Is tyre degradation so high in GT5 thats its unrealistic? PD read!

[shirakawaa]

There doesn't need to be a tire model for each single car.
It is possible to create a generic, dynamic model which will change slightly according to certain parameters (tire type, size, etc).
PD most probably already does this. Cars with skinny tires clearly have less traction than those with fatter ones. It's just that users don't have access to tire size data, they can't even see it.
We can only select tyre type (comfort/racing/sports/etc) and hardness (soft/medium/hard).

 

[CSLACR]

Right, and cars like the 97 Civic had skinny tires in real life, so no matter what you do in GT5, they have less grip then newer Civic's which wore fatter tires off showroom floors.

 

[Tornado]

In my experience in modding PC sims (rFactor and Sports Car GT, mostly), the tire model is unified with different parameters (the ones SHIRAKAWA Akira outlined) just like the rest of the physics engine is. It wouldn't make sense to do it any other way because then you would need to simultaneously run multiple tire models at the same time.



Gimme a minute, and I'll boot up SCGT and see exactly what parameters were utilized.

 

[CSLACR]

In my experience in modding PC sims (rFactor and Sports Car GT, mostly), the tire model is unified with different parameters (the ones SHIRAKAWA Akira outlined) just like the rest of the physics engine is. It wouldn't make sense to do it any other way because then you would need to simultaneously run multiple tire models at the same time.

Plus there's no reason for more then one tire model, because tires are tires, and with the right parameters, well, you have the right parameters, and all is well.

 

[SkylineObsession]

Why? Cause it's fun? So you think PD is really that naive?

We have a whole section here @ GTP for racing series and each and every one of them is having a problem with the new tire wear system. You're telling me that PD decided that the majority of these racers would prefer to pit 5-10 times more often compared with RL? And they did it for the best?

I said probably, which means i'm guessing just as much as everyone else. But what i said sort of sounds like the most logical reason why it was changed. Besides the fact that all the tyres seemed to wear at the same rate before, so there wasn't much need to use RM or RH.

And as CSLACR said (which sums it up well);
I was thinking similarly myself. That PD makes the tires wear so quickly so we can "simulate" long races in less time but (in their minds) still get the "feel" of a longer race.

 

[Jav]

You're missing the point. Tire physics don't change, ever.

What does what tires a Civic can fit matter? You can't change tire size in GT, so everything remains stock. that's not actually a tire physics flaw, but a customization flaw.
You do not need a tire physics model for every car in the game if no car can change wheel/tire size.

I'm talking about the ammount of grip and performance a tire gives a car in relation to the car's dynamics, but obviously I'm not getting my point across clearly so I'll just stay quiet and keep reading.

There doesn't need to be a tire model for each single car.
It is possible to create a generic, dynamic model which will change slightly according to certain parameters (tire type, size, etc).
PD most probably already does this. Cars with skinny tires clearly have less traction than those with fatter ones. It's just that users don't have access to tire size data, they can't even see it.
We can only select tyre type (comfort/racing/sports/etc) and hardness (soft/medium/hard).

Exactly. But where PD fails is in making this models too generic wich leads to this "exagerated" grip levels.

Right, and cars like the 97 Civic had skinny tires in real life, so no matter what you do in GT5, they have less grip then newer Civic's which wore fatter tires off showroom floors.

Something like that...

 

[kenkwilinski]

I totally agree. I used sports soft tires at daytona n was goin top speed in lead pack while they were on racing softs. IRL those tires would pop

 

[CSLACR]

I'm talking about the ammount of grip and performance a tire gives a car in relation to the car's dynamics, but obviously I'm not getting my point across clearly so I'll just stay quiet and keep reading.

That would be down to different parameters for different cars, not the tire model itself.
As far as I know, all racing games do that part pretty much the same, where each car has it's own parameters that get put into the physics engine.

Coin sorter explanation - Consider the games physics engine to be a coin sorter, a 97 Civic is a nickel, modify the wheels/tires, and now it's a nickel and a penny. Throw them into the coin sorter, and you change your coins in for driving on the track.

