I seriously want to love this game, but some design decisions are beginning to frequently frustrate to a point that its becoming detrimental.

[CBH]

I will be back playing GT7, if PD removes it so any change to the suspension settings will not be effect the PP. I had high hope for this game but being a tuner for many many years it's kind of sad what PD has done to this game.

 

[Moglet]

I just want them to allow you to back out from any menu within GT Auto without it taking you to the World Map. Such a bizarre decision.

 

[DodgySyrup]

I am annoyed that I have to figure out or copy whichever exploit is being used by certain players in daily races to stand a chance.

It makes it frustrating to see cars, which should be at or around the same performance, disappear on straightaways like I'm going backwards.

There is no way any player, no matter how talented, can find 10 or 11 seconds per lap at High Speed Ring in similarly powered machinery...it isn't possible.

3, 4, at a push...but 10?

No way.

 

[gigio79]

I'll be honest, compared to GT sport the game is a bit confusing in the general menu and in the settings of the cars. Maybe because we are at the beginning but it is not very clear what to do, how to do it and when to do it. I don't like the sequence of the books, but this is a personal opinion. GT sport's career mode was much clearer and easier to understand. I believe that the purpose of the developers is to let you play in multiplayer, the career is only a small part of the game useful for mastering the guide. Maybe in some driving events gold medals are more difficult than in GT sport.

 

[jonathansp]

Abuse of the system has already been found, if you limit top speed to under 150mph, the measure system doesn't think you can turn at high speed so reduces the PP for the car. If you're running on a track that isn't going to see you get to 150mph+ you just got a free PP reduction.

My issue with including set-up in PP is two-fold, the first is the above potential for abuse and the second is the lack of real-world parallel. No race series in the world includes a team's set-up choices in it's BoP calculations (which is effectively what PP is - a BoP tool), rather what they do is limit the range of options you have for that series, so you can only adjust camber between x and y values, only adjust final dive with limited ratios, etc. That would be a much better route and one less open to abuse (and as other titles have done just that, it's quite for PD to do so as well).

That's interesting. I'd not heard of that exploit yet. I do wonder how the simulation of performance works. I'm guessing you get the reduction of PP because you obviously wouldn't go as fast on a long straight. A car with a high top speed is still capable of being quick on a twisty circuit but a car with a low top speed is not capable on a circuit with very long straights, but they may be identical in the corners. Interesting problem to solve.

The thing with the suspension set up is that in real life events, people have a very good idea of how to set up suspension. On GT, a lot of people don't. Having PP tied to suspension set up allows people to know if they're making good changes or not. Once they have a high performance set up, then maybe they will understand enough to tweak it to suit their driving style.

 

[breeminator]

IMHO, only power, weight, downforce and tyres should affect PP.

I'd say it needs more than that. Drag coefficient can have a major impact, as can gearbox and which wheels are driven.

I'm not sure whether pure setup parameters such as ARB stiffness etc should affect PP. On the one hand, it de-values tuning skills, as if you skilfully tune the car to be faster, it just gets cancelled out by the PP changing to account for it. On the other hand, de-valuing tuning skills could be seen as a good thing! You make good points, though, about how it not perfectly calculating performance means it will be more about gaming the PP calculation than true tuning skills, and variations in how fast setups are for different drivers. One example of this is RWD vs AWD, where it depends how close the simulation assumes a driver can drive to the limit. If it assumes the driver can perfectly drive on the grip limit, RWD will have too high PP, and everyone will be better off with AWD. If it makes an allowance for drivers having to drive somewhere below the grip limit with RWD, but less so with AWD, then if a top driver can drive closer to the grip limit with RWD than it assumes, RWD will be meta for them, but AWD will be meta for less skilled drivers.

 

[Scaff]

That's interesting. I'd not heard of that exploit yet. I do wonder how the simulation of performance works. I'm guessing you get the reduction of PP because you obviously wouldn't go as fast on a long straight. A car with a high top speed is still capable of being quick on a twisty circuit but a car with a low top speed is not capable on a circuit with very long straights, but they may be identical in the corners. Interesting problem to solve.

