GT Sport beta physics discussion - Read the First Post Before Replying

[Donnced]

I tend to look at it on PCars Dash, which is a UDP app and on that it goes to full red (and is dynamic based on the car in question).

As I don't use the telemetry when racing I've not noticed.

I do however agree that it should be in place in GTS (and for that matter AC).

Hi mate!

Yes! Brake fade should be implemented in the simulation of AC and GTS.

By the way.... On assetto they started to implement brake fade on classic cars in 1.12 PC version, so,should come in console version with the incoming update.

Here is part of the 1.12 chancelog:

"*Improved and updated V10 tyre model for all cars available
* Improved and updated cars handling and chassis balance and inertia for all cars available
* Brake fade for all vintage cars
* Improved tyre wear and tyre graining algorithms taking more into account the load operation for each tyre."

http://www.assettocorsa.net/forum/index.php?threads/assetto-corsa-v1-12-update-available.43105/

 

[OdeFinn]

Do you have an example of this?

You're welcome to come here on next winter and test it your self, actual example was there's already.

Wow, that's an excellent example of how little grasp you have on the English language. Or reality, reall

Sorry for that, nice to have mature correction from staff.

As unsurprising as it is that you would be the one to bring up a ridiculous example like this, what you're failing to realize is that "your friend" would still be wrong.

You don't get point of it, if you feel/see/taste something then you do, and if lot of people feels same they start to keep it fact, and only reason why it's fact is because majority says so.

Oh and the bolded part, your car tyres will vary in pressure by that much just by you sitting in it, even more so as you drive it dependent on a wide range of factors, but they are not going to influence things to the degree you claim for a 1ps difference, and I strongly suggest you provide some proof of that after the last trip to fantasy land you made with a similar level of absurd and unsupported claims.

You too are welcome to Finland on next winter. Point of this was just how minimal thing can change behavior different than basic assumption of it is, speaking physics and one minimal flaw or change in variables can produce totally different result than majority is expecting.

No its really not.

That would make Santa, Unicorns and the Tooth Fairy objective facts, and they are not.

Facts are testable, repeatable and falsifiable.

Yes yes, world was flat (fact) until it was proven to be round, few guys just were eliminated on the way of proofs were accepted as a fact.

That's right the harder a material is the better is transmits sound!

So harder means softer? Sound waves are moving actual material, so it can't be stiff or it won't move.

 

[ImaRobot]

A lot of people say you're wrong, therefore, a fact.

Al though you're demonstrating that whether people think that or not.

So harder means softer? Sound waves are moving actual material, so it can't be stiff or it won't move

The softer the material, the more that gets dampened and absorbed.

 

[Marcus Garvey]

 

[PzR Slim]

So harder means softer? Sound waves are moving actual material, so it can't be stiff or it won't move.

You really need to educate yourself. Take a piece of cotton wool and see how well it transmits sound waves

 

[Scaff]

You're welcome to come here on next winter and test it your self, actual example was there's already.

Because you are the only person here with experience of harsh winter driving?

You don't get point of it, if you feel/see/taste something then you do, and if lot of people feels same they start to keep it fact, and only reason why it's fact is because majority says so.

That still not what determines facts, nor will it ever be.

You too are welcome to Finland on next winter. Point of this was just how minimal thing can change behavior different than basic assumption of it is, speaking physics and one minimal flaw or change in variables can produce totally different result than majority is expecting.

The season has nothing to do with it, a 1psi change is not going to make the difference you claim, and as you made the claim it's up to you to support it.

Yes yes, world was flat (fact) until it was proven to be round, few guys just were eliminated on the way of proofs were accepted as a fact.

Nope.

Tell me, who was the first person to discover the earth was round (or are you a flat earther).

Now man has suspected that the earth was round since the 6th century BC, and proven it in the 3rd century BC.

The idea that people thought it was flat past the bronze age is a myth.

So harder means softer? Sound waves are moving actual material, so it can't be stiff or it won't move.

You are aware that at a molecular level (unless the temperature is absolute zero) that everything is moving?

I guess not otherwise you would not be making absurd claims that illustrate a failure to understand even basic Physics concepts.

All material (regardless of state) is vibrating on a molecular level, sound waves are transferred through substances at that level. The more densely packed those molecules are the easier the sound waves are transferred (as less energy is used moving to the next one) and the better conductor of sound it is.

Harder materials are normally denser at molecular level and as such better transmitters of sound.

