Non-linear throttle

[barkohba]

Ahh, no worries. And yes they're basically the same, just cheap metal arms with different face plates instead of cheap plastic arms.

I'm not 100% sure they are the same. I remember in the T-GT review by Inside Sim Racing, the guys were saying they were upgraded as compared to what was found on T300, etc. But I can't remember the details.

 

[barkohba]

That's why I said "roughly"

Anyway, here is a much more accurate version:

View attachment 741610

This is from measuring the throttle voltage between pedals and T300 wheel, and comparing with various on-screen displays and DIView (which is numeric, and certainly applies no curve of its own). Obviously there is some innacuracy when trying to gauge 1/4, 5/8 etc on the displays, but the linearity of AC and DIView is readily apparent compared to GTS' curve.

T300 with G29 pedals. I might test with the TM pedals at some point (trickier, because I don't have an adapter to use), but I'm positive it won't change the curve at all. It might change the amount of deadzone at the start, which would move both the GTS curve and the linear others together (as in, any rescaling of the x-axis would affect both equally).

What car were you testing in GTS/AC ?

Can you do a few tests with a few different cars? Each car has a different throttle map, technically. Use cars that are present in both games for a comparison, If you like. That would be interesting to see.

 

[barkohba]

Aah to be young and innocent, when you believe Polyphony will fix things and make sense.

I remember those days..

Well, mate, I'm certainly not young, and it's a well known fact that he GTS World Tour Championship at the Nurburgring was run on a completely new tire model, and the differences could be observed both in the gameplay, standing starts, and was also commented upon by the live commentators.

 

[Griffith500]

I've accused you of trolling (and I might add as an alternative being disrespectful for no good reason) when I shared my video regarding the throttle modulation, and you said something to the effect of I have no idea what i'm doing in the game when it comes to throttle input, literally out of nowhere. So you don't need to "gloss" over anything, just change your attitude.

This thread is about the last 20% of throttle modulation (in the game) effectively being unusable because of the throttle axis mapping. You claimed it was easier with your new pedals, but your video shows you still don't modulate in that area. Either I'm wrong about that, or you are. No disrespect intended, just truth. Replying multiple times and accusing me of being a troll instead of addressing the lack of evidence is disrespectful of this entire thread.

More to the point, my first part when comparing AC to GTS has nothing to do with that throttle "graphic". I'm talking about the way I'm moving my actual foot, I need very little readjustments and I don't change my input style.

So get to the point. We're still waiting for that video proving you do modulate the last part of the travel. If you do, then great, we can all recommend the TM pedals as a fix. Not before, certainly not based on the evidence we have so far.

As far as F1, you might think the info I relayed, explaining how turbo lag in mordern cars have been basically almost reduced, to the extent that the lean F1 setting, which you suggested is for combating turbo lag, is actually not for that (since it's almost a non issue in modern F1 cars, at least since 2014), but actually for different track layouts or weather.

I'm not going to enter an never ending argument with you, I'm basing my info on facts. You think turbo lag is still a thing in modern F1 cars? In that case, here are some articles on the matter, with very detailed tech explanations as to how this was achieved. In case you don't agree, please take it up with the engineers/motorsports journalists who wrote them. Fact is: F1 turbo lag has been essentially eliminiated, and the "lean" F1 setup is definitely not for that, but rather for slow corners and/or wet weather.

I know that they can keep the turbo spinning using the motor, but that costs energy. You claimed it was because of the exhaust gases, which is how all (normal) turbos have worked, and they definitely do lag significantly. Since it looks like you didn't quite have your facts straight there, either, I think I can be forgiven for not taking your word for it.

• https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/technique-the-mgu-k-and-mgu-h-explained-791187/

"There’s no turbo lag. Power application is immediate, like with any normally aspirated engine."

* In the ideal case where the turbocompressor is already at the correct speed, meaning energy is expended to keep it spinning at that speed the whole time. It's best to have the throttles open to reduce the drag on the compressor wheel and use less energy, as I already stated.


E.g.: https://jalopnik.com/how-formula-ones-amazing-new-hybrid-turbo-engine-works-1506450399

"The challenge is to reduce lag to near zero to match the instant torque delivery of the V8."
"To prevent this lag, the MGU-H turns to a motor and powers the turbo, keeping the rotational speed as close to optimum. When the driver exits the corner and gets back on the throttle, the MGU-H returns to a generator and picks up the energy from the active turbocharger and exhaust gases. The energy recovered can either power the MGU-K to keep the fuel burn as low as possible or charge the battery."

"Over the course of the lap, this balance between energy harvesting, energy deployment and (carbon) fuel burn will be carefully monitored."

Hence what I said about the drive by wire throttles (the actual topic of conversation) trimming any imbalance between optimum and "close to optimum". And also fuel consumption: in = out.

I.e.: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/135942/f1-losing-mguh-a-backwards-step--mercedes

"the MGU-H provides 60% of the electric energy used to power the other part of the energy recovery system, the MGU-K, and contributes 5% of the current engine's thermal efficiency."

So burning less fuel means less energy available to the MGU-H and so less for the MGU-K, as I said. You want to maximise MGU-K in all situations, so something has to give.


From your first link again: https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/technique-the-mgu-k-and-mgu-h-explained-791187/

"The moment the driver steps on the gas pedal and we are no longer grip limited, it applies full power. It’s no longer if the driver wants to use it or not. The power is available. It’s all controlled automatically."

Sounds like traction control to me!!

• https://metropolitan.fi/formula-1-fact/is-there-a-turbo-lag-in-formula-1-engines

Sorry, what is this? Not a credible source.

• https://www.autoevolution.com/news/turbocharged-engines-in-formula-one-18108.html

Yep, they were beasts. No mention of the crazy fuels and boost levels they were using. No mention of the current engines, since it was written in 2010. Nice history for those who didn't see it or didn't know about it.

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antilag_system

"An anti-lag system (ALS) or misfiring system is a system used on turbocharged engines to minimize turbo lag on racing cars"

No mention of elimination there, either - in fact, it's less effective than a motor on the shaft. And F1 doesn't officially use this, especially after all that hoo-ha regarding the blown diffusers. They probably do run rich at times to charge the battery, and they are threatening to do the same when the MGU-H units are banned, you know, to reduce lag.