I've not tried it myself, but I have seen it referenced in a number of places.

The thing with the suspension set up is that in real life events, people have a very good idea of how to set up suspension. On GT, a lot of people don't. Having PP tied to suspension set up allows people to know if they're making good changes or not. Once they have a high performance set up, then maybe they will understand enough to tweak it to suit their driving style.

The issue with that, as has already been mentioned, is that set-ups are not universal. I may favour a set-up that lowers PP and be quicker with it, while you may favour a set-up that increases PP and be quicker with that, something that then gives me an advantage over you. We are both quick with our set-ups, but I now have a PP advantage over you.

 

[breeminator]

if you limit top speed to under 150mph, the measure system doesn't think you can turn at high speed so reduces the PP for the car

Is that definitely the reason for it? Might it not just be that it uses a single simulated test track where the lower max speed hurts the lap time?

 

[Scaff]

Is that definitely the reason for it? Might it not just be that it uses a single simulated test track where the lower max speed hurts the lap time?

I'm yet to try it myself, but that's what I've now seen in a few places (including a post here at GTP).

It's potentially a combination of both, but either way if it works it's a way to game the PP system.

 

[Imari]

Can you care to explain why? There's little argument why it shouldn't, other than your own personal preference. In that case, better get comfortable because you'll be waiting a while until GT8

Should the PP of the car alter depending on the skill of the driver? A good driver also makes the car go faster.

At some point you have to draw a line between objective and subjective advantages. Car upgrades are more or less objective advantages, they'd make everyone faster. A setup is usually a personal thing, a setup that makes you faster might make me slower. And so most games leave the setup out, as long as the default setups are decent then setup is more about making the car more comfortable for a specific driver than it is about making the car objectively faster.

 

[jonathansp]

I've not tried it myself, but I have seen it referenced in a number of places.

The issue with that, as has already been mentioned, is that set-ups are not universal. I may favour a set-up that lowers PP and be quicker with it, while you may favour a set-up that increases PP and be quicker with that, something that then gives me an advantage over you. We are both quick with our set-ups, but I now have a PP advantage over you.

This makes complete sense.
I'm just trying to think of what might be a solution to keep it accessible to people who aren't confident in tuning suspension, but also keeping it interesting for people who are.
Maybe a PP range, so there is some wiggle room for setup preference.

 

[LeGeNd-1]

I'd say it needs more than that. Drag coefficient can have a major impact, as can gearbox and which wheels are driven.

I'm not sure whether pure setup parameters such as ARB stiffness etc should affect PP. On the one hand, it de-values tuning skills, as if you skilfully tune the car to be faster, it just gets cancelled out by the PP changing to account for it. On the other hand, de-valuing tuning skills could be seen as a good thing! You make good points, though, about how it not perfectly calculating performance means it will be more about gaming the PP calculation than true tuning skills, and variations in how fast setups are for different drivers. One example of this is RWD vs AWD, where it depends how close the simulation assumes a driver can drive to the limit. If it assumes the driver can perfectly drive on the grip limit, RWD will have too high PP, and everyone will be better off with AWD. If it makes an allowance for drivers having to drive somewhere below the grip limit with RWD, but less so with AWD, then if a top driver can drive closer to the grip limit with RWD than it assumes, RWD will be meta for them, but AWD will be meta for less skilled drivers.

Drag/downforce are two sides of the same coin, but unless you're racing on ovals, the benefits of downforce usually greatly outweighs drag in terms of laptime. That's why increasing DF increases PP makes sense (even though drag penalty is also increased). As for the inherent Cd of the car's body, I believe that is already taken into account by the base PP of the car (as is the drivetrain, and how good the stock suspension/brakes and chassis are).

Gearbox again is highly situational. On twisty tracks shorter gears are faster, and vice versa on tracks with long straights. Unless the PP system can know what track you're going to be racing on, it doesn't make sense to include it in PP.

 

[Scaff]

Is that definitely the reason for it? Might it not just be that it uses a single simulated test track where the lower max speed hurts the lap time?