This really is stunningly basic stuff.

http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/biomusic/6517

Now you have already been told to stop posting your faux science in this thread, I strongly advise you to take heed of that before you (again) get way out of your depth on a subject you are clearly unaware of.

Now to remove any doubts about this, should you post any more of this nonsense about flat earth's or soft diamonds in this thread, the posts will be deleted and a warning issued to you.

If you have such a burning desire to actually understand how physics works @Famine has already pointed out the correct thread. However should you approach that with the same desire to argue points that can clearly be shown to be wrong it's likely to be simply viewed as trolling.

As right now you signal to noise ratio is pure noise and your contribution to GT Planet not a positive at all.

Sort out your posting, your attitude and you fact checking before you next hit the submit button.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

You're welcome to come here on next winter and test it your self, actual example was there's already.

So, like the majority of your claims, you have no proof. As expected.

Sorry for that, nice to have mature correction from staff.

Yes — you have an obviously tenuous grasp on both of those things. As a reminder, this is what you posted:

Fact is just thing where majority of people have decided to believe, example: you might say at diamonds are one of hardest materials in world, but I can say at those are really soft. I'm right and you're wrong. Proof: take imaginary 1km (irrelevant how long, but helps to understand) long diamond and knock on other end and listen on other end, sound will come thru, bending diamond to deliver it's sound waves thru it. So just jelly to me, even light travels thru it, so black thick paper has to be harder..

It's becoming increasingly obvious you have no idea about many of the concepts you're discussing. Either it's a language barrier — which is entirely possible — or you're trolling. I suppose it could be both.

There are objective ways to measure the strengths and weaknesses of GT Sport's physics engine, the same way there exist ways to measure the strengths and weaknesses of any other game's physics engine. This is different from people stating their preferences for Game X over Game Y — neither the subjective or objective is more important, or more valid, than the other. The problem arises when one tries to argue one as the other: an opinion ("I prefer Game X's physics") is not a fact ("I prefer Game X's physics, therefore it's more realistic").

 

[Haitauer]

A lot of people say you're wrong, therefore, a fact.

Thats some The Real Trump argumenting there.

So, like the majority of your claims, you have no proof. As expected.

I really have not read any factual scientific proof from either side here.. So no points there..



Other than that - not even funny anymore. Maybe take it to a private conversation or maybe we make a new thread for GTS physics..

 

[Scaff]

Thats some The Real Trump argumenting there.


I really have not read any factual scietific proof from either side here.. So no points there..



Other than that - not even funny anymore. Maybe take it to a private conversation or maybe we make a new thread for GTS physics..

I wouldn't worry, it will end soon, one way or the other.

 

[ImaRobot]

Thats some The Real Trump argumenting there.

How so? I'm just using his direct example he literally posted right before me.

I really have not read any factual scietific proof from either side here.. So no points there..

You must have been following a different conversation.

 

[PzR Slim]

I really have not read any factual scientific proof from either side here.. So no points there..

Come on Haitauer that's not true. This whole ridiculous 'conversation' started because one forum member claimed AC & PCars overdid the bumpy track as a counter to the argument that GTS had tracks that were too smooth. Both myself and Scaff posted real life videos proving that was not the case. That really should have been the end of it. Instead we got a whole load of, frankly, rubbish to try and legitimise the initial point. There has been plenty of objective points put forward.

 

[Haitauer]

How so? I'm just using his direct example he literally posted right before me.

Ok.. Not really..

You must have been following a different conversation.

Really.. From academic point of view all above is like studying to be a gynaecologist and a sexual therapist by watching porn..

Pardon me..

 

[ImaRobot]

Ok.. Not really..

Not really what? He literally said that.

and if lot of people feels same they start to keep it fact, and only reason why it's fact is because majority says so.

So I fail to see your point.

Really.. From academic point of view all above is like studying to be a gynaecologist and a sexual therapist by watching porn..

You have fun with that.

 

[Haitauer]

You have fun with that.

Yes - its fun but not realistic...

Now dont please dont rewind there..

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I really have not read any factual scientific proof from either side here.. So no points there..

The onus of proof is on the person making the claim.

Other than that - not even funny anymore. Maybe take it to a private conversation or maybe we make a new thread for GTS physics..

You're right, the butchering of terms like "proof" and "fact" isn't particularly funny.

It'd be great for the thread to get back on-topic about GT Sport physics instead of OB/GYN prep.

 

[Haitauer]

On topic few questions that sunk in that.. conversation.

Has the wall auto correct magic finger been completely removed between v1.05 and now or does it go away at DR C?? Just noticed its not there anymore - at all (1.05 made it less intrusive).