So let me know how relevant this is to any of the cars in the game.

Cheers.

Indeed. FYI, double-posting is generally frowned upon here, please multi-quote or something.

 

[barkohba]

This thread is about the last 20% of throttle modulation (in the game) effectively being unusable because of the throttle axis mapping. You claimed it was easier with your new pedals, but your video shows you still don't modulate in that area. Either I'm wrong about that, or you are. No disrespect intended, just truth. Replying multiple times and accusing me of being a troll instead of addressing the lack of evidence is disrespectful of this entire thread.



So get to the point. We're still waiting for that video proving you do modulate the last part of the travel. If you do, then great, we can all recommend the TM pedals as a fix. Not before, certainly not based on the evidence we have so far.



I know that they can keep the turbo spinning using the motor, but that costs energy. You claimed it was because of the exhaust gases, which is how all (normal) turbos have worked, and they definitely do lag significantly. Since it looks like you didn't quite have your facts straight there, either, I think I can be forgiven for not taking your word for it.

• https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/technique-the-mgu-k-and-mgu-h-explained-791187/

"There’s no turbo lag. Power application is immediate, like with any normally aspirated engine."

* In the ideal case where the turbocompressor is already at the correct speed, meaning energy is expended to keep it spinning at that speed the whole time. It's best to have the throttles open to reduce the drag on the compressor wheel and use less energy, as I already stated.


E.g.: https://jalopnik.com/how-formula-ones-amazing-new-hybrid-turbo-engine-works-1506450399

"The challenge is to reduce lag to near zero to match the instant torque delivery of the V8."
"To prevent this lag, the MGU-H turns to a motor and powers the turbo, keeping the rotational speed as close to optimum. When the driver exits the corner and gets back on the throttle, the MGU-H returns to a generator and picks up the energy from the active turbocharger and exhaust gases. The energy recovered can either power the MGU-K to keep the fuel burn as low as possible or charge the battery."

"Over the course of the lap, this balance between energy harvesting, energy deployment and (carbon) fuel burn will be carefully monitored."

Hence what I said about the drive by wire throttles (the actual topic of conversation) trimming any imbalance between optimum and "close to optimum". And also fuel consumption: in = out.

I.e.: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/135942/f1-losing-mguh-a-backwards-step--mercedes

"the MGU-H provides 60% of the electric energy used to power the other part of the energy recovery system, the MGU-K, and contributes 5% of the current engine's thermal efficiency."

So burning less fuel means less energy available to the MGU-H and so less for the MGU-K, as I said. You want to maximise MGU-K in all situations, so something has to give.


From your first link again: https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/technique-the-mgu-k-and-mgu-h-explained-791187/

"The moment the driver steps on the gas pedal and we are no longer grip limited, it applies full power. It’s no longer if the driver wants to use it or not. The power is available. It’s all controlled automatically."

Sounds like traction control to me!!

• https://metropolitan.fi/formula-1-fact/is-there-a-turbo-lag-in-formula-1-engines

Sorry, what is this? Not a credible source.

• https://www.autoevolution.com/news/turbocharged-engines-in-formula-one-18108.html

Yep, they were beasts. No mention of the crazy fuels and boost levels they were using. No mention of the current engines, since it was written in 2010. Nice history for those who didn't see it or didn't know about it.

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antilag_system

"An anti-lag system (ALS) or misfiring system is a system used on turbocharged engines to minimize turbo lag on racing cars"

No mention of elimination there, either - in fact, it's less effective than a motor on the shaft. And F1 doesn't officially use this, especially after all that hoo-ha regarding the blown diffusers. They probably do run rich at times to charge the battery, and they are threatening to do the same when the MGU-H units are banned, you know, to reduce lag.


So let me know how relevant this is to any of the cars in the game.


Indeed. FYI, double-posting is generally frowned upon here, please multi-quote or something.

Well I can tell you how relevant it is - you said the lean mapping is for compating turbo lag, which it isn't, and I just pointed out to how F1 cars actually have no turbo lag, shared exact details as to why, and your whole post is now irrelevant because you're basically running around the subject, with the same result, which is, unfortunately for you, unavoidable: F1 cars have basically no turbo lag and don't need a special engine mapping to do it. You're just cherry picking info which have no relevance to this made up story, inside your head, of modren F1 cars having turbo lags. From reading the materials which I have shared you can clearly understand how MGU-H actually helps combatting turbo lag to near-0. Your conclusion about how the MGU-K/MGU-H article, stating that "it sounds like traction control to me" is laughable, mate. You really should reasearch F1 A LOT and then enter discussions on this subject. That is NOT TC, and F1 cars obviously do not have TC, nor ABS.

Other than that, what can I tell you? I've explained time and time again, but you're too deep into your own eco-chamber to be able to read what I've said. Regardless of the non-linear throttle mapping in GTS, you CAN modulate even the last 20%. The reason for which I do not generally do that, is because when RACING, as soon as one comes out of a corner, where generally post-apex the throttle is somewhere at 60-70%, you don't need to modulate it too slowly, because you are RACING and need to be fast, so there's no reason not to slam on the last 20% travel, which even in real GT3 race cars does very little in terms of adding torque, and presents basically 0% risk of oversteering.

And as far as a video I mentioned I might make to see what's exactly up with the throttle pedal, that is for general information on the subject and for the sake of the thread. I'll do it when I feel like doing it, stop asking for stuff that you're not entitled to. I've no obligation to do any videos for the likes of you.

 

[Scaff]

Purely theorizing here, but real engines usually don't make 50% power at 50% throttle opening and 50% pedal travel. It's more like 75% power at 50% input. This could be a really crooked way of trying to fix that and failing in the process.

Some do, some don't it depends very much on the car, its audience and its purpose.

The RSMEGANE article is especially revealing - when putting the Megane RS in track/sport mode, the throttle is remapped to pretty much exactly what is experienced in GTS - non-linear progressive , check the graph below taken from the article:

Want to know why they do that (from someone who worked for them)?

Because it makes the car exciting to drive, and the driver aids and diff take care of the fall-out from it.