 

[Jav]

That would be down to different parameters for different cars, not the tire model itself.
As far as I know, all racing games do that part pretty much the same, where each car has it's own parameters that get put into the physics engine.

Coin sorter explanation - Consider the games physics engine to be a coin sorter, a 97 Civic is a nickel, modify the wheels/tires, and now it's a nickel and a penny. Throw them into the coin sorter, and you change your coins in for driving on the track.

That's a pretty good way to look at it, but the more complex games like the PC ones have a specific tire model for each car. Granted they are dealing with way fewer cars than PD has to deal with, so they have to compromise here.

 

[Tornado]

Okay, here:

And right off the bat, I can see two major things that SCGT's tire model doesn't take into consideration that I know GT5 either does or at the very least fakes quite convincingly just from playing it (section width and sidewall aspect ratio); so there is no reason to run a separate tire model for each car when adjusting those parameters would accomplish the same thing.




Now, there are cars where specific tire models would possibly be required (cars with more or less than 4 wheels would probably need one, but maybe not), but nothing I can think of in GT5 would make that necessary.

 

[SagarisGTB]

I was thinking similarly myself. That PD makes the tires wear so quickly so we can "simulate" long races in less time but (in their minds) still get the "feel" of a longer race.

This is exactly what I've been thinking for the last 10 years, since GT3. I've sort of accepted that there's always going to be an "arcady" side of GT to appeal to the casual gamer. The exaggerated tire wear allows the casual gamer to make multiple pit stops and think of strategy without the race lasting for an hour. It's been like this since GT began life.

Likewise, the exaggerated draft effect creates artificially closer races, appealing to the casual gamer. SRF, high tire grip, newly unimportant licenses and the neutering of Formula GT make GT5 more accessible as well.

But they also contradict this mission by giving us 24 hour races, among other things. Such things that only appeal to hardcore players. PD is trying to appeal to everyone, and that makes the game a little muddy in certain areas. I can accept that, this game is marketed to the masses and in turn makes it affordable for what it offers.

But why they made the already exaggerated tire wear worse at this time, I have no clue. PD has always been doing illogical things. From the underused Rome-Night in GT2 to the slowness of the Eneos SC430 in GT5, there's always something there to stump us.

 

[CSLACR]

No, tire physics do not change.
It may be easier in situations to run separate tire models for cars, but it's never needed, and really shouldn't ever happen.

215/55/16 tires are 215/55/16 tires (assuming the same tire itself), there's no reason whatsoever to "reprogram" these identical tires for different cars.
If car A comes with 215/55/16 stock, and car B comes with 195/65/15 stock, and you change car B's tires to 215/55/16, are 215/55/16 tires any different? No.

If you have the individual cars parameters and the tire model correct, there's no use whatsoever for more then a single tire model.

 

[Tornado]

From the underused Rome-Night in GT2 to the slowness of the Eneos SC430 in GT5, there's always something to stump us.

Perhaps off topic (though maybe not), but what is up with that, anyway?


I bought one of those this morning (along with the Bandai and Petronas models), and that stuck me as odd. With the GT-Rs I can get it, because for whatever reason PD modelled one of them as having the penalty ballast, but I don't see why the Lexus is different. Other than a very slightly different grill and a different headlight cluster, the 2008 SC430s seem identical in every way, but the Eneos has lower PP than even the Bandai even though it has notably higher downforce and horsepower.

Is it actually slower, or is it just a glitch in the PP system?

 

[shirakawaa]

No, tire physics do not change.
It may be easier in situations to run separate tire models for cars, but it's never needed, and really shouldn't ever happen.

215/55/16 tires are 215/55/16 tires (assuming the same tire itself), there's no reason whatsoever to "reprogram" these identical tires for different cars.
If car A comes with 215/55/16 stock, and car B comes with 195/65/15 stock, and you change car B's tires to 215/55/16, are 215/55/16 tires any different? No.