Has any of you had a chance to test the dirt tracks? How is the grip there? Not seen in eu beta yet.. even though im not holding my breath after playing Dirt Rally

 

[PzR Slim]

On topic few questions that sunk in that.. conversation.

Don't know about the magic finger. I can remember investigating it a few days ago but can't remember if that was pre 1.05. Don't think EU has had any dirt track racing since the beta began here.

 

[Scaff]

Don't know about the magic finger. I can remember investigating it a few days ago but can't remember if that was pre 1.05. Don't think EU has had any dirt track racing since the beta began here.

No EU dirt tracks, I think that the US only had them when they still had arcade.

 

[Haitauer]

Don't know about the magic finger. I can remember investigating it a few days ago but can't remember if that was pre 1.05. Don't think EU has had any dirt track racing since the beta began here.

I have been checking the finger after 1.05 update, and it was made weaker in the update. But now it is completely gone. I just went to DR C so it could be the DR or it has been changed between 1.05 update and now

 

[Jakedog23]

I have been checking the finger after 1.05 update, and it was made weaker in the update. But now it is completely gone. I just went to DR C so it could be the DR or it has been changed between 1.05 update and now

I am D and can confirm it is gone. Hit the wall at Dragon Trail and nothing happened except I hit the wall

 

[OdeFinn]

Because you are the only person here with experience of harsh winter driving?

No, but seems like I'm only one with understanding of physics, car geometry and good senses.

The season has nothing to do with it, a 1psi change is not going to make the difference you claim, and as you made the claim it's up to you to support it.

Test yourself.

So, like the majority of your claims, you have no proof. As expected.

I have understanding at all you have Assetto Corsa and Porsche pack which contains gt3 cup Porsche? If yes then go and try following setup on Brands Hatch GP, without any aids, this includes use of ABS, noABS during testing. Only aids to use is auto-blip and tyre blankets.
Stock brake bias 62
Stock fuel 30
Aero 10
Slick hard (H) tires
Front pressure 15psi
Rear pressure 16psi
Front camber -2.8°
Rear camber -3.6°
Front toe 49
Rear toe 11
Front height 6
Rear height 12
Front ARB 12
Rear ARB 8

Above give you classic understeery on throttle and oversteer on lift-off.
Then reduce 1psi from rear pressures, to 15psi equal on front and rear and car changes it behaviour to way different, someone said at understeer is just thing what you can't tune out from Porsche, well you can modify car behaviour with tune a lot, if you try hard (really super smooth trying) you might get it understeer.
Is physics now broken or why this happens? I'm just saying at this happens also on real-life and one psi makes difference.
Oh, you must try what happens if all but one tire is 15psi and that one has 16psi.. LOL


@oneloops 1:29 is tough time, I'm barely hanging on 1:30, only differ is I'm without ABS.

 

[Tornado]

You see, you say "understeer" and "oversteer" but even those words you've mangled the meaning of in the recent past.

 

[Johnnypenso]

No, but seems like I'm only one with understanding of physics, car geometry and good senses.

Two words: Soft diamonds

 

[ImaRobot]

No, but seems like I'm only one with understanding of physics, car geometry and good senses.

Oh my

 

[Scaff]

Your posting history to date shows that what is objectively demonstrable is very much important that "how it feels" driving a simulator.

I know my own posts.

That your vision of physic simulations, and others have others visions and differents ways to feel realism through a digital controller. No problem.

It is a problem if you attempt to counter what is objectively testable, repeatable and falsifiable with subjective 'feels'.

I agree, it works with both sides together.

It still fails if you only try and use your side of things. One is vastly more valuable than the other.

No, but seems like I'm only one with understanding of physics, car geometry and good senses.



Test yourself.



I have understanding at all you have Assetto Corsa and Porsche pack which contains gt3 cup Porsche? If yes then go and try following setup on Brands Hatch GP, without any aids, this includes use of ABS, noABS during testing. Only aids to use is auto-blip and tyre blankets.
Stock brake bias 62
Stock fuel 30
Aero 10
Slick hard (H) tires
Front pressure 15psi
Rear pressure 16psi
Front camber -2.8°
Rear camber -3.6°
Front toe 49
Rear toe 11
Front height 6
Rear height 12
Front ARB 12
Rear ARB 8

Above give you classic understeery on throttle and oversteer on lift-off.
Then reduce 1psi from rear pressures, to 15psi equal on front and rear and car changes it behaviour to way different, someone said at understeer is just thing what you can't tune out from Porsche, well you can modify car behaviour with tune a lot, if you try hard (really super smooth trying) you might get it understeer.
Is physics now broken or why this happens? I'm just saying at this happens also on real-life and one psi makes difference.
Oh, you must try what happens if all but one tire is 15psi and that one has 16psi.. LOL


@oneloops 1:29 is tough time, I'm barely hanging on 1:30, only differ is I'm without ABS.

