- 35,174
- Addison,Texas
- GTP_RACECAR
To be fair, its "Artificial Intelligence". Like many things that are artificial, it doesn't guarantee its good
Kazunori Yamauchi Monaco Interview: The Role AI Plays in GT Sport's BOP and Penalty Systems
- Thread starter GTPNewsWire
- 59 comments
- 6,156 views
To be fair, its "Artificial Intelligence". Like many things that are artificial, it doesn't guarantee its good
- 272
- Netherlands
- F1FOUAD
They probably have Dev Tools to run those A.I Bop tests before being finetuned by one of the Devs.
- 55
- Germany
Kaz= Naked SNAKE
- 146
- Buckinghamshire
- ZokyCRO
It seems they were on vacation, chilling somewhere most of the year?!,Extremely dissapointed with their contribution to the game so far, especially since I know who they are (at least I think, presuming) and on what level they can compete and drive.
I understand the decision of pushing an idea of creating a perfect AI that will solve everything, much cheaper and conveinent then employing a bunch of test drivers.
- 1,372
- Serbia
- Warlock__SRB
...maybe it isn't good system, but when you think about it, in fact it is good that AI is slower, so this way they don't need to multiply gained time by some random number, instead they already have it as a difference between you and average driver (AI).
- 1,355
- United Kingdom
- 786
- United States
It's way past time the AI are updated...
Been hearing that for ten years. So, never going to happen. Basically, I'm guessing that PD know that if their AI offer real competition to even decently alien drivers, their next game won't be a 'must buy' and players will wait until they hear about bugs, game design flaws and the rest of the litany of problems first adopters get. Make them suck, close the servers for the old game pretty quickly, you extort the entire player base to migrate (at full price). Bingo, share prices and CEO compensation stays high!
If penalty imposition comes from comparing human times to an AI time, sector by sector, turn by turn, then replace that data set with a data set derived from actual players (in fact, that honor might be a suitable prize for the winners of the World Cup) and the problem goes away. Because it is never going to get solved by the AI getting faster.
That just isn't in Kaz's best interest.
Been hearing that for ten years. So, never going to happen. Basically, I'm guessing that PD know that if their AI offer real competition to even decently alien drivers, their next game won't be a 'must buy' and players will wait until they hear about bugs, game design flaws and the rest of the litany of problems first adopters get. Make them suck, close the servers for the old game pretty quickly, you extort the entire player base to migrate (at full price). Bingo, share prices and CEO compensation stays high!
If penalty imposition comes from comparing human times to an AI time, sector by sector, turn by turn, then replace that data set with a data set derived from actual players (in fact, that honor might be a suitable prize for the winners of the World Cup) and the problem goes away. Because it is never going to get solved by the AI getting faster.
That just isn't in Kaz's best interest.
- 5,626
- Ohio
Go ahead and take a family member of yours at random, aged 7 to 77 or whatever, and plunk them down in your chair and tell them to win.
The AI is a very good training tool to learn to race clean. Hence the bonus.
The AI is a very good training tool to learn to race clean. Hence the bonus.
- 786
- United States
The AI are a great way for 6 year olds to learn to race. Once past that, only humans are fast enough in GTS to not have you have to nerf your car at least three tire grades. 
Unfortunately, the AI only teaches you to divebomb like crazy, knowing the AI will check up like your granny at all tighter turns and not defend the inside.
Unfortunately, the AI only teaches you to divebomb like crazy, knowing the AI will check up like your granny at all tighter turns and not defend the inside.
- 1,605
- Greece
- Giorgos_Ferrari
So now i understand why the Penalty system and the BOP is broken , i hope they found a better reference point to solves the issues currently present because im starting to regret paying 60$ for PS+.
- 4,962
- Nelson, England
- GTP_ASH32
Or they fancied driving those cars in the FIA events so needed them to be good and don't give a 🤬 whether cars they don't drive are good or not.
I'd know I'd tempted to do this if I was one of these "testers" and was racing FIA events.
Really I don't have a clue why some cars are so out of balance but it seems no one knows why. Maybe one day it'll be different but that probably just mean it'll be a couple of different OP cars and the McLarens will still suck.
- 1,337
- Brazil
Holy trinity?
- 453
- Black Forest
- GTRP_RennPanda
- R3nnPanda
In other words, sandbagging exists in GT Sport as well? Now that's a whole new level of realism. We need more human drama next year, though.Or they fancied driving those cars in the FIA events so needed them to be good and don't give a 🤬 whether cars they don't drive are good or not.
I'd know I'd tempted to do this if I was one of these "testers" and was racing FIA events.