Well, in real life, beyond grip and endurance different tire models with the same size might have a different effective contact patches, different sidewall stiffness (and load rating), behave differently on wet surfaces or cold temperatures, heat up and cool down differently, require different inflating pressures, etc. In GT the tire model isn't that detailed however, at least to my knowledge.

If you have the individual cars parameters and the tire model correct, there's no use whatsoever for more then a single tire model.

There might be different models, at least one for each tire type (comfort/street, sports, racing, snow, dirt - they do not just differ by grip and endurance). But definitely not one for each car, except probably a few specific cases. In PC racing sims this is generally easier because they tend focusing on a certain car type using the same tyre type.

 

[Jav]

Perhaps off topic (though maybe not), but what is up with that, anyway?


I bought one of those this morning (along with the Bandai and Petronas models), and that stuck me as odd. With the GT-Rs I can get it, because for whatever reason PD modelled one of them as having the penalty ballast, but I don't see why the Lexus is different. Other than a very slightly different grill and a different headlight cluster, the 2008 SC430s seem identical in every way, but the Eneos has lower PP than even the Bandai even though it has notably higher downforce and horsepower.

Is it actually slower, or is it just a glitch in the PP system?

It almost leads me to believe PD goes by historic records of each cars when they decide to give a car better performance than another version but identical car. Example the 51 and 91 Team Oreca Vipers, the same car but yet one massively outperformes the other... I have no clue on how different they performed in real life and their on track performance records but why do PD do this? Same goes for many other race cars, SuperGT cars there will always be 1 of the different models that will outperforms the rest when in reality they shopuld just use the same car with different skins, not different physics...
Now, back to topic. Yes tire wear sucks!

 

[TRGTspecialist]

I must admit, I really like the exaggerated tyre wear. Means races as short as 10 laps (about the race distance I'm inclined to run nowadays) require a stop or two, throwing that extra bit of strategy in there. Less realistic for sure, but definitely more fun for players like myself. Although unlike you guys I don't run long-distance races often, and I totally see how the frequency of stops could be a pain then (though I'd probably still enjoy it, haha). They definitely need a Weak/Strong tyre wear option, like they had in past GTs.

 

[CSLACR]

Perhaps off topic (though maybe not), but what is up with that, anyway?


I bought one of those this morning (along with the Bandai and Petronas models), and that stuck me as odd. With the GT-Rs I can get it, because for whatever reason PD modelled one of them as having the penalty ballast, but I don't see why the Lexus is different. Other than a very slightly different grill and a different headlight cluster, the 2008 SC430s seem identical in every way, but the Eneos has lower PP than even the Bandai even though it has notably higher downforce and horsepower.

Is it actually slower, or is it just a glitch in the PP system?

Try the Advan Woodone Clarion GTR.
Both the Advan and Eneos have what seem to be "tire penalties" and they just suck, quite frankly.
But I am told if you set each car to 590PP and free range test them they come out close, I just haven't tested it myself yet.

Cars currently (unfortunately) excluded from WSGTC - Eneos SC430, Advan GTR, Epson NSX.
The Epson is just heavy, combined with the NSX's already poor handling. (go figure NSX's can't turn well)

Well, in real life, beyond grip and endurance different tire models with the same size might have a different effective contact patches, different sidewall stiffness (and load rating), behave differently on wet surfaces or cold temperatures, heat up and cool down differently, require different inflating pressures, etc. In GT the tire model isn't that detailed however, at least to my knowledge.
There might be different models, at least one for each tire type (comfort/street, sports, racing, snow, dirt - they do not just differ by grip and endurance). But definitely not one for each car, except probably a few specific cases. In PC racing sims this is generally easier because they tend focusing on a certain car type using the same tyre type.