Just tested it, and it's not just for the top speed, adjusted the GT500 Supra (which apparently as a JGTC car doesn't come with a race transmission stock - that's another Cr21k) to run at 240kmh and it reduces the PP from 726.59 to 679.97.

As you can see in the screenshot, it zero's the value for rotational G at 150mph and also by the looks of it also High Speed stability, so your getting a triple advantage. You take a very slight hit in acceleration (but have more than enough PP in hand to address that if needed) and also reduce low speed understeer and increase low speed Rotational-G.

 

[jonathansp]

Just tested it, and it's not just for the top speed, adjusted the GT500 Supra (which apparently as a JGTC car doesn't come with a race transmission stock - that's another Cr21k) to run at 240kmh and it reduces the PP from 726.59 to 679.97.

As you can see in the screenshot, it zero's the value for rotational G at 150mph and also by the looks of it also High Speed stability, so your getting a triple advantage. You take a very slight hit in acceleration (but have more than enough PP in hand to address that if needed) and also reduce low speed understeer and increase low speed Rotational-G.

View attachment 1122610

If the top speed is 151mph, does the PP jump back up to 700 odd or is the PP still actually being reduced based on top speed. It can't show a 150mph rotational G because it can't reach that speed, but the G may not be part of the calculation.

 

[breeminator]

As you can see in the screenshot, it zero's the value for rotational G at 150mph and also by the looks of it also High Speed stability, so your getting a triple advantage.

Ah, I see, it's showing some details of its calculations there, yes. That makes me wonder if it's even running a simulation at all, or if it's just some formula linking those values. Obviously if it can't reach 150mph, it can't turn at 150mph, but that shouldn't directly affect a simulation. If it were just a formula linking those values, it's easy to see how it would be fooled by that going to 0.

 

[Scaff]

If the top speed is 151mph, does the PP jump back up to 700 odd or is the PP still actually being reduced based on top speed. It can't show a 150mph rotational G because it can't reach that speed, but the G may not be part of the calculation.

Just tested 240kmh vs 250kmh, the PP for 240 is 679.97 and 250kmh is 725.53.

It doesn't seem to be just the top speed in the PP calc.

 

[Pfei]

Just tested it, and it's not just for the top speed, adjusted the GT500 Supra (which apparently as a JGTC car doesn't come with a race transmission stock - that's another Cr21k) to run at 240kmh and it reduces the PP from 726.59 to 679.97.

As you can see in the screenshot, it zero's the value for rotational G at 150mph and also by the looks of it also High Speed stability, so your getting a triple advantage. You take a very slight hit in acceleration (but have more than enough PP in hand to address that if needed) and also reduce low speed understeer and increase low speed Rotational-G.

View attachment 1122610

RIP balanced Sport mode if PD continues to focus on tuning. We whined about BoP in Sport with the cars being only a few tenths off of each other, but this is over the top. With the departure of the FIA I am very worried that PD is going to leave Manufacturers open to tuning with a PP limit which will open a Pandora's Box of glitches and exploits that flies in the face of PD's stated intention of close, competitive and fair racing.

I guess we'll see on Monday what the future has in store for Sport Mode.

 

[jonathansp]

Just tested 240kmh vs 250kmh, the PP for 240 is 679.97 and 250kmh is 725.53.

It doesn't seem to be just the top speed in the PP calc.

Huh, then there we go. Let's hope PD reference GT Planet when making tweaks to the PP system

 

[Scaff]

Huh, then there we go. Let's hope PD reference GT Planet when making tweaks to the PP system

Just had more of a play with the final drive rather than just using the Top Speed tool, jump of just under 45PP when you go from under 150mph to over 150mph.

Those who know this will have a massive advantage on slower track or with cars than are technically geared for 150mph but would normally never reach them due to long final gears.

Public service video may be in order.

 

[pedrocor]

I will be back playing GT7, if PD removes it so any change to the suspension settings will not be effect the PP. I had high hope for this game but being a tuner for many many years it's kind of sad what PD has done to this game.