"The standard throttle mapping on the majority of modern vehicles is setup to be very responsive to minor throttle input. This makes the vehicle feel more powerful as you get a sudden surge when you initially press the pedal. For general daily driving, this is a great setup and makes driving quickly almost effortless.

When you start using a vehicle on the track or for spirited driving on your favourite country roads the standard throttle mapping can become a hindrance. Add the additional power that our customers run over a stock vehicle and for some the standard throttle mapping can be oversensitive. This is where a linear throttle map is beneficial.
A linear throttle map is set up to give closer to a 1:1 ratio between the throttle angle and engine load. This gives the driver much more control as it allows for a much wider range of throttle modulation."

https://www.onlyrevo.com/blog/linear-throttle/

The reality when it comes to track and race prepped cars is that the throttle mapping will be set to match the drivers preference, weather conditions and the circuits layout. Real world mapping will also vary from gear to gear, as the simple fact that gearing multiplies torque means that aggressive maps in lower gears play havoc with your ability to pull away smoothly and softer mappings in higher gears leading to the opposite issue.



GTS's mapping however is absurdly aggressive even in comparison to real world aggressive non-linear mapping, with around 50% of the throttle in the last 20%. In reality it would result in a car that feel absurdly sluggish and slow when driving at everyday speed on the road and then bat-**** crazy at the end.

Its not however alone in that regard, as the brake progression and clutch implementation are also not without issue, with the clutch to be blunt simply being wrong in every way. It does however help address some of the issues with GTS's low speed tyre model!

I read at some point on a youtube comment from a championship stream that the tire model was developed in colaboration with iRacing. Really hope that's true.

I don't, iRacings tyre model has some issues to say the least

which even in real GT3 race cars does very little in terms of adding torque, and presents basically 0% risk of oversteering.

That depends on exactly what gear you are in, in reality yes it can make quite a difference in lower gear, slower corners. which is exactly why GT3 cars run TC as standard and GTE is considered tricker to drive.

 

[Griffith500]

Well I can tell you how relevant it is - you said the lean mapping is for compating turbo lag, which it isn't, and I just pointed out to how F1 cars actually have no turbo lag, shared exact details as to why, and your whole post is now irrelevant because you're basically running around the subject, with the same result, which is, unfortunately for you, unavoidable: F1 cars have basically no turbo lag and don't need a special engine mapping to do it. You're just cherry picking info which have no relevance to this made up story, inside your head, of modren F1 cars having turbo lags. From reading the materials which I have shared you can clearly understand how MGU-H actually helps combatting turbo lag to near-0. Your conclusion about how the MGU-K/MGU-H article, stating that "it sounds like traction control to me" is laughable, mate. You really should reasearch F1 A LOT and then enter discussions on this subject. That is NOT TC, and F1 cars obviously do not have TC, nor ABS.

Other than that, what can I tell you? I've explained time and time again, but you're too deep into your own eco-chamber to be able to read what I've said. Regardless of the non-linear throttle mapping in GTS, you CAN modulate even the last 20%. The reason for which I do not generally do that, is because when RACING, as soon as one comes out of a corner, where generally post-apex the throttle is somewhere at 60-70%, you don't need to modulate it too slowly, because you are RACING and need to be fast, so there's no reason not to slam on the last 20% travel, which even in real GT3 race cars does very little in terms of adding torque, and presents basically 0% risk of oversteering.

And as far as a video I mentioned I might make to see what's exactly up with the throttle pedal, that is for general information on the subject and for the sake of the thread. I'll do it when I feel like doing it, stop asking for stuff that you're not entitled to. I've no obligation to do any videos for the likes of you.

Oh dear. Either provide the evidence, or cut it out - I'm not acting entitled here, you are: prove what you claim, or leave it as a matter of opinion. You mentioned F1 despite it having no relevance. I can't help that your technical understanding is lacking, but what I stated about "effective" TC is 100% true. You'll be telling me they didn't burn oil next...


To get to the real issue: the fact that you habitually don't use that last portion of throttle surely means you are not qualified to comment as to how different it is, be it from peripheral to peripheral, or game to game. Surely that much is obvious to you.

I'm not saying you're not entitled to your opinion, but you must recognise when it has no bearing on the lives of others who do not expect the same thing from a controller. I mean, why else would you so actively "defend" every criticism or counter-point? Other people have not experienced the same thing as you with the same peripheral in the same game - maybe that has more to do with your input habits, like I said the first time?

"Real GT3 cars"

 

[barkohba]

Some do, some don't it depends very much on the car, its audience and its purpose.


Want to know why they do that (from someone who worked for them)?

Because it makes the car exciting to drive, and the driver aids and diff take care of the fall-out from it.

"The standard throttle mapping on the majority of modern vehicles is setup to be very responsive to minor throttle input. This makes the vehicle feel more powerful as you get a sudden surge when you initially press the pedal. For general daily driving, this is a great setup and makes driving quickly almost effortless.

When you start using a vehicle on the track or for spirited driving on your favourite country roads the standard throttle mapping can become a hindrance. Add the additional power that our customers run over a stock vehicle and for some the standard throttle mapping can be oversensitive. This is where a linear throttle map is beneficial.
A linear throttle map is set up to give closer to a 1:1 ratio between the throttle angle and engine load. This gives the driver much more control as it allows for a much wider range of throttle modulation."

https://www.onlyrevo.com/blog/linear-throttle/

The reality when it comes to track and race prepped cars is that the throttle mapping will be set to match the drivers preference, weather conditions and the circuits layout. Real world mapping will also vary from gear to gear, as the simple fact that gearing multiplies torque means that aggressive maps in lower gears play havoc with your ability to pull away smoothly and softer mappings in higher gears leading to the opposite issue.



GTS's mapping however is absurdly aggressive even in comparison to real world aggressive non-linear mapping, with around 50% of the throttle in the last 20%. In reality it would result in a car that feel absurdly sluggish and slow when driving at everyday speed on the road and then bat-**** crazy at the end.

Its not however alone in that regard, as the brake progression and clutch implementation are also not without issue, with the clutch to be blunt simply being wrong in every way. It does however help address some of the issues with GTS's low speed tyre model!


