|
Post by Renegade1911 on Jun 21, 2015 19:30:56 GMT
Just my opinion but I think it's confirmation bias, if you go testing long enough with a goal in mind, you'll eventually focus on everything that confirms what you're trying to prove. Fair point. Though as I mentioned about my testing I couldnt tell if the different spoilers on the Comet made any difference or if whatever difference I noticed is placebo/human error. It is very much a thing on the Feltzer though. I've been rocking the GT Wing park bench since day 1 and during my test runs with that car I figured out why it oversteers as often as it does, and likewise why the rear soaks bumps so well. Like I believe Clarkson said on Top Gear about Porsche being rear-engined "It's like throwing a sledgehammer with the handle first". Meaning that you get tons of understeer and then BAM oversteer bonanza. Incidentally I have always used the small spoilers on cars apart from the Feltzer, so these differences never occured to me until someone suggested it and I went to test for it. On cars with stiff suspension, use whatever I suppose. On cars with soft suspension, definitly check it out. Even on pretty rigid cars you might still notice a difference, though. This stuff is insignificant until you want to get the most out of all your cars wherever possible. Want to tweak a car towards understeer or not? Want a car to be loose or firm around corners? Want to feel every bump or coast over it all? People that want to fine tune their cars to this level will be interested in finding this stuff, and I'm certainly one of them. "But why would Rockstar ever put this effort into different spoilers?" etc. etc. Well, they did it to the different wheel types, didnt they? Who's to say they didnt make subtle, yet noticable, differences to other things?
If someone suggests that "this" or "that" makes a difference and it sounds like a plausible theory that has yet to be tested, I'm not the kind of person to turn down their ideas unless I have already found out what's going on before hand. The reason I found the spoiler theory plausible was because of the fact that the hitbox of the car changes. That's our first indicator that it has a physical effect, so why not delve as deep as possible into it and see if anything more is going on? I have done enough testing to be 100% sure it is a thing, so I'll leave the rest up to you guys, the community, to play around with the ideas and findings. Note: I know that I'm using wrong terminology about spoilers in my first post summary. The correct explanation would be a weight shift, not grip balance. But I figured that would make more sense to people less familiar with the terms used. It's a very common thing in modern physics engines to evaluate the volume size and mass of an object and approximate a correct Center of Mass. Since the CoM is specificed in the handling data, testing would point out that this weight shift is done right after loading the handling data. I don't think they did. It is my firm belief that most of the stuff we had to discover and have to deal with (curb boosting, hyper starts, double clutching, wheels, spoilers, etc.) are byproduct of the way the game engine works. On the contrary, if R* would actually put thought into these tiny details, they'd change them, or negate them altogether. I don't think they want curb boosting or offroad wheels being preferable any more than we do. It's just the way it is and it would be too difficult to change these things to our liking.
|
|
|
Post by CHILLI on Jun 23, 2015 6:11:10 GMT
It's possible that the different wheel types' ability to go over bumps is just a biproduct of the new suspension system in the game. But the fact that the cornering abilities differ between types doesnt happen by random chance, that sort of stuff has to be added on purpose. The way spoilers affect the handling is indeed a biproduct of how it approximates mass distribution and is very common in modern physics engines (PhysX used in, for example, Unity and Unreal Engine behaves the same way if you try to attach several "colliders" to the same "rigidbody" object). And if what modders claim to have found out is true, RAGE uses Bullet Physics Library, so the source isnt even their own. Just like how they used the Renderware engine for all 3-era games, but stitched together various libraries to form RAGE. (To my knowledge RAGE consists of, since GTA V, Bullet PB, Bink, Autodesk Scaleform, Nvidia Gameworks, Naturalmotion Euphoria and maybe Dolby Digital audio. The only thing that's really their own is the rendering pipeline and the core of the engine itself that's taking care of garbage collection, events, AI, streaming and other various logic). And who's to say that they didnt leave curb/bump boosting in on purpose (it's not a bug, it's now a feature scenario)? Since it was a thing in GTA IV maybe they even went ahead and made it a proper feature, a bit like how the devs for Street Fighter (scroll down to "Animation Cancelling") purposely leave in certain bugs because it allows the games to become more competitive as a large portion of the players have learned those moves. Yes I know GTA is mainly aimed at the casual majority and doesnt put all of their focus into making a balanced game for competitive gaming, but that doesnt mean they wont leave or even add little things like these. I'm pretty sure the whole "air control" thing for cars started off as a bug when they tried to add proper support for planes, helicopters and bikes, but decided to leave it in (GTA SA had different button combos for pulling off different aerial movements with cars) and later to make it an official feature (GTA V). Learning what I called the "burnout trick" in my original post can actually save you from completely spinning out so you wont have to come to a complete stop before going in the right direction again. Bug? I highly doubt it since it was really strong in GTA IV and in GTA V you can even spin out FWD cars without pulling the handbrake.
