MORE Customization/ upgrade options.
- Thread starter HPIxProdigy
- 292 comments
- 27,163 views
- 147
- dublin
- thiagoturbao
a few things missing on gt5 settings...steering lock, caster angle, tire pressure and a few others...
wheels and tire size (R13 to R20)...
A hotlap (TT) ranking for each track...
Tires allowed by PP, for example from 200pp to 400pp just possible on confort, 400pp to 600pp sports and racing tires just for more than 600pp....It would make the game less arcade than it is now.
cheers
wheels and tire size (R13 to R20)...
A hotlap (TT) ranking for each track...
Tires allowed by PP, for example from 200pp to 400pp just possible on confort, 400pp to 600pp sports and racing tires just for more than 600pp....It would make the game less arcade than it is now.
cheers
- 2,012
Most of those parts aren't proven to be better for your car before hand, because running them on a windtunnel costs an absurd lot and even a simulation is expensive. That's why they are ricer for the most part.
Looking at this thread is like watching mightcarmods all over again. Great youtube channel that demystifies lots of silly mods and they have a very good taste in cars.
Last edited:
GT is about driving the cars Kaz has looked at in magazines or seen at auto/motor shows and in the racing world. He's sharing
His experience with the automobile. Having said that, I'm still waiting to find out how much lighter any car is when I buy the
Carbon driveshaft.
His experience with the automobile. Having said that, I'm still waiting to find out how much lighter any car is when I buy the
Carbon driveshaft.
- 66
- Canterbury
- Hitman_Elite66
So why would it ruin the point of Gran Turismo? If you don't want to customize your cars with a livery editor, then don't. There are plenty of us who want a livery editor.
It creates a sense of individualization to the game by customizing your cars, and allows you to tell what sorts of car-culture/style the other person is into when you meet people online.
If they give us blank GT3 cars or other touring cars, we can create our own liveries and racing teams. There are so many advantages to having an advanced livery editor that it's almost mandatory for a GT game.
A livery editor will play a big part in keeping me a fan of Sony and GT Series.
- 5,761
- Anoka, MN
So for those that don't want a livery system, what is the point of GT? Race in stock looking vehicles in stock paint colors with only aftermarket wheels and spoiler? How did standard and premium not ruin the point of GT? How did a full mode of B-spec not ruin the point of GT? How did a horrible leveling system, rather than licenses (what the original 4 GTs were based on) not ruin the point of GT?
What's missing is the racing option we got at the dealership. The choice of colours with dedicated liveries in GT1. GT2 gave us the BTCC upgrades and Renown liveries for the RX7, etc. it was what would have made excellent variety for the online community.
- 24
- Louisiana
- DSC-VipersVenom
Things that shouldn't be too far of a reach in GT6: (1)..FULL COLOR SPECTRUM(do away with "buying colors or attaining colors"). (2)Put EVERY RACE CAR or RACE "edition" of a car EVER MADE(this is a racing game-no more vans!!). (3).CONSTANT DLC CARS!...as a car comes out or even a car on SEMA and well pay 1.00 for supercar(koeinsegg/ssc/gumpert/lamborhini). 50 cents for a sports car(92'viper/2013 viper/stingray concept)...and modern sedans and hatchbacks should be free dlc!..or 25.cents(ford focus/dodge dart/chevy cobalt). (4)EVERY AVAILABLE CUSTOMIZATION FOR ANY CAR!
- 485
- Croatia
AmericanStig
(Banned)
- 23
- NYC
A livery editor would really add to racing leagues as well, everyone designing and racing their own cars, imagine that!
- 2,059
- Under your bed.
- Ask me, man.
I still can't believe the idea of paint chips and horn hunting made it to final release.
- 1,033
Body kits? Why? If they arn't fuctional don't bother. I'd love to see more visual options but any aero changes should make a difference in the way the car drives.
For instance! If I put a front splitter on my car it should increase front end downforce!
For instance! If I put a front splitter on my car it should increase front end downforce!
- 12
- SoCal
- xXNissanDriftXx
- 12
- SoCal
- xXNissanDriftXx
- 6,671
- Mexico City
- MoLieG
That's the whole point of livery editor: It's about driving your car, not only a car...
I'm going to get a 360 Forza IV someday just for that...
- 5,761
- Anoka, MN
Yeah, race with solid colored vehicles, that's how it's done in real life! Who needs interesting designs that PD didn't put in the game! [/sarcasm]
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,155
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
Flamebait is not needed at all (nor for that matter is double posting and your abuse of basic English grammar - both of which you need to address given that you agreed to the AUP when you joined) so plesae cut it out.
That Forza has a livery editor is NOT a valid reason for GT to not have one, customer liveries is a rather large part of motorsport at almost every level, add in the on-line element to the GT series now and the need is even greater.
GT needs one and needs one rather badly.
In a nutshell GT's tyre physics are very, very basic and require a significant amount of work, how to approach that is what is being discussed.
LOLWUT
In future if your not sure what is being explained please ask without the use of text speak (see the AUP once again) and we would be more than happy to explain.
- 8,704
Pacejka-like models are the industry standard; it doesn't matter that GT5 doesn't include certain adjustments here and there, they're practically all based on look-up tables for tangential wheel speed divided by ground speed ("slip ratio") for longitudinal grip. I.e. they all share the same divergence. This is the "parameterisation issue", given the Pacejka model was developed not for the sim industry, but for the tyre industry where, presumably, zero speed isn't a very interesting "problem". Things have probably changed in both industries in the last ten years, so it'll be interesting to see what comes of the next generation of sims.