I don't, iRacings tyre model has some issues to say the least


That depends on exactly what gear you are in, in reality yes it can make quite a difference in lower gear, slower corners. which is exactly why GT3 cars run TC as standard and GTE is considered tricker to drive.

I tried iRacing for am month and I find it clearly superior to GTS, which has more of a beta-type tire model, due to the obvious 2-stage model, 1 very bad mode for low speeds where it's impossible to control until you hit smth like 60-70kmh and the "normal" model kicks in.

It is true though that the model is kind of strange - the tires seem to be kind of mushy, as in there's a bigger gap between wheel input and the care actually starting to lay off the tire flex and turning, when compared to for example AC, which has a really nice tire model (probably the best in the industry) IMHO.

As far as GT3 vs GTE, as far as I know, GT3 allows for both ABS and TC, yet GTE only allows TC. In AC, I finde the Porsche GT3 (racing, not model) and Porsche RSR (GTE config) to behave the same as far as controlling the throttle with both TC on or off, however you gotta be careful with the breaking in GTE as there's no ABS.

 

[Traks1]

Good discussion here if a little unecessarily heated in places perhaps. I think we can all agree though that the GTS implementation of throttle mapping is pure **** and that it would benefit us all if it were made linear or thereabouts....correct?.

 

[Scaff]

I tried iRacing for am month and I find it clearly superior to GTS, which has more of a beta-type tire model, due to the obvious 2-stage model, 1 very bad mode for low speeds where it's impossible to control until you hit smth like 60-70kmh and the "normal" model kicks in.

It is true though that the model is kind of strange - the tires seem to be kind of mushy, as in there's a bigger gap between wheel input and the care actually starting to lay off the tire flex and turning, when compared to for example AC, which has a really nice tire model (probably the best in the industry) IMHO.

iRacing is better than GTS, that I would agree, but both are a way behind AC, PC2 and quite a few others.

As far as GT3 vs GTE, as far as I know, GT3 allows for both ABS and TC, yet GTE only allows TC. In AC, I finde the Porsche GT3 (racing, not model) and Porsche RSR (GTE config) to behave the same as far as controlling the throttle with both TC on or off, however you gotta be careful with the breaking in GTE as there's no ABS.

That's because AC doesn't have a stupidly aggressive throttle map or a messed up tyre model in the way that GTS does. Aside from that in lower gears and slower corners without TC you will most certainly have to be far smoother and gradual with throttle application than with TC.

 

[barkohba]

iRacing is better than GTS, that I would agree, but both are a way behind AC, PC2 and quite a few others.



That's because AC doesn't have a stupidly aggressive throttle map or a messed up tyre model in the way that GTS does. Aside from that in lower gears and slower corners without TC you will most certainly have to be far smoother and gradual with throttle application than with TC.

Hmm...so your impression is that PC2 has a good tire model? I've found AC to be damn near excellent, but I really don't like PC2, i feel it's very different as compared to AC. Some car are well done, some are horrible (Lamborghini Huracan ST, and a few others). I find the game sometimes brilliant, but many times i feel the physics are messed up.

I did a few comparisons between PC2, GTS and AC (only on PS4), and found that using the same setup (almost, in GTS you can adjust certain settings, AC almost the same but PC2 has a lot more options), I was able to get very similar lap times and car behavior in GTS vs AC, but PC2 behaves very differently - I find the cars are generally more grippy but inconsistent.

The most accurate (across all 3 titles) test that i've done is Nurburgring GP with a Mercedes AMG GT3 - same time, weather, temp, hard tires, setup as identical as possible given the different options available. I was able to get about 1.57.3 for the best lap on AC and GTS, but around 1.56.6 on PC2.

 

[Scaff]

Hmm...so your impression is that PC2 has a good tire model? I've found AC to be damn near excellent, but I really don't like PC2, i feel it's very different as compared to AC. Some car are well done, some are horrible (Lamborghini Huracan ST, and a few others). I find the game sometimes brilliant, but many times i feel the physics are messed up.

I did a few comparisons between PC2, GTS and AC (only on PS4), and found that using the same setup (almost, in GTS you can adjust certain settings, AC almost the same but PC2 has a lot more options), I was able to get very similar lap times and car behavior in GTS vs AC, but PC2 behaves very differently - I find the cars are generally more grippy but inconsistent.

The most accurate (across all 3 titles) test that i've done is Nurburgring GP with a Mercedes AMG GT3 - same time, weather, temp, hard tires, setup as identical as possible given the different options available. I was able to get about 1.57.3 for the best lap on AC and GTS, but around 1.56.6 on PC2.

I have to be honest GTS isn't even in the same ballpark as PC2 and AC and I find those two very, very similar.

I spent a day at MB World recently and had the chance to drive the AMG SLS (well a whole bunch of AMG actually) and then gave the same a go in all three, AC and PC2 are very close to the real thing (after you adjust the tyre pressure down and use OEM set-up), GTS feels nothing like it should at all.

To be honest the only thing that keeps me playing GTS is VR, and even that's better done (across the game) in DC and Dirt Rally.

 

[barkohba]

I have to be honest GTS isn't even in the same ballpark as PC2 and AC and I find those two very, very similar.

I spent a day at MB World recently and had the chance to drive the AMG SLS (well a whole bunch of AMG actually) and then gave the same a go in all three, AC and PC2 are very close to the real thing (after you adjust the tyre pressure down and use OEM set-up), GTS feels nothing like it should at all.

To be honest the only thing that keeps me playing GTS is VR, and even that's better done (across the game) in DC and Dirt Rally.

Well, as far as the feel of the car, FFB particularly, when I had a G29, it was crap (almost no ffb info) on GTS, and indeed, AC and PC2 felt much more similar.

But since switching to the T-GT, there's tons of road surface info, tire flex and understeer feel for GTS, and in AC it feels different, and PC2 even more different (but on both less details due to the nature of T-GT's implementation on GTS) on "raw" setting.

BTW, do you mean SLS AMG road version or GT3 race car?

 

[Scaff]

Well, as far as the feel of the car, FFB particularly, when I had a G29, it was crap (almost no ffb info) on GTS, and indeed, AC and PC2 felt much more similar.