Well, I'm sure real life racing teams are full of guys who are great tuners, but to BoP concern, such things, specially ride height, toe, camber, gear ratios and wings, they are set in stone by the parameters used on BoP evaluation tests, you have to use it all year after that.

So, indeed there is a general consensus that those things influence the performance window of a car and any change on them cannot be ignored.

 

[lbpomg95]

I'm in the same boat as the OP, especially with the snap oversteer. I'm on DS4 (can't find a PS5, not paying hundreds for a wheel) and I just can't moderate the throttle enough on the higher powered cars. I also find it bizarre that cars like the 997 GT3 and the F430 are so easy to control despite their power, but a Mazda RX-8 on the same tyres (a car loved for its balance and for being easy to control at the limit) with stock power is almost impossible to keep steady, and when it does slide I just can't rescue it.

It gets even worse when the cars are tuned up, and it feels like no matter what I do with the suspension set-up, it doesn't change a thing. I'm a bit lost with how uncontrollable the cars are, especially when I was actually good at GT5, 6 and GTS. I could drive fully tuned cars with no real issues, I could manage powerslides, I could drift, and now I just can't do any of it.

 

[breeminator]

Drag/downforce are two sides of the same coin, but unless you're racing on ovals, the benefits of downforce usually greatly outweighs drag in terms of laptime. That's why increasing DF increases PP makes sense (even though drag penalty is also increased). As for the inherent Cd of the car's body, I believe that is already taken into account by the base PP of the car (as is the drivetrain, and how good the stock suspension/brakes and chassis are).

Gearbox again is highly situational. On twisty tracks shorter gears are faster, and vice versa on tracks with long straights. Unless the PP system can know what track you're going to be racing on, it doesn't make sense to include it in PP.

The relationship between drag and downforce isn't the same for all cars, some are more aerodynamically efficient than others. Consider racing at Le Mans, for example, the benefit of aerodynamic efficiency will increase as power increases and you reach higher speeds. So it has to be accounted for in a dynamic manner as it's impact depends on other things you can change. Same for driven wheels - at low power there may be no problem with traction with RWD but as power is increased, AWD can become increasingly beneficial. With gearbox I was thinking more about when top speed is limited by gearing and hurts lap times. If it's based on a fixed simulated track, that is always going to have its own limitations, with clear meta tunings for tracks that are more handling or more speed biased.

 

[breeminator]

Those who know this will have a massive advantage on slower track

I see this as basically just a bug that they need to fix, it shouldn't be that hard for them to fix it.

 

[Scaff]

I see this as basically just a bug that they need to fix, it shouldn't be that hard for them to fix it.

Maybe, we know from past titles in the series that PD's priorities can often be a bit odd.

I'm in the same boat as the OP, especially with the snap oversteer. I'm on DS4 (can't find a PS5, not paying hundreds for a wheel) and I just can't moderate the throttle enough on the higher powered cars. I also find it bizarre that cars like the 997 GT3 and the F430 are so easy to control despite their power, but a Mazda RX-8 on the same tyres (a car loved for its balance and for being easy to control at the limit) with stock power is almost impossible to keep steady, and when it does slide I just can't rescue it.

It gets even worse when the cars are tuned up, and it feels like no matter what I do with the suspension set-up, it doesn't change a thing. I'm a bit lost with how uncontrollable the cars are, especially when I was actually good at GT5, 6 and GTS. I could drive fully tuned cars with no real issues, I could manage powerslides, I could drift, and now I just can't do any of it.

It's not that bad, a number of us have driven cars in the game in reality and know from first hand experience that they are wrong once you get over the limit. Hasn't stopped some telling us that our experiences in reality are wrong and that GT 7 is actually right.

GT 7 more real than real.

 

[lbpomg95]

Maybe, we know from past titles in the series that PD's priorities can often be a bit odd.


It's not that bad, a number of us have driven cars in the game in reality and know from first hand experience that they are wrong once you get over the limit. Hasn't stopped some telling us that our experiences in reality are wrong and that GT 7 is actually right.

GT 7 more real than real.

Sorry I'm not following, are you saying that cars at the limit are uncontrollable, like in GT7, or GT7 is wrong at the limit?