I could agree they'd need a tire "model" for each type of tire, yes. Of course one could view it as one model with three different types included, but essentially it could better be viewed and drawn up as 3 tire models, one for each type of compound.
Then there' also radials, non radials, run-flats, etc, etc. I don't think all that is needed though, my main gripes of PD's tire model are lack of flex, sizes, and terrible wear rates.
Perfection is to much for anything current to process fast enough to play in games that anyone less fortunate then Donald Trump can afford. (See military flight sims)

I must admit, I really like the exaggerated tyre wear. Means races as short as 10 laps (about the race distance I'm inclined to run nowadays) require a stop or two, throwing that extra bit of strategy in there. Less realistic for sure, but definitely more fun for players like myself. Although unlike you guys I don't run long-distance races often, and I totally see how the frequency of stops could be a pain then (though I'd probably still enjoy it, haha). They definitely need a Weak/Strong tyre wear option, like they had in past GTs.

Options never hurt.
I can see how it would appeal to people wanting to simulate a longer race in less time, for many reasons, and that's fine with me. What's not fine with me is not having an option for anything even close to realistic tire wear.
Even more, is how much the lap times fall with balding tires, as SuperSic said, lap times were only dropping 2 seconds at Suzuka in SuperGT over 30 laps, yet in GT5 you'll lose 2 seconds a lap on racing hards in around 8-10 laps.

I mean, it's not even close. In a game with 24 hour races, one might expect better.

 

[xxDingerxx]

It almost leads me to believe PD goes by historic records of each cars when they decide to give a car better performance than another version but identical car. Example the 51 and 91 Team Oreca Vipers, the same car but yet one massively outperformes the other... I have no clue on how different they performed in real life and their on track performance records but why do PD do this? Same goes for many other race cars, SuperGT cars there will always be 1 of the different models that will outperforms the rest when in reality they shopuld just use the same car with different skins, not different physics...
Now, back to topic. Yes tire wear sucks!

Not really. While Super GT does have regulations, the GT500 class simulated in GT5 were not quite as strict. The individual teams were allowed engine swaps and different variations in chassis.

However, I think they have had some rule changes in the last year or so to tighten things up.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Close enought to me for a first step into real training and racing.

??????

How does that video have anything to do with the debate here at hand? It doesn't compare the tire model of GT to real life, and all it seems to try and do is show how GT5 runs a almost exact real world lap. However, that real world lap could have been sync'd since those are two different videos meshed in one for comparing. Also what about timing the virtual lap to try and coincide with the real world lap to see how close one really gets to it.

I mean that's not really the best evidence for GT5 being a great game for Academy members to jump from. More so it shows that GT5 is a good simcade, but most of the work is done in the real world.

 

[CSLACR]

Not really. While Super GT does have regulations, the GT500 class simulated in GT5 were not quite as strict. The individual teams were allowed engine swaps and different variations in chassis.

However, I think they have had some rule changes in the last year or so to tighten things up.

Go drive the Advan Woodone Clarion GTR and pit your times against the Calsonic, Yellowhat, or Xanavi, or hell, even the 30KG heavier Motul Autech GTR's and let me know if you think that's close to reality.

I'd really like to see you drive the good ones first, and then have video of you spinning the Advan Clarion GTR around like a top for the first 25 corners or so.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Go drive the Advan Woodone Clarion GTR and pit your times against the Calsonic, Yellowhat, or Xanavi, or hell, even the 30KG heavier Motul Autech GTR's and let me know if you think that's close to reality.

I'd really like to see you drive the good ones first, and then have video of you spinning the Advan Clarion GTR around like a top for the first 25 corners or so.

The Clarion GTR was the worse modeled Super GT500 car I've ever used in an online racing series. The car is unrealistic and nothing like the other GTRs offered in the game.

 

[Jav]

Not really. While Super GT does have regulations, the GT500 class simulated in GT5 were not quite as strict. The individual teams were allowed engine swaps and different variations in chassis.

However, I think they have had some rule changes in the last year or so to tighten things up.

Not sure your reply has anything to with what I posted... I understand the liberties the teams have in terms of powerplant choice. But for the models we have in-game there shouldn't really be any performance difference, only the car's liveries should be different.
Oh well, that's PD for you!