But since switching to the T-GT, there's tons of road surface info, tire flex and understeer feel for GTS, and in AC it feels different, and PC2 even more different (but on both less details due to the nature of T-GT's implementation on GTS) on "raw" setting.

Which in GTS appear to be caned effects that only the T-GT can 'manage', none of which make the tyre model any better.

BTW, do you mean SLS AMG road version or GT3 race car?

Road car, along with (on track) an E63-4matic and C63.

I've however a fair bit of experience with road, track and race cars from a good 20 years in the motor industry.

As an example of GTs's issues going further than just the throttle, not a single one of the FWD race cars behave as they should and do in reality.

 

[barkohba]

Which in GTS appear to be caned effects that only the T-GT can 'manage', none of which make the tyre model any better.




Road car, along with (on track) an E63-4matic and C63.

I've however a fair bit of experience with road, track and race cars from a good 20 years in the motor industry.

As an example of GTs's issues going further than just the throttle, not a single one of the FWD race cars behave as they should and do in reality.

Of course it has nothing to do with the tire model - I was talking about the feel of the cars. Don't know how you got the impression that a better wheel makes for a better tire model.

But there's no SLS AMG road car in PC2. So how did you gave the car a go in all 3 games to come to your conclusion?

 

[Scaff]

But there's no SLS AMG road car in PC2. So how did you gave the car a go in all 3 games to come to your conclusion?

I used the C63 as a comparison to reality in the case of PC2.

 

[barkohba]

I used the C63 as a comparison to reality in the case of PC2.

Then again, there's no C63 in GTS. You said smth different in the initial post, that you used the SLS AMG and gave it a go in all 3 games, AC and PC2 were very similar. Besides that "plothole", SLS AMG being non-existent in PC2, thus such a comparison and conclusion being impossible, C63 is a very different car, bar the engine (I believe).

I found the AMG GT3 in AC and GTS to be far more similar in these 2 games as opposed to how it's implemented in PC2, and I had as similar experience with Mclaren 650 GT3 and Nismo GT3. When testing the lotus f1 car, i found that for some reason SMS decided to give it a 5 speed gearbox instead of 6 (AC did it right), and many other technical and graphical inconsistencies - the way the RS 01 looks in PC2 is very wrong, some cars are way too grippy and some not at all (in the same class/setting/track), etc.

Regardless, I feel we diverged too much from the main subject which is throttle implementation in GTS.

I'm waiting to the big tire model upgrade to see if anything changes - it's entirely possible the throttle mapping is done as is intentionally due to the faulty (for now temporary) tire model.

 

[Scaff]

Then again, there's no C63 in GTS. You said smth different in the initial post, that you used the SLS AMG and gave it a go in all 3 games, AC and PC2 were very similar. Besides that "plothole", SLS AMG being non-existent in PC2, thus such a comparison and conclusion being impossible, C63 is a very different car, bar the engine (I believe).

I wasn't comparing the three against each other, but each of the three against the real world version (and posting in between calls at work).

As such no 'plot hole' exists.

I'm more than happy to carry out the same degree of rather petty pickness against each and every one of your posts if you like?

I found the AMG GT3 in AC and GTS to be far more similar in these 2 games as opposed to how it's implemented in PC2, and I had as similar experience with Mclaren 650 GT3 and Nismo GT3. When testing the lotus f1 car, i found that for some reason SMS decided to give it a 5 speed gearbox instead of 6 (AC did it right), and many other technical and graphical inconsistencies - the way the RS 01 looks in PC2 is very wrong, some cars are way too grippy and some not at all (in the same class/setting/track), etc.

Regardless, I feel we diverged too much from the main subject which is throttle implementation in GTS.

And I disagree (and GTS doesn't do 'turbo lag' well at all), but back to the main topic

I'm waiting to the big tire model upgrade to see if anything changes - it's entirely possible the throttle mapping is done as is intentionally due to the faulty (for now temporary) tire model.

Temporary? Tyre model. The GT tyre model having issues has been around since day one, and we have been promised big tyre model changes in the past (across multiple releases), as such I remain very skeptical.

 

[baldeinstein]

I have been playing for months with a DS4 and wondered why it felt so different than it did in the early closed beta.
I then saw your findings on the non linear throttle.
I think this sudden rush of throttle in the last limited travel of the analogue stick is real and it has made throttle control very difficult.
A proper deadzone setting may help as well as I have lots of travel left and the throttle is already fully open.
I also believe the game has been designed to almost force people to use the driving aids.
I am on a DS4 and have after months relented and started using abs.Immediately I am more competative due to no lockups.
I also feel things like csa are hindering non users because If I get a tap from someone with it on I am always the one spinning out.
I wish they would add a purist event where all aids are off.
Regards
baldy

 

[barkohba]

I wasn't comparing the three against each other, but each of the three against the real world version (and posting in between calls at work).

As such no 'plot hole' exists.

I'm more than happy to carry out the same degree of rather petty pickness against each and every one of your posts if you like?



And I disagree (and GTS doesn't do 'turbo lag' well at all), but back to the main topic




Temporary? Tyre model. The GT tyre model having issues has been around since day one, and we have been promised big tyre model changes in the past (across multiple releases), as such I remain very skeptical.

Dude, no point in getting all salty because you probably made up a scenario where you "tested" the SLS AMG in all 3 games, only to be surprised by the fact that i also have PC2, and the SLS AMG does not exist in that game, thus basically being caught up in a lie. What makes it funnier is that you then switched narratives to "i tested out the c63 in PC2" (wut?) .

It's o funny, and a bit sad that you got so salty as to jump on my obviously subjective (as any personal observation is) of how the cars behaved when I tested them in the aforementioned sims - though I don't get your "turbo lag" remark - where in that quote from my post did I say anything about turbo lag?

And "temporary?" - yeah, when a new tire model is bound to land in the near future, a tire model which for all intents an purposes is pretty much completed since it's been used in the GTS Nurburgring World Tour Championship, it's fair to call the current one temporary. As in something temporal, not eternal. About to change. C'mon salty buddy, you know word definitions.