LeGeNd-1
Premium
- 7,264
- Australia
- GTP_LeGeNd-1
Would be better if the penalty is based on your own sector time during your fastest lap during the race, than the AI time. This way it is self controlled. The AI is a poor measure of speed and would just overpenalize people for minor cutting. They need to work on the detection zones as well. This week's Daily B race at Red Bull Ring for example, I went into Omega corner side by side on the outside and had to take a wider line than usual, which leads me to run slightly wider on the kerbs in the short straight in between the 2 corners. It's intentional but unavoidable otherwise I would have collided. The game decides to penalize 2 seconds for what is probably a net time loss. What a joke.
- 12,871
- Cambridge
- Moglet85
- Moglet
The AI are a great way for 6 year olds to learn to race. Once past that, only humans are fast enough in GTS to not have you have to nerf your car at least three tire grades.
Unfortunately, the AI only teaches you to divebomb like crazy, knowing the AI will check up like your granny at all tighter turns and not defend the inside.
As Famine pointed out the in-race AI are likely not the same ones used to determine penalties. For all we know they have some super efficient AI that can lap faster than most players but they don't use it for anything other than configuring penalties.
Tired Tyres
Premium
- 12,535
- West Yorkshire
- Tired_Tyres
- Tired Tyres
- 2,600
- Brazil
- 320
- Lisbon, Portugal
And how do you know it was "accidentally"? Put "gain time = penalty time", and you'll suddenly have a few "smart-ones" constantly cutting certain zones (like the last chicane of Le Mans).
Penalty by definition is something you get to discourage a wrong action in the first place. If it's merely "gain time = penalty time".... ugh..
As long as you actually did something wrong, I say, got a harsh penalty, deal with it.
And no one suggested it was that simple, duh. Car contact is a whole other problem...
- 816
- London
- And-War
So they are basing it on gt A I that sucks as gt AI cars are not the fastest and hardly ever cut or push the track boundaries just do a off line race gt AI has some time before it's as good as assetto coursa's
More like Raiden
Last edited by a moderator:
- 1,728
- Catching You
- TNR_FILO
What they should do is fully optimise every car's gearbox for their BoP you'll get an even representation of the car's optimal performance around the differing tracks raced on.
- 35,174
- Addison,Texas
- GTP_RACECAR
This looks like a dramatic cutscene before the final boss in a game
Perfect image for a Sega Genesis Side-Scrolling Beat-em-up, complete with bottom text dialogue.
Yeah, nowhere else in that shot is that specific shade. Did we just expose a wizard?
- 874
- Australia
- 786
- United States
That's pure conjecture.
But let me get this straight... PD are sitting on an AI strength way faster than typical race AI, and chose to deliberately make their game a joke offline for anyone even slightly competent?
I'm guessing there's a PD apologist about to jump in next and say why that's a good thing.
- 2,600
- Brazil
They hire japanese drivers because it's easier for communication(at least that's my guess),PD is kind of small for a AAA studio probably the smallest working nowadays and most of them are japanese.
- 786
- United States
The studio with the most sales is hiring the fewest people to improve the game?
Can you say 'profits'?!
Can you say 'profits'?!
- 12,871
- Cambridge
- Moglet85
- Moglet
That's pure conjecture.
But let me get this straight... PD are sitting on an AI strength way faster than typical race AI, and chose to deliberately make their game a joke offline for anyone even slightly competent?
I'm guessing there's a PD apologist about to jump in next and say why that's a good thing.
Everything in this thread apart from the initial post is conjecture, however it seems likely they use a different AI system to determine corner cuts as we know that the AI you see in the game is pretty woeful.
Regarding the AI that appears in offline racing, you're assuming that a more advanced AI system would run on a PS4. That's not always the case. There's a big difference between running a single AI car at highest performance to determine track limits and running multiple AI that have to react to player inputs.
- 2,677
- UK
- Outspacer
Hmm, I haven't played for months so not sure what it currently does, but doesn't the penalty come up before the end of the sector? That would mean this statement needs interpreting in some other way:
Kaz: “The simplest aspect to it the system is always looking at and comparing how much time gain there was by making that shortcut as compared to the lap time of an AI. Once we know that it did cut, at the next sector it compares the time the AI would have gotten as opposed to the driver, and there you can see how much of a gain there was – two or three seconds or so.”
What I thought it actually did was to look at the player's speed when coming back on track, and compare that against something - possibly the speed an AI would be doing at that point on the circuit. I certainly recall cases where I ran wide, lost lots of time in gravel, but came back on track with some speed and got a penalty. Unless it's changed a lot since then I'd say it's still based on speed not time. The decision whether to issue a penalty could have a threshold of, say, 80% of the AI's speed to make it trigger happy.
I think it's fair to assume that the in-game AI is using simplified physics, and along with rubber-banding we don't see what the core AI code could do running with full player physics - something that should be possible for PD to run to create a reference. However, I suspect it would still be as 'polite' about not using the full track up to the track limits, so distinctly slow compared to an average player - at corner exits especially.
Similar threads