I have replied to this in the AC Physics thread, as you're not dragging this thread off topic any longer.

 

[oneloops]

It still fails if you only try and use your side of things. One is vastly more valuable than the other.

Nope, I try to evaluate both. In the other side you try and use to impose your partial view of the experience playing a simulator. I try to analyse with two sides, you only with one of them, and impose your criteria and your own analysis-rules to others.

Let opinions and subjective views can be exchanged, a simulator is not only data, it's data + visual, hear and touch perception. The brain of every one judge the inmersion and similarities between the real experience and the simulated experience, the inmersion is judged by your brain not by data.

From a long time ago, real car sounds are recorded for GT series, and if they are judge as vacuum cleaners it's because a lack of subjective talent to integrate that REAL DATA into the game. You can't avoid the subjective talent put into every area of a sim. It has a undeniable importance for the final result and for the user experience.

Your valuable rules are not the same for everybody.

It's not me but you who insist in evaluate my opinion as off topic with your only-data vision.

 

[Scaff]

Nope, I try to evalute both. In the other side you try and use to impose your partial view of the experience playing a simulator. I try to analyse with two sides, you only with one of them, and impose your criteria and your own analysis-rules to others.

Let opinions and subjective views can be exchanged, a simulator is not only data, it's data + visual, hear and touch perception. The brain of every one judge the inmersion and similarities between the real experience and the simulated experience, the inmersion is judged by your brain not by data.

From a long time ago, real car sounds are recorded for GT series, and if they are judge as vacuum cleaners it's because a lack of subjective talent to integrate that REAL DATA into the game. You can't avoid the subjective talent put into every area of a sim. It has a undeniable importance for the final result and for the user experience.

Your valuable rules are not the same for everybody.

It's not me but you who insist in evaluate my opinion as off topic with your only-data vision.

You seem to have forgot that my specific comment you have quoted was in regard to this statement of yours:

"That can help to develop and improve the race car, the feels, intuition and creativity of the driver and engineers can help, and in fact it does too."


My reply has nothing to do with the development of sim, but that of actual real world vehicles (road or race), as such you seem to have changed the topic to one I wasn't even replying to!

Oh and the production of audio is a known science as well, its not just gut feel and guesswork.

What you seem to forget is that without an understanding of the science behind the data that feel is meaningless.

Let me ask you a question that I hope will illustrate this.

You are driving your car and feel the following (that have not been present in the past), more play in the steering column along with odd vibrations that get worse at speed, you also notice a grinding noise from one of the wheels and are experiencing odd tyre wear.

What is the more likely issue with the car?

Oh and which is the odd one out and not a symptom of this problem?

 

[Topsu]

I am really underwhelmed by the physics. The Gr. 3 cars all feel too easy to drive. And the force feedback at least on T500 is very weak. Almost as if it's only at 30% power. The effects might be there, but I can't feel them.

 

[OdeFinn]

I am really underwhelmed by the physics. The Gr. 3 cars all feel too easy to drive. And the force feedback at least on T500 is very weak. Almost as if it's only at 30% power. The effects might be there, but I can't feel them.

This might sound weird, but do you switch off entirely your PS4 when you stop playing or just put it on "rest mode" sleep? Because I had today situation where I had way lower FFB than it should be, after shutting down PS4 it started to work normally. I'm suspecting at this was jus because of leaving PS4 on "rest mode" instead of fully shutting down. This might be or not more common problem on PS4. All my peripherals (wheel and other USB devices) were entirely turned off, powerless without cables.

 

[Haitauer]

I am really underwhelmed by the physics. The Gr. 3 cars all feel too easy to drive. And the force feedback at least on T500 is very weak. Almost as if it's only at 30% power. The effects might be there, but I can't feel them.

I was just wondering after reading about dirt 4 and thinking about drive club, that what if PDI/GTS is testing and planning two physics modes arcade/simulation as 1.04 and 1.05 could suggest. If they manage even nearly matching those together as 1.05 has more grip but 1.04 was faster(?) they would be close to providing for both customers.

And with POS.. Sorry BoP they could match laptimes of the drivers regardles of the mode they are using and match them to same races..