more mundane system' to a apparently superior double wishbone setup, how would you go about moving, creating and reinforcing the new mounting points?

I do not think they take into account that someone would do such a thing because it's a massive undertaking, not to mention how would they have decided whether they wanted parallel double wishbones or something like VSAL = track width?

If you're going to that level then why not start going into other things like ackermann/anti-ackermann geometry? anti-dive/anti-squat? Rising rate, linear or digressive springing?

Personally I like swing axles but that's just me

 

[Tenacious D]

One thing that is lacking in GT is that effect in the wheel. The FFB is good but when running over a rumble strip the only real feedback is the sound. A bit of vibration sent to the wheel would go a long ways to make it more enjoyable.

Maybe this depends on the wheel setup in the Options menu, but with mine on Simulation and FFB strength around 6, my DFGT jiggles when I go over rumble strips.

Every Gran Turismo since GT2 has come out with a new wheel to support it, so maybe Thrustmaster will pick up this gauntlet with GT6, and incorporate all the feedback we need.

(technical jargon)

If PD did anything like this level of modeling in GT6, I'd have to make my racing center into a shrine to them.

 

[analog]

You assume that a double wishbone setup is automatically better?

Actually I didn't assume anything, I was merely wondering if PD would consider (and thereby perhaps wrongfully assuming it according to you) it to be the better option or an improvement when upgrading.

 

[HBR-Roadhog]

Maybe this depends on the wheel setup in the Options menu, but with mine on Simulation and FFB strength around 6, my DFGT jiggles when I go over rumble strips.

Yeah it jiggles a bit sometimes depending on wheel settings but still not quite there. For example I use a CSR Elite wheel on both the PS and Xbox the wheel has vibration built in and in Forza when you run over a rumble strip in addition to a possible wheel kick from the FFB there is also a vibration. In GT5 this vibration is not felt in the wheel at all but is simulated through sound. It would be much more realistic if it sent the vibration through the wheel as well.

Another thing I hope they change in GT6 is the way the wheel reacts on some cars. Even the DFGT had some issues with fighting you on straights especially in certain cars on certain tracks very much so in GT5P.

With the Fanatec I find that on some cars I can drive fine with no deadzone settings but on some of the race cars they will just beat you to death trying to drive in a straight line. The X1 is probably the worst of the bunch even with some deadzone added it it can be tough.

Would be nice to be able to release the wheel when driving in a straight line on a smooth track and not have the wheel whip right and left.

If they have this ironed out and add some vibration feedback I will be happy, even more so if they add an option on the menu for Fanatec wheel selection.

 

[avens]

This gif was posted in the GT5 vs GT6 Graphics Comparison thread here, I thought it should also be posted in this thread because it shows off the new suspension moddeling well. The way it moves is very realistic imo, can't wait to try the GT Academy demo in July!

What logic dictates is the GT:A demo will be classic GT:A, which consists of challenges with nissan race cars, using physics from an early version of GT6, nothing more. To the very most it could be a preview of GT6's graphics, but content is most probably not going to change from 2012's GT:A.

The X-bow is one of the ugliest cars ever made, and GT6 does an excellent job of recreating this ugliness. On a more relevant note, the suspension model, graphically, looks incredible. As good or better than any out there I would say.

Ugliness and awful sounds (in some cars) are realistic.

No idea why they went with the X-Bow instead of the Ariel Atom.

 

[TokoTurismo]

No idea why they went with the X-Bow instead of the Ariel Atom.

Umm. Because they helped with the event like the other manufacturers who were listed?

 

[avens]

Umm. Because they helped with the event like the other manufacturers who were listed?

I would like GT Academy better if it was a Ferrari partnership instead of Nissan.

Settling up with everything is not the greatest idea on the long run, especially when PD's competition is getting the exciting cars while GT6 (ps3 or ps4) isn't.

 

[sinbad]

What logic dictates is the GT:A demo will be classic GT:A, which consists of challenges with nissan race cars, using physics from an early version of GT6, nothing more. To the very most it could be a preview of GT6's graphics, but content is most probably not going to change from 2012's GT:A.

You think they'll use Motegi again? I'm not sure, I rather expect it will be Silverstone, whether it's the GP course, I don't know, probably not. Cars-wise it will, as you say be Nissan, but one or two new models are bound to be put in there. I hope there is a FWD car with a bit of poke, not the leaf, because GT5 FFs are pants.

It will be fascinating to see how it is received if they are going for a much more realistic physics engine, but realistic suspension is not enough. PC sims have had that for years, where the real magic lies is the tyre model. I know they're working with a manufacturer, but tbh we've all heard yarns like that before, it's a good publicity token, like the "we used GT6 to set up our car" thing. Tyres are definitely an area where good base data is a good starting point, though, but rubber is not so easily turned into mathematics as a spring, or even a damper.

