No more split times just before corners...

[pilmat]

Please PD, why not give us split times on corner exit so we can look at them going down the straight and not have them pop up while entering a braking zone. This is a small gripe, but you think they would have figured it out themselves. Maybe this is not possible on world tracks, as they try to use the official sectors, but on PD tracks it should be pretty easy to do.

/rant

 

[ZohsixGT5]

(Delete)

 

[R0ssingt0n]

I'd prefer it if there was a constant split time in a corner of a screen so i wouldn't have to wait until i get to a certain part of the track to know how far ahead/back I am. Also a split time showing how far the car behind and the car right in front of you instead of just the leader would be good.

 

[Fire Yoshi]

Personally, I like the realtime distance (in meters) a car is ahead or behind you that Forza uses.

 

[sumbrownkid]

Personally, I like the realtime distance (in meters) a car is ahead or behind you that Forza uses.

Seconds is much easier to discern than distance.

It's easier to gauge pacing when you know the opponent gained 3 seconds on you instead of 300 meters.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Seconds is much easier to discern than distance.

It's easier to gauge pacing when you know the opponent gained 3 seconds on you instead of 300 meters.

Agreed, but it probably looks much messier having a real-time time split compared to distances, even if, yeah, they're more useful.

Splits for all competitors could probably be fit in right beside the current space for the order right now. It'd be a much more handy approach to the current one.

 

[Fire Yoshi]

Seconds is much easier to discern than distance.

It's easier to gauge pacing when you know the opponent gained 3 seconds on you instead of 300 meters.

Subjective, although my point came from the fact that it's real-time, instead of clocked. If the timer was real-time, then I would prefer that over distance. I just like what Forza does better because I know where they're at 100% of the time (not counting the track map).

 

[TheeFrogmanlego]

Subjective, although my point came from the fact that it's real-time, instead of clocked. If the timer was real-time, then I would prefer that over distance. I just like what Forza does better because I know where they're at 100% of the time (not counting the track map).

I like what real life race leagues do better

 

[pilmat]

I like what real life race leagues do better

They almost all doing something different, so please tell us which way you would like the splits posted.

 

[Barra333]

Posting splits at pre-determined locations on track is fine by me. Adding splits to all cars in the standings on the right side of the screen would be great.
As for positioning of splits... for real life tracks, PD have used the real points (as far as I know), but for the fantasy tracks, some of the choices are horrible. Some is down to track variations (Grand Valley, Cape Ring), but Tokyo has always annoyed me. Two 45 second splits, followed by a 15 second one which is one corner? Really?

 

[another_jakhole]

To take it even further! (kinda off/on-topic), there needs to be a choice to map a button for cycling through what shows on the HUD. Pausing during a race?

 

[VBR]

Yet another example that shows a lack of common sense on PD's part. Some of the splits do pop up & the most inconvenient time, should be optimized for GT6.

 

[IceMan PJN]

Seconds is much easier to discern than distance.

It's easier to gauge pacing when you know the opponent gained 3 seconds on you instead of 300 meters.

Distance worked just fine for me. Seconds would work as well, but distance also worked just fine. I still use it to determine whether I'm gaining or losing ground on the other guys.

 

[dr_slump]

Subjective, although my point came from the fact that it's real-time, instead of clocked. If the timer was real-time, then I would prefer that over distance. I just like what Forza does better because I know where they're at 100% of the time (not counting the track map).

I don't think it's better.

 

[snowgt]

Distance worked just fine for me. Seconds would work as well, but distance also worked just fine. I still use it to determine whether I'm gaining or losing ground on the other guys.

If you're driving at the same pace behind someone, and you're 5 seconds behind, the distance will change with every acceleration/deceleration of each car. You don't get ANY information from that.

 

[Tornado]

You don't get ANY information from that.

Except you get the exact same information that you get from dedicated split times, just constantly updated. So you kinda do.


Unless you are saying that you don't get information from regular split times either.

 

[awr117]

I'll take time over distance any day. Sector times popping up can be annoying. Wish they could implement the times next to the drivers names in the racing lineup of the upper right hand corner of the screen.

 

[KiroKai]

Except you get the exact same information that you get from dedicated split times, just constantly updated. So you kinda do.


Unless you are saying that you don't get information from regular split times either.

No. What he says is that distance information is worthless because it depends on your car's current speed. Time is always the same.

If two cars who have a close race keep a distance of 5 metres at 250km/h down a straight it's much closer than when they drive at 35km/h through a corner, with 5 metres between them, so you always have to think twice when seeing a distance, first the actual metres, than your speed and the speed of the rival which cannot always be determined even.