Chill bro ) don't get salty because I called on your obvious bs when it came to that "SLS AMG accross all 3 games" story

EDIT: I would also like to know, Salty McSalt, what you disagree with? You disagree with me sharing my opinion? You disagree with the LOTUS 98T f1 car having 6 speed (as in reality, and AC) as opposed to 5 (no accurate, PC2) ? You disagree with the weird toally inaccurate way in which the Renault RS01 GT3 car is rendered in PC2? What exactly? Or is it your feelings that got hurt and you disagree with anyone not loving PC2 and not hating GTS?

 

[Scaff]

Dude, no point in getting all salty because you probably made up a scenario where you "tested" the SLS AMG in all 3 games, only to be surprised by the fact that i also have PC2, and the SLS AMG does not exist in that game, thus basically being caught up in a lie. What makes it funnier is that you then switched narratives to "i tested out the c63 in PC2" (wut?) .

It's o funny, and a bit sad that you got so salty as to jump on my obviously subjective (as any personal observation is) of how the cars behaved when I tested them in the aforementioned sims - though I don't get your "turbo lag" remark - where in that quote from my post did I say anything about turbo lag?

I guess you missed out on the edit that listed the cars I drove on track that day (please feel free to check with any other member of staff as well - I posted about the day in the mod forums - http://www.evo.co.uk/sponsored/2131...eir-place-on-continental-s-ultimate-tyre-test).

Nothing 'salty' about it at all, but you do seem rather eager to jump on any narrative that doesn't match your own.

And "temporary?" - yeah, when a new tire model is bound to land in the near future, a tire model which for all intents an purposes is pretty much completed since it's been used in the GTS Nurburgring World Tour Championship, it's fair to call the current one temporary. As in something temporal, not eternal. About to change. C'mon salty buddy, you know word definitions.

Yes, and we have heard the claim of the 'new tyre model that will fix it' many, many times before. Hence my skepticism.

Chill bro ) don't get salty because I called on your obvious bs when it came to that "SLS AMG accross all 3 games" story

Which I have already covered, quite reasonably, but I guess your posts are all first time perfect, which is duely noted.

 

[barkohba]

I guess you missed out on the edit that listed the cars I drove on track that day (please feel free to check with any other member of staff as well - I posted about the day in the mod forums).

Nothing 'salty' about it at all, but you do seem rather eager to jump on any narrative that doesn't match your own.



Yes, and we have heard the claim of the 'new tyre model that will fix it' many, many times before. Hence my skepticism.


Which I have already covered, quite reasonably, but I guess your posts are all first time perfect, which is duely noted.

I have no interest, and no obligation to check what you have done in the past and start scraping GTP forums for your posts - fact is, you said you gave the SLS AMG a go in all 3 games, and in GTS it's very different, AC and PC2 the same. Car doesn't exist in PC2. You then switched it to C63, which besides being already besides the point, is a completely different car that in this case doesn't exist in GTS. So it's your own narrative that doesn't match your own, buddy. I didn't ask you to post that fantastical conclusion based on testing cars that don't exist within certain games. I just called out a fact. Facts don't care about your feelings, and stories, sorry.

Also, we have not been promised anything from PD regarding tyre model in GTS in the past, at least not to my knowledge and definitely nowhere in any patch notes. You can argue with me as much as you want - fact is, you can check the GTS WORLD TOUR champioship from about a month ago, and you'll find out, from the contestants themselves, that the championship used a build with a commpletely new, different, better tire model, which is bound in the near future to enter the general game.

Stay salty if you wish, mate, and hate on GTS or whatever as much as you wish. Facts are facts.

 

[Scaff]

I have no interest, and no obligation to check what you have done in the past and start scraping GTP forums for your posts - fact is, you said you gave the SLS AMG a go in all 3 games, and in GTS it's very different, AC and PC2 the same. Car doesn't exist in PC2. You then switched it to C63, which besides being already besides the point, is a completely different car that in this case doesn't exist in GTS. So it's your own narrative that doesn't match your own, buddy. I didn't ask you to post that fantastical conclusion based on testing cars that don't exist within certain games. I just called out a fact. Facts don't care about your feelings, and stories, sorry.

Already explained and ignored by you.

Also, we have not been promised anything from PD regarding tyre model in GTS in the past, at least not to my knowledge and definitely nowhere in any patch notes. You can argue with me as much as you want - fact is, you can check the GTS WORLD TOUR champioship from about a month ago, and you'll find out, from the contestants themselves, that the championship used a build with a commpletely new, different, better tire model, which is bound in the near future to enter the general game.

Which is exactly why I was clearly talking about that being across the GT series.

I said....

"The GT tyre model having issues has been around since day one, and we have been promised big tyre model changes in the past (across multiple releases)"

...note that I say GT, not GTS and say 'across multiple releases'.

Stay salty if you wish, mate, and hate on GTS or whatever as much as you wish. Facts are facts.

I don't hate GTS, I do however have an issue with those who don't see able to see the issues it has. Odd that the pattern is always the same, discussions about issues with AC/PC/PC2/Dirt/SLRE, etc, etc. are always managed with this odd 'white knighting' that occurs the moment anyone mentions an issue with the GT series (the link in my sig actually references this - the issue I have with GTS is not GTS itself, its an unfortunate part if the GT fanbase).

 

[barkohba]

Already explained and ignored by you.



Which is exactly why I was clearly talking about that being across the GT series.

I said....

"The GT tyre model having issues has been around since day one, and we have been promised big tyre model changes in the past (across multiple releases)"

...note that I say GT, not GTS and say 'across multiple releases'.



I don't hate GTS, I do however have an issue with those who don't see able to see the issues it has. Odd that the pattern is always the same, discussions about issues with AC/PC/PC2/Dirt/SLRE, etc, etc. are always managed with this odd 'white knighting' that occurs the moment anyone mentions an issue with the GT series (the link in my sig actually references this - the issue I have with GTS is not GTS itself, its an unfortunate part if the GT fanbase).

You obviously have selective understanding of what one is saying.

Firstly, this is about GTS, and my original post about a new tire model is, again, about GT-S. Not the sereis. You can refer to NFS tire models as far as I'm concerned, I care little that you want to bring the discussion to older GT games. This forum is about GTS, this thread is about GTS, my mention of a new incoming tire model is about GTS, nothing else.