Sorry if this was a bit rambly, but please consider what I said above before ruling things out or making assumptions about "this" or "that". None of us here work for Rockstar, and in the case of anyone doing so I doubt they're allowed to reveal it to the public (NDAs and all that fun stuff related to contracts), so we'll simply never know what their intentions were. Everything in games, heck even software in general, has to be coded in and added one by one, piece by piece. Things like the steering response of different suspension upgrades and turning behaviour of different wheel types rarely ever happen by random chance. Lastly I want to point out that I'm saying this from both personal experience with coding aswell as what I've read about other games on the net. This is all I know, at this point my skillset/education is so limited to games that I'd be struggling to even get hired as a janitor if I went looking for another kind of job. Knowing that I'm saying this to hundreds of people that have never met me and probably never will, I'll let you believe what you will. I'm merely trying convey my findings in such a way that it doesnt sound like I'm using fancy terms and talking out of my @$$ just because I can.
|
|
Xepy★̅
Member
Nah.
Posts: 624
Registered on: April 2015
|
Post by Xepy★̅ on Jun 24, 2015 5:34:59 GMT
So I was doing a bit of practice with the Turismo for the F1 event and since the race is conviently placed beside a mod shop, I tested my options. And I can definitely say there is a difference with spoilers and wheels. I was getting a rather consistent lap times with my GT wing/ tuner setup, so I basically got the lines down for the track. Went switched over to a carbon/highend setup because why not, does it really matter? Now, rather its placebo or not I won't even know, but testing this back to back to back I noticed a significant increase in understeer with the carbon wing. It was a huge difference, so much following the race line I've used before would throw me off the track on every exit. So I switched back to the GT wing. With the highends, I found I slid a bit more than with tuners. Now, I don't know if I was subconciously pushing the car harder around the corners, but one thing I did notice was that the highends had a longer "traction loss sound" when I did a mid-drive speed boost. Wheels shouldn't affect traction, but I don't know, that's what I felt and heard.
I switched back to tuners later and went back to doing the laptimes I was doing before I switched around the parts. And that's the important part that convinces me that there are differences here. But I will say, unless you're really pushing the car, none of this stuff even matters. And chances are, the combonation you have now no matter what it is will likely be better than a new combonation of parts simply because you have gotten used to it. But for those who want to tweak every last detail, yes, it does make a difference. But I suppose this stuff is like talking about VR: unless you experience it, words can only do so much.
|
|
|
Post by CHILLI on Jun 24, 2015 15:53:33 GMT
Now, I don't know if I was subconciously pushing the car harder around the corners, but one thing I did notice was that the highends had a longer "traction loss sound" when I did a mid-drive speed boost. Wheels shouldn't affect traction, but I don't know, that's what I felt and heard. Interesting thought... In Broughy's mythbusting/testing he only tried full throttle from a standstill. Taking a look at the handling file data, all cars have a "low speed traction" setting used to create that fancy burnout (and get your car stuck in silly places) when starting from a stop. What if this lo-speed traction overrides everything else until you've got some speed? That would explain why Broughy didnt see any difference between different types in a straight line, because if I recall correctly he only checked how long the skidmarks were. Now the question is how to test for it... A braking test perhaps? But that might be too hard to "measure" as the cars dont leave any skidmarks from braking (locking the wheels with the handbrake will default it to the base traction value so it wont stop any faster), so it'll be very difficult to compare distances. Has anyone got any ideas? My take on this is that we'd need to test braking and listen for when the skid sound starts and pray that we get the braking vs speed right. Curse you, human error!