This is off-topic anyway though.

 

[Fire Yoshi]

I don't think it's better.

Hence why I said "subjective."

 

[mcfizzle]

I agree that I like time better than distance but they could give us the option to choose. I like time better because 2 seconds is 2 seconds no matter the speed or location of the split zone. Whereas exiting a corner the distance maybe 25 feet and at the end of the straigh it could be 100 feet but the actual time gap hasn't changed. Just my personal preference though. Split times/gaps etc should be fully customizable. Allow us to decide how we want it presented and where along with the amount of info give. PD needs to learn that full customization with HUD is necessary.

 

[TP3]

Please PD, why not give us split times on corner exit so we can look at them going down the straight and not have them pop up while entering a braking zone./rant

I agree with you man, it's always a bit distracting mid-corner having that info pop up. Most annoying on city courses where the runoff areas most often don't exist and the walls are non-negotiable.

 

[Samus]

No. What he says is that distance information is worthless because it depends on your car's current speed. Time is always the same.

If two cars who have a close race keep a distance of 5 metres at 250km/h down a straight it's much closer than when they drive at 35km/h through a corner, with 5 metres between them, so you always have to think twice when seeing a distance, first the actual metres, than your speed and the speed of the rival which cannot always be determined even.

This is off-topic anyway though.

Say what now? Distance increases at speed? No, 5 metres is 5 metres.

 

[mcfizzle]

Say what now? Distance increases at speed? No, 5 metres is 5 metres.

He's saying if the time gap is static the distance will increase a speed increases.

 

[pilmat]

Say what now? Distance increases at speed? No, 5 metres is 5 metres.

Distance doesn't change at speed, distance gap does If you are 50 meters behind coming out of La Source (Spa), you will be more at the end of Kemmel, but you will still be 0.5 seconds.

 

[KiroKai]

Distance doesn't change at speed, distance gap does If you are 50 meters behind coming out of La Source (Spa), you will be more at the end of Kemmel, but you will still be 0.5 seconds.

Wish I had put it that short. Anyway, this. 👍

 

[Samus]

Sorry I don't follow, if the distance from the rear bumper of the car in front to your front bumper is 50 meters it doesn't matter how fast you're going, it's still 50 metres. Time is the variable here surely, not distance.

If a game tells me I'm 50 metres behind the car in front I can judge how far that is no matter what. If it says i'm 10 seconds behind then you have to get into working out laptimes and speed.

 

[mcfizzle]

But the time required to cover that 50 meters is variable. The faster you are traveling the less time it takes to travel 50 meters. That's all people are saying. At a slow portion of a track where you are driving 50 mph that 50 meter gap is a much larger gap than the fastest part of a track where you are driving 180 mph. So the relevance of that 50 meters is dependant of where you are on the track. Time is not though. 2 second lead a two second lead anyhwere on the track. Not that it is wrong to measure gaps that way but too me it is more complicated. Racing is about time, not distance. We say you missed the pole position by .1 of a second, not 10 feet. And I don't think we hear drivers ask how much their lead is in distance rather than time.

Edit: it is an interesting discussion because distance does become more relevant in my mind the closer you are. But more when you are talking within car lengths and in oval racing. 2 car lengths on an oval is relevant to me and the gap. But if someone said you have a two hundred car lengths lead it wouldn't tell you a whole lot.

 

[Exorcet]

Basically time makes figuring things out easier. Simplify a race as two identical ghost cars. One starts 5 seconds before the other. For the duration of the race, the time gap is 5 seconds, but the distance gap can be anything from 0 to infinity.

Now move on to a real race. If the change in the time gap is neagtive (time gap shrinks between two checkpoints) the car behind you is gaining. If the change in the distance gap is negative (or positive), you don't know. The car behind you could be gaining or it could be falling behind.

 

[Samus]

Still don't agree. If a game tells me the car behind has gone from being 100m behind but he's now 90m behind he's obviously gaining on me. How could he be falling behind if the distance between our cars is smaller? Or if we're both driving flat out on a straight and the gap gets larger I know I'm moving faster than him on the straight. Yes it'll yo-yo slightly during corners with the concertina effect but it's still pretty easy to follow unless i'm missing something obvious here.

 

[gamerdog6482]

Still don't agree. If a game tells me the car behind has gone from being 100m behind but he's now 90m behind he's obviously gaining on me. How could he be falling behind if the distance between our cars is smaller? Or if we're both driving flat out on a straight and the gap gets larger I know I'm moving faster than him on the straight. Yes it'll yo-yo slightly during corners with the concertina effect but it's still pretty easy to follow unless i'm missing something obvious here.

You are braking and he is not.