Also, you can pull out the "white knighting" card as much as you want, I've criticised GTS a lot, and have a lot of gripes with it, even started a poll about fixing the horrid h-shifter/clutch implementation in GTS on this very forum. The issue is that you are at the complete opposite side of the spectrum, and while we both might agree that AC is a hell of a game, PC2 is anything but - good to horrible physics depending on car (very inconsistent), too many bugs, cars rendered physically and technically incorrect, etc. If it's odd to you that the patter is the same, well, it isn't. I think you need glasses.

 

[Scaff]

You obviously have selective understanding of what one is saying.

Not at all.

Firstly, this is about GTS, and my original post about a new tire model is, again, about GT-S. Not the sereis. You can refer to NFS tire models as far as I'm concerned, I care little that you want to bring the discussion to older GT games. This forum is about GTS, this thread is about GTS, my mention of a new incoming tire model is about GTS, nothing else.

Yo may be happy to look at it isolation, I however find it informative to look at a developers past history when it comes to updates, patches, what they do and how much they fix.

Also, you can pull out the "white knighting" card as much as you want, I've criticised GTS a lot, and have a lot of gripes with it, even started a poll about fixing the horrid h-shifter/clutch implementation in GTS on this very forum. The issue is that you are at the complete opposite side of the spectrum, and while we both might agree that AC is a hell of a game, PC2 is anything but - good to horrible physics depending on car (very inconsistent), too many bugs, cars rendered physically and technically incorrect, etc. If it's odd to you that the patter is the same, well, it isn't.

In thinking so you would be utterly incorrect.

I praised and pilloried each of the three when it appropriate (and a hell of a lot of other titles as well). I ripped apart AC's appalling AI issues at launch, its launch frame-rate and judder issues and poor UI. I'm also quite happy to point out the issues it has with physics (and they do exist). With PC2 its issues with sound (to the degree that I carried out a detailed analysis of exactly what frequency ranges it was missing in comparison to other titles and what impact that has on people with subs and tactile rigs), its utterly inconsistent AI (that changes with each patch - but never gets fixed), its tyre model issues with certain cars (the Formula C stands out as the longest running one).

I can keep going with regard to the Dirt series, the WRC series, SLRE and other Milestone products (a great example of why knowing how well a dev will support a product is vital), etc. I can keep going with regard to the trio above as well.

What frustrates me with GT and PD is that I know for a fact that they are capable of better than we have, I played the Copper Box build at the event for hours (feel free to check the post is around some place) and was extremely positive about the tyre model changes it had, all of which disappeared for the closed and open betas and the final product.

I think you need glasses.

I already have them, a nice half-rim titanium alloy pair.

 

[barkohba]

Not at all.


Yo may be happy to look at it isolation, I however find it informative to look at a developers past history when it comes to updates, patches, what they do and how much they fix.


In thinking so you would be utterly incorrect.

I praised and pilloried each of the three when it appropriate (and a hell of a lot of other titles as well). I ripped apart AC's appalling AI issues at launch, its launch frame-rate and judder issues and poor UI. I'm also quite happy to point out the issues it has with physics (and they do exist). With PC2 its issues with sound (to the degree that I carried out a detailed analysis of exactly what frequency ranges it was missing in comparison to other titles and what impact that has on people with subs and tactile rigs), its utterly inconsistent AI (that changes with each patch - but never gets fixed), its tyre model issues with certain cars (the Formula C stands out as the longest running one).

I can keep going with regard to the Dirt series, the WRC series, SLRE and other Milestone products (a great example of why knowing how well a dev will support a product is vital), etc. I can keep going with regard to the trio above as well.

What frustrates me with GT and PD is that I know for a fact that they are capable of better than we have, I played the Copper Box build at the event for hours (feel free to check the post is around some place) and was extremely positive about the tyre model changes it had, all of which disappeared for the closed and open betas and the final product.


I already have them, a nice half-rim titanium alloy pair.

Agreed, mostly. I mean, besides iRacing (which I no longer play, because the business model is appaling and makes no sense in today's market), I'm exclusively a ps4 sim gamer.

I've tried out almost everything available - Dirt 4, F1 2017, WRC 7, AC, PC2, GTS, Drive Club.

Out of those, I felt that wasted money was definitely Dirt 4, and somewhat PC2, but I loved and played the crap out of the rest. WRC 7 is excellent, from my point of view, in terms of how Rally sim physics should be (too bad about the low frame rate).

GTS is indeed, in many senses, a product riddled with odd decisions. We're talking about a game with rich DNA, amazing graphics, super prezentation, (as of now) solid car-roster, especially when it comes to GT4/3 classes, the best online experience I've experienced for a racing game (and this is the reason why I spent the vast majoirty of my sim racing time on the game, and I'm loving it). At the same time it has somewhat lackluster physics in certain areas, and very good in others. Very good suspension modeling and weight transfer, mediocre tyre physics, bad break peddal mapping especially when racing w/o ABS (it improved for me when switching to the T-GT, but still not AC level), and basically bugged-out H-Shifter implementation (and clutch), but one of the best pit-system implementation (this is one area where PC2 is appaling from my point of view).

Then there's also the rim setup implementation. On one side, it's a shame that much of the feeling is nixed from basically any other wheel than the T-GT. On the other, the T-GT in GTS is amazing. This is probably the first product I ever bought where I thought I will be underwhelmed, but when I tried it in GTS i was completely overwhelemed by the great FFB experience, and that transducer translates in such a wide variety of subtle and strong road detail vibration in the wheel, it basically transforemd GTS into something much better for me.

The biggest issue is that these issues are present in a game that is made by a very experienced team, which as huge ties to a lot of motorsport teams and leagues, and whose president is an actual race driver who participated multiple times with very good results in the 24 H VLN Nurburgring race (for Lexus and BMW), and has very very close ties with races and staff in other leagues, like Super GT, F1, Nismo team, Gazoo Racing, BMW, etc etc.

When you take these things into consideration, indeed, GTS's problems should be criticised more than the average games because theoretically there shouldn't be any excuses.