To date, I think only a few independent sims have strayed away from purely empirical adjustment factors and into physical modeling (e.g. "brush", as in LFS) - perhaps empirical data is hard to "come by" for smaller developers. Interestingly, Forza is supposed to use a non-Pacejka model, but I think it's still empirically-based.
The reason physical models are the holy grail, for me, is that you can include infinite variability and the tyre should behave correctly, assuming the model is accurate over the range allowable in the game.
That kind of customisation is prohibitive for empirical models, since you need to have all that data to hand, or "interpolate" between similar tyres and ignore potential differences that actually matter in real life; those differences that would theoretically just fall out of a physical model. Note that both iRacing and LFS are working towards physical models, despite the former having access to practically all the empirical data that can be measured (the fact that much of the important stuff can't be reliably measured might be the driving force.)
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,155
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
Pacejka models and the MF are mainly based around slip angles rather than slip ratios/percentages are they not?
Slip percentage alone is relatively straightforward to handle in its base form, which is why its odd that GT still has issues in that area. I do however 100% agree that divergence is the issue in regard to low-speed values within the MF and that accounts for a lot of GT's low speed tyre issues.
Fingers crossed for the sim side of things, I certainly know that its moved on in the tyre industry.
True, but the brush model has its own issues, as while it does deal with low-speed more effectively its generally a lot less accurate overall. so its a trade off for the smaller devs, who as you say will struggle to get hard data to work with. The LFS dev team have I believe said pretty much that in the past.
From what I can gather its a mixture of the two, they used MF for the higher speed work, but then used empirical data to 'correct' the lower speed issues. Working with Pirreli to gather a wider range of data that would normally be collected, particularly in regard to lower speed and drifting conditions. The advantage of working with a single tyre manufacturer is that you can actually get this info, the disadvantage of course is that you only have data for that manufacturer. Which is great if the car comes with OEM tyres from them, and wrong (in a right way if you get what I mean) if it doesn't.
I have to be honest and say I think we still have quite a way to go until home machines (be it PC or not) are going to be able to accurately run a physical tyre model in real time for multiple tyres on multiple cars, damn complex stuff inflated rubber.
One interesting thing I did not in regard to empirical data that the T10 team did make was that when they used to get data from a range of manufacturer they found that almost none of them actually measured the exact same data, the conditions, range and even type of data varied to quite a degree, making a true empirical based model for a range of manufacturers almost impossible, which is why they went with a single one and could be why iRacing is going down the route of a physical model.
- 39
I'm actually disappointed in GT5, after all the years of waiting. This is all they can give us? horns? seriously? 6 wheels to pick from? having to earn paint just to paint your car and wheels? premium and standard cars, seriously? Only some cars can do race modification?
I'm not asking for much but if they can have, more customization, more selections of aero kits, more selection of wheels, more real world tracks if possible. Engine swaps? nothing like a 2JZ swap Lancer Evo8 or drivetrain tossing a 4wd drivetrain in a EF civic.
It's like looking at a menu and picking out what you want but nothing stupid ridiculous.
I'm not asking for much but if they can have, more customization, more selections of aero kits, more selection of wheels, more real world tracks if possible. Engine swaps? nothing like a 2JZ swap Lancer Evo8 or drivetrain tossing a 4wd drivetrain in a EF civic.
It's like looking at a menu and picking out what you want but nothing stupid ridiculous.
- 1,012
- Portugal
- ULTRA-FLOW
- 8,704
I thought lateral grip was inferred from slip angle (the angle the vector of the ground's velocity makes with the vector of the tyre's orientation), whilst longitudinal grip is a simple look-up from slip ratio. Obviously, there's a bit of longitudinal and lateral action going on in most manoeuvres.
Yeah, I did a quick search, and they actually appear to use software tyre rigs now as a first step. Which is also what the lead dev of LFS is doing.
Yes, the brush model is an incomplete model; as noted above, they're working on a more feature-complete version that runs "offline", then data from that model is to be parameterised for efficient calculation at run time. It seems that only early versions of LFS were a pure brush model, it's now a tread model, but the underlying "brush" workings don't produce the correct variations in contact patch sizes to plug into the real-time tread simulation.
I'd always thought that the "Magic Formula" was empirically based - like it's sort of an engineering joke: "don't ask, it's just magic" kind of thing. Good insight, though, and only furthers the point that empirical methods, for games like GT with so many cars and the scope (if not the actual means, yet) for customisation, i.e. of tyre sizes etc., are not going to be practical unless accuracy isn't a concern.
It could still be based on look-up tables for run-time. That means that, instead of having something like two tables each for every tyre (type, size, whatever), you might have one set of tables for every tyre it is possible to manufacture. Obviously validating such a model is difficult, but it "needs" to be done.
I'd actually expect it to move forwards from the current model, so a low-res tread model, with corrections for high-res effects and lots of load-, camber- etc. dependent stuff for contact patch shape / size determination.
The reason iRacing went physical is because you can't measure what happens in the "scary zone", as Kaemmer calls it. The tyre changes state / condition far too quickly for it to mean anything. This is why he built a software model and made his own measurements of real tyres (with the help of a manufacturer) to validate it.
The fact that different manufacturers measure different things shouldn't matter to a physical model, because you should just be able to set up the model in the same state the manufacturer did their tests and get the numbers out. That means that, in effect, there's potentially more useful data to hand.
Similar threads
Latest Posts
-
-
Open ◆ SNAIL [Spec] Racing - Currently Recruiting for GT7 - JOIN TODAY!!
- Latest: arethosetacos
-
-
-