 

[avens]

Silverstone will surely be in, though I'm not very excited about the current layout.

Why isn't there a very exciting current Nissan.

 

[TokoTurismo]

I would like GT Academy better if it was a Ferrari partnership instead of Nissan.

Settling up with everything is not the greatest idea on the long run, especially when PD's competition is getting the exciting cars while GT6 (ps3 or ps4) isn't.

Well for one isn't GT Academy sponsored by Nissan anyway? Second I'm not sure what will go on with the cars, we'll have to wait and see what cars are listed in the car list at least.

 

[sinbad]

Why isn't there a very exciting current Nissan.

Joke?

I Don't Know!
Why isn't there a very exciting current Nissan?

 

[TheDabbinDave]

What logic dictates is the GT:A demo will be classic GT:A, which consists of challenges with nissan race cars, using physics from an early version of GT6, nothing more. To the very most it could be a preview of GT6's graphics, but content is most probably not going to change from 2012's GT:A.

Ugliness and awful sounds (in some cars) are realistic.

No idea why they went with the X-Bow instead of the Ariel Atom.

The "content"'is not the highlight, nor the graphics. The new physics engine is. Which you completely ignored.

 

[Christian_C]

Actually I didn't assume anything, I was merely wondering if PD would consider (and thereby perhaps wrongfully assuming it according to you) it to be the better option or an improvement when upgrading.

Sorry, I didn't mean to come across that way, I was just maybe suggesting that such an upgrade would be near impossible without the car completely losing what makes it the car that it is.

It really depends what you're going for, I honestly don't think they're always the best solution but considering they've found widespread adoption I'd say that my view isn't the one that's shared by the masses.

 

[avens]

The "content"'is not the highlight, nor the graphics. The new physics engine is. Which you completely ignored.

GT:A certainly isn't a GT6 demo if it lacks GT6 content and GT6 graphics.

If anything people play the GT series because of content, not physics. Cars, tracks and graphics are the highlights of the game, to the point it would sell considerably less if you offer people 'only' 100 cars in exchange of having iRacing/assettocorsa like physics.

 

[CoolColJ]

You can see the suspension drop down from the wheels that are off the ground vs the real car

 

[Tenacious D]

If anything people play the GT series because of content, not physics.

Yes, and in the series, we do get that content. If you were here during those crazy days before GT5 shipped, the whole planet went bonkers over the first GT Academy demo, which offered only two unmodifiable cars and one track.

(piccies)

Woah... happy pre-birthday. I'm beginning to feel like your sig!

Is it July yet??

 

[dr_slump]

GT:A certainly isn't a GT6 demo if it lacks GT6 content and GT6 graphics.



If anything people play the GT series because of content, not physics. Cars, tracks and graphics are the highlights of the game, to the point it would sell considerably less if you offer people 'only' 100 cars in exchange of having iRacing/assettocorsa like physics.

Why did GT3 sell that good then?

 

[TheDabbinDave]

GT:A certainly isn't a GT6 demo if it lacks GT6 content and GT6 graphics.

If anything people play the GT series because of content, not physics. Cars, tracks and graphics are the highlights of the game, to the point it would sell considerably less if you offer people 'only' 100 cars in exchange of having iRacing/assettocorsa like physics.

Some people have difficulty seeing the forest because of all those damned trees in the way!!!

Moving on...

You can see the suspension drop down from the wheels that are off the ground vs the real car

Too bad it (this shot) doesn't take advantage of better lighting we have seen

 

[TheDabbinDave]

Translation from Kaz's Facebook post:

I used google translate. First lap of qualifying top 40. Front downforce missing in Flugplatz, GT-R had flying 15 meters. (Angle of the rear wing is 8 °) It was also reproduced in the simulation of GT6 which was moving at the same time as the race. It gets worse when you lower the angle of the rear wing. It does not improve if you do not lower the ride height of the front.

 

[TexasTyme214]

That's nice. I hope we can pick the angle of our wings instead of saying, "Let's see what 47 does."

 

[oink83]

That's nice. I hope we can pick the angle of our wings instead of saying, "Let's see what 47 does."

Or if your lazy like me: "Just max it out"

 

[Cosbuster]

Or if your lazy like me: "Just max it out"

Or better yet, grab a hammer and get rid of it altogether.

 

[TorqueHappenS08]

Nobody on here, got to play to play the demo?

 

[Foxiol]

IGN did and they talked good about it:

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/05/28/gran-turismo-6-racing-around-silverstone