But I'm optimistic, and not unpleased by the game. A new tire model, which will address (possibly) a LOT of it's issues, is incoming ; the lackluster (still) track list is slowly but surely being addressed (Monza, La Sarthe), we've received a ton of free cars already, many of them very well made, constant updates and adjustments to the online system, and the online systems itself which makes me want to play this game and enjoy it way more than AC for instance, even though I know for a fact AC is more realistic.

I have faith in PD. Up until now, in the GT 5 and GT 6 days (on ps4, of course), the competition (and criticism as a result) were not so tough. Right now, with so many stellar sims with very good "next gen" realistic physics, they're feeling the pressure, and as their raison d'etre is to make "The REAL Racing Simulator" and be competitive from a business perspective on this niche market, they will continualy improve it. I believe.

 

[Scaff]

Agreed, mostly. I mean, besides iRacing (which I no longer play, because the business model is appaling and makes no sense in today's market), I'm exclusively a ps4 sim gamer.

I've tried out almost everything available - Dirt 4, F1 2017, WRC 7, AC, PC2, GTS, Drive Club.

Out of those, I felt that wasted money was definitely Dirt 4, and somewhat PC2, but I loved and played the crap out of the rest. WRC 7 is excellent, from my point of view, in terms of how Rally sim physics should be (too bad about the low frame rate).

GTS is indeed, in many senses, a product riddled with odd decisions. We're talking about a game with rich DNA, amazing graphics, super prezentation, (as of now) solid car-roster, especially when it comes to GT4/3 classes, the best online experience I've experienced for a racing game (and this is the reason why I spent the vast majoirty of my sim racing time on the game, and I'm loving it). At the same time it has somewhat lackluster physics in certain areas, and very good in others. Very good suspension modeling and weight transfer, mediocre tyre physics, bad break peddal mapping especially when racing w/o ABS (it improved for me when switching to the T-GT, but still not AC level), and basically bugged-out H-Shifter implementation (and clutch), but one of the best pit-system implementation (this is one area where PC2 is appaling from my point of view).

Then there's also the rim setup implementation. On one side, it's a shame that much of the feeling is nixed from basically any other wheel than the T-GT. On the other, the T-GT in GTS is amazing. This is probably the first product I ever bought where I thought I will be underwhelmed, but when I tried it in GTS i was completely overwhelemed by the great FFB experience, and that transducer translates in such a wide variety of subtle and strong road detail vibration in the wheel, it basically transforemd GTS into something much better for me.

The biggest issue is that these issues are present in a game that is made by a very experienced team, which as huge ties to a lot of motorsport teams and leagues, and whose president is an actual race driver who participated multiple times with very good results in the 24 H VLN Nurburgring race (for Lexus and BMW), and has very very close ties with races and staff in other leagues, like Super GT, F1, Nismo team, Gazoo Racing, BMW, etc etc.

When you take these things into consideration, indeed, GTS's problems should be criticised more than the average games because theoretically there shouldn't be any excuses.

But I'm optimistic, and not unpleased by the game. A new tire model, which will address (possibly) a LOT of it's issues, is incoming ; the lackluster (still) track list is slowly but surely being addressed (Monza, La Sarthe), we've received a ton of free cars already, many of them very well made, constant updates and adjustments to the online system, and the online systems itself which makes me want to play this game and enjoy it way more than AC for instance, even though I know for a fact AC is more realistic.

I have faith in PD. Up until now, in the GT 5 and GT 6 days (on ps4, of course), the competition (and criticism as a result) were not so tough. Right now, with so many stellar sims with very good "next gen" realistic physics, they're feeling the pressure, and as their raison d'etre is to make "The REAL Racing Simulator" and be competitive from a business perspective on this niche market, they will continualy improve it. I believe.

I would agree with most of what you mention here, with the exception of:

Pit entry system: I personally can't stand the GTS teleport to the box system, and actually really like (with one issue) the PC2 system when you run fully manual. I have an option on my button box to Pit Stop request, pit speed limiter on the wheel rim and then to have to manually hit your marks in the box just does it for me every time. The only area of it I don;t like is the unnecessarily complex system for setting up the pit stop changes themselves.

I can fully understand the love for the T-GT as well, but I shouldn't have t spend that much on a rim to get that detail out of GTS, particularity when I can get it out of every other title with my existing T300.

I also can't agree that the GTS suspension model is very good either, as the damper model is practically unchanged from GT6 and still suffers from being hideously over-damped, something that can most clearly be seen and felt on the older and rally cars. It has an impact on the weight transfer model as well, which can most clearly been seen on the FWD cars, the race variants of which do not drive or behave as they should at all.

I agree that what GTS excels at is the visual and presentation side of things, and that's to a large degree why its sells so damn well, its a constant and safe option in that regard. Its also why I also fear we will never get a really good, accurate physics model as well. as the 'lite' approach appeals to a far greater audience.

BTW - I would suggest Seb Loeb Rally Evo if you get a chance (not the demo - that sucks), as the fully patched title has the best rally physics (particularly on ice, snow and gravel) of any title on the PS4. Its just a sham eit looks and sounds nasty, but get past that and its stunning, with great stages taken from GTS and videos of the real ones.

 

[Kano Manel]

you all have too much time to spare... O_o

very interesting to see that people expend time researching about a messed up non-linear throttle map... that everybody knows is a messed up non-linear throttle map. Don't you ever consider there are better things to do? like playing the game for instance? or taking your girl/boy out for a drink? Just my 2 pennies. (very informative anyways)

 

[OutlawQuadrnt]

you all have too much time to spare... O_o

very interesting to see that people expend time researching about a messed up non-linear throttle map... that everybody knows is a messed up non-linear throttle map. Don't you ever consider there are better things to do? like playing the game for instance? or taking your girl/boy out for a drink? Just my 2 pennies. (very informative anyways)

At least on my end, the people I've informed for the most part had no idea about the mapping. Only that something was "off" in the game. The ultimate goal is to make enough noise that it will be addressed in some way. Otherwise, having knowledge means figuring out how to best adjust. I've gotten faster with what I know now but it remains hard to override years of muscle memory, though.

 

[winet]

I don't, iRacings tyre model has some issues to say the least

That's an understatement. Was a member since the beta days and after who knows how many new tire models it is still very icy feeling. I do envy the track selection.