|
|
Dim
Member
They don't think the universe be like it is, but it do. -Black science man
Posts: 736
Registered on: March 2015
|
Post by Dim on Jun 24, 2015 15:56:30 GMT
Now, I don't know if I was subconciously pushing the car harder around the corners, but one thing I did notice was that the highends had a longer "traction loss sound" when I did a mid-drive speed boost. Wheels shouldn't affect traction, but I don't know, that's what I felt and heard. Interesting thought... In Broughy's mythbusting/testing he only tried full throttle from a standstill. Taking a look at the handling file data, all cars have a "low speed traction" setting used to create that fancy burnout (and get your car stuck in silly places) when starting from a stop. What if this lo-speed traction overrides everything else until you've got some speed? That would explain why Broughy didnt see any difference between different types in a straight line, because if I recall correctly he only checked how long the skidmarks were. Now the question is how to test for it... A braking test perhaps? But that might be too hard to "measure" as the cars dont leave any skidmarks from braking (locking the wheels with the handbrake will default it to the base traction value so it wont stop any faster), so it'll be very difficult to compare distances. Has anyone got any ideas? My take on this is that we'd need to test braking and listen for when the skid sound starts and pray that we get the braking vs speed right. Curse you, human error! Record it on video, take time to brake starting from when braking lighst come on to full stop
|
|
rcracer11m
Member
You've gotta laugh, otherwise you'd cry
Posts: 1,053
Registered on: October 2014
|
Post by rcracer11m on Jun 25, 2015 0:33:15 GMT
Now, I don't know if I was subconciously pushing the car harder around the corners, but one thing I did notice was that the highends had a longer "traction loss sound" when I did a mid-drive speed boost. Wheels shouldn't affect traction, but I don't know, that's what I felt and heard. Interesting thought... In Broughy's mythbusting/testing he only tried full throttle from a standstill. Taking a look at the handling file data, all cars have a "low speed traction" setting used to create that fancy burnout (and get your car stuck in silly places) when starting from a stop. What if this lo-speed traction overrides everything else until you've got some speed? That would explain why Broughy didnt see any difference between different types in a straight line, because if I recall correctly he only checked how long the skidmarks were. Now the question is how to test for it... A braking test perhaps? But that might be too hard to "measure" as the cars dont leave any skidmarks from braking (locking the wheels with the handbrake will default it to the base traction value so it wont stop any faster), so it'll be very difficult to compare distances. Has anyone got any ideas? My take on this is that we'd need to test braking and listen for when the skid sound starts and pray that we get the braking vs speed right. Curse you, human error! Would it work if you used a car that didn't have abs such as the slamvan rat truck or others.
|
|
|
Post by tjezc☻ on Jun 25, 2015 7:04:31 GMT
Now, I don't know if I was subconciously pushing the car harder around the corners, but one thing I did notice was that the highends had a longer "traction loss sound" when I did a mid-drive speed boost. Wheels shouldn't affect traction, but I don't know, that's what I felt and heard. Interesting thought... In Broughy's mythbusting/testing he only tried full throttle from a standstill. Taking a look at the handling file data, all cars have a "low speed traction" setting used to create that fancy burnout (and get your car stuck in silly places) when starting from a stop. What if this lo-speed traction overrides everything else until you've got some speed? That would explain why Broughy didnt see any difference between different types in a straight line, because if I recall correctly he only checked how long the skidmarks were. Now the question is how to test for it... A braking test perhaps? But that might be too hard to "measure" as the cars dont leave any skidmarks from braking (locking the wheels with the handbrake will default it to the base traction value so it wont stop any faster), so it'll be very difficult to compare distances. Has anyone got any ideas? My take on this is that we'd need to test braking and listen for when the skid sound starts and pray that we get the braking vs speed right. Curse you, human error! I have experienced the low speed traction thing several times. When doing a stickybomb start, slamming throttle will often make you burnout a little. By gently pressing throttle first you get the car moving and when you apply full throttle once that happens, you get a lot more traction and shoot off quicker than the people who just slam dunk the throttle from standing still. I must state I haven't tested this explicitly, but every time I use it, it works and I start off with (a lot) more speed than others. You can also notice it when driving a car up steep cliffs. If you have momentum while coming up, you can come a long way on a very steep slope. But when you have come to a stop, cars will struggle for traction. To get it back, you can gently apply throttle so you won't get wheelspin. Then you can move slightly faster and get going again. Of course you will need a car with enough torque for this. Ever tried driving the Elegy/Zentorno up the steepest hill you can find? Those things almost manage a 90 degree slope Not really sure how this is relevant tho...
|
|
|
Post by CHILLI on Jun 26, 2015 19:45:36 GMT
Dim & rcracer11m I get what you two are suggesting, but the reason I'm feeling that testing this would be too difficult is because of what you mentioned. Record each test and compare footage, so far so good. But then the problem is to consistently brake enough to make full use of the traction but also not brake so much that the ABS kicks in (and locking the wheels is no good because that will default to the base traction as I mentioned earlier). The reason the ABS must not kick in is because then the wheels alternate between locked and rolling, so it would be about the same as braking very lightly and of course locking the wheels or going beyond the traction abilities. The whole point of a test like this is to see where this limit is, so mashing the brakes wont do any good. Also I'm a bit of a lazy person when it comes to video editing and such so I'd rather not do that...
tjezc☻ I think what you