 

[SagarisGTB]

It almost leads me to believe PD goes by historic records of each cars when they decide to give a car better performance than another version but identical car. Example the 51 and 91 Team Oreca Vipers, the same car but yet one massively outperformes the other... I have no clue on how different they performed in real life and their on track performance records but why do PD do this? Same goes for many other race cars, SuperGT cars there will always be 1 of the different models that will outperforms the rest when in reality they shopuld just use the same car with different skins, not different physics...
Now, back to topic. Yes tire wear sucks!

Doesn't quite explain the Eneos. The Eneos SC430 did far better than the Sard SC430 in 2008, yet the Sard is the better car in GT5. Actually, the Sard SC430 with the dunlop tires was by far the worst car/tire combo in 2008, yet PD have given it the same performance level as the championship winning Tom's SC430.

To make sense, all the 2008 SC430s should be exactly the same or the Denso Sard SC430 should be slower because of the dunlop tire. The fact that the Eneos is slow and the other two are the same does not make any sense to me.

Try the Advan Woodone Clarion GTR.
Both the Advan and Eneos have what seem to be "tire penalties" and they just suck, quite frankly.

The Kondo GT-R (Woodone Clarion) used the Yokohama tires that year. That might explain why it is slower than the others (but I wouldn't go as far as you do, it's not THAT far off the others and doesn't handle markedly differently).

But the car still out performed and generally outpaced the Hasemi GT-R back in 2008. The Hasemi GT-R is as fast as the Impul and factory GT-Rs in the game.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

The Kondo GT-R (Woodone Clarion) used the Yokohama tires that year. That might explain why it is slower than the others (but I wouldn't go as far as you do, it's not THAT far off the others and doesn't handle markedly differently).

But the car still out performed and generally outpaced the Hasemi GT-R back in 2008. The Hasemi GT-R is as fast as the Impul and factory GT-Rs in the game.

Obviously you haven't raced in any online leagues for Super GT. Ask any group and they'll tell you not to drive the Clarion cause it is basically a broken car in the game. To say it's not that bad is going pretty far and quite a gullible and naive understanding of all the cars in that class.

 

[SagarisGTB]

Obviously you haven't raced in any online leagues for Super GT. Ask any group and they'll tell you not to drive the Clarion cause it is basically a broken car in the game. To say it's not that bad is going pretty far and quite a gullible and naive understanding of all the cars in that class.

But I have raced in an online league for Super GT.

I very well know the reputation the car caries, but I have recently begun GT500 testing various GT500 cars, including the Woodone Clarion Gt-R, and the car has not performed as poorly as I had previously feared. It's usually 1-2 seconds off the Hasemi GT-R I'm also currently testing (both fully broken in and limited to 602 hp), and has gotten as close as 7 tenths to the Hasemi on Monza. With Praiano's tune and careful driving, it's not as bad as you make it seem. I certainly haven't been spinning every corner.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

But I have raced in an online league for Super GT.

I very well know the reputation the car caries, but I have recently begun GT500 testing various GT500 cars, including the Woodone Clarion Gt-R, and the car has not performed as poorly as I had previously feared. It's usually 1-2 seconds off the Hasemi GT-R I'm also currently testing (both fully broken in and limited to 602 hp), and has gotten as close as 7 tenths to the Hasemi on Monza. With Praiano's tune and careful driving, it's not as bad as you make it seem. I certainly haven't been spinning every corner.

As bad as I or anyone else make it seem? Your wording is as if you're the resounding assurance to all that the car is just fine and that it isn't bad at all. More times than not people will say it is a bad car, maybe the update has helped this car for your, but for me and many others it is a bad car. Also where did I say I was spinning every corner? Quote me saying that and I'll apologize for slight exaggeration. I think a regular person is willing to believe the many that say it's bad to the one or two that say it is good.