To be honest I've never been all that concerned with what was more realistic or not. Physics in GT games always just kinda felt right, cars felt natural, they moved in what felt like a realistic way, but without biting your head off. Now I'm driving any 200bhp+ RWD car and all of them feel like wrestling a Lancia Stratos rally car down a narrow mountain pass on gravel.

 

[Scaff]

Sorry I'm not following, are you saying that cars at the limit are uncontrollable, like in GT7, or GT7 is wrong at the limit?

Upto and on the limit (say a degree of two of tyre slip) they are reasonably accurate, once you get over that point it's a hot mess of innacuracy.

To be honest I've never been all that concerned with what was more realistic or not. Physics in GT games always just kinda felt right, cars felt natural, they moved in what felt like a realistic way, but without biting your head off. Now I'm driving any 200bhp+ RWD car and all of them feel like wrestling a Lancia Stratos rally car down a narrow mountain pass on gravel.

I could go into a very long and detailed list about what PD have got wrong with physics in past GT titles. GT7 is overall a solid step in the right direction while you are under and just on the limit, and that's a positive, but that doesn't absolve them from just how wrong it is over the limit.

 

[pedrocor]

On the original post, completely agree.

Contrary to some critics he see here all the time, in this case those are very good points noted and specially things that can be greatly improved in future updates.

Can't believe they don't have plans to more career races, and so on.
The physics flaw and FR/MR isn't a huge one, the basis are correct, just need to refine it a little, the loss of grip happens at too low speeds and is too much on/off rather than gradual. But effectively it happens on this kind of cars IRL and many times results on spins and crashes. Most of the cars I tried in the game are pretty manageable (like the Subaru BRZ or the E30 M3) with some very basic tuning (suspension to have less weight transfer side to side, a bit of wing in the back), but some, even after some heavy tuning remain undriveable (Camaro ZL1 comes immediately to mind, with people who have driven the car IRL stating that the car is quite the other way around), no matter how much you try to improve ride height, suspension and bar stiffness, aero, toe, camber...

 

[Jo3f1sh]

I just wish they would have taken the bones of GT Sport, and then added the rest of GT7 around it. Some things didn't need to change.

- The physics/handling in GT Sport were spot on. Driving my actual car (2015 Mustang GT Premium, even the same wheels) in the game felt very close to how it drives in reality. In GT7, it's like I'm driving it on ice everywhere. Nowhere near the same. In GT Sport, I knew how far I could push the car before it hit the limit, same as in my actual car when I do track days.

- FFB. I can no longer feel curbs, and the over-all weightiness of the steering is gone. It no longer loads up in the turns as I'm used to, and I feel like I'm constantly fighting the car.

- In Sport, the cockpit view and adjustments were perfect. I was able to raise the camera to where the virtual steering wheel was hidden behind the one on my rig, and I was looking over the dash just like a real car. I could peek down to the gauges inside the rim. Now, I'm back to staring at the dash taking up half my screen, even on the highest height setting, and my gauges are blocked.

- Also, there needs to be an option to turn the cockpit "wobble" off completely. Even at 1, the transitions are jarring, and un-immersive. Tossing the car around the first sector of Suzuka is the worst example.

- Why did they remove the cones? I loved the braking, entrance, apex, and exit cones. Lots of tracks actually use these during track days, and they are great. Was really bummed they removed them in GT7. Now we get these floating icons. Gross.

I know these are super nit-pickey, but i still feel they are valid, and easily changed (except the physics probably).

 

[DodgySyrup]

Personally, I feel like the game should do more than provide easily exploitable PP ratings.

It should automatically limit top speed, regardless of the car or the tuning boosts.

 

[AlexWilmot]

Personally, I feel like the game should do more than provide easily exploitable PP ratings.

It should automatically limit top speed, regardless of the car or the tuning boosts.

How would limiting top speed help?
The issue with daily race B is the allowance of the hybrid car where it’s combustion engine meets the hp limit but has extra power with the hybrid,
Limiting the top speed doesn’t seem like the right approach to me