 

[SagarisGTB]

As bad as I or anyone else make it seem? Your wording is as if you're the resounding assurance to all that the car is just fine and that it isn't bad at all. More times than not people will say it is a bad car, maybe the update has helped this car for your, but for me and many others it is a bad car. Also where did I say I was spinning every corner? Quote me saying that and I'll apologize for slight exaggeration. I think a regular person is willing to believe the many that say it's bad to the one or two that say it is good.

YOU were the one who jump on me for posting (in brackets) that I didn't think it was as bad as you and CSL were making it seem. Its not "unrealistic", "worse modeled Super GT500", "a broken car" to me. From my seat, the car is only 1 second slower than the other GT-Rs and is faster than the SC430s on many tracks. If people think it's a bad car, that's fine, but it's not a universal opinion and I'm allowed to have mine.

Also, CSL was the one who noted that a driver would be "spinning the Advan Clarion GTR around like a top for the first 25 corners" after previously driving the other GT-Rs.

 

[Jav]

Doesn't quite explain the Eneos. The Eneos SC430 did far better than the Sard SC430 in 2008, yet the Sard is the better car in GT5. Actually, the Sard SC430 with the dunlop tires was by far the worst car/tire combo in 2008, yet PD have given it the same performance level as the championship winning Tom's SC430.

To make sense, all the 2008 SC430s should be exactly the same or the Denso Sard SC430 should be slower because of the dunlop tire. The fact that the Eneos is slow and the other two are the same does not make any sense to me.
The Kondo GT-R (Woodone Clarion) used the Yokohama tires that year. That might explain why it is slower than the others (but I wouldn't go as far as you do, it's not THAT far off the others and doesn't handle markedly differently).

But the car still out performed and generally outpaced the Hasemi GT-R back in 2008. The Hasemi GT-R is as fast as the Impul and factory GT-Rs in the game.

Well, that throws my theory out the window! Why they do this is beyond me, obviously GT5 never had in mind the comunity aspect of sim racing where performance parity is needed. They do have a decent field of cars with SuperGT, it would've been so easy to give them equal performance for the same models and very closely balnced performance between makes. Are the NASCAR cars the same?
Back to topic, tire wear is horrible!! Rate Adjustment option please!

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

YOU were the one who jump on me for posting (in brackets) that I didn't think it was as bad as you and CSL were making it seem. Its not "unrealistic", "worse modeled Super GT500", "a broken car" to me. From my seat, the car is only 1 second slower than the other GT-Rs and is faster than the SC430s on many tracks. If people think it's a bad car, that's fine, but it's not a universal opinion and I'm allowed to have mine.

Also, CSL was the one who noted that a driver would be "spinning the Advan Clarion GTR around like a top for the first 25 corners" after previously driving the other GT-Rs.

No one is saying you can't have your opinion but you try to run your opinion off of stats that you also try to provide as facts. Show us all the data sheets on this and then I'll shut up and so will many others. Also you quoted everything else but not the part you claimed I had said prior. In other words don't get me and other members mixed up when trying to argue, what I see as a moot effort. I've raced the car in online series it wasn't a second slower even with various set ups it was much worse. Also when I say quote, how about a full quote and not a sound bite so people know what I really said. I said to me it was that experience, which is obviously showing an opinion yet your writing make it out to be that I was trying to make it factual. The car does seem to have some handicap on it, that PD instituted and it's not the only Super Gt car to have such. Also no one claimed it was universal, but rationally a person would probably believe the many more that disagree with you than agree.

 

[SagarisGTB]

Please calm down. But what do you want from me? To declare that my opinion is invalid? You seem persistent to adamantly prove that the Kondo GT-R is a "bad" car. Can you not accept that I think the car is decent? The stats I have presented are facts: they are rough comparative time difference I have gathered through my own personal testing, for myself (and certain others). I'm not trying to mislead anyone. Rather to the contrary, I would like people to drive the car and formulate their own opinions of it, rather than accepting the popular consensus like sheep.

I can gladly accept your differing opinion; why can't you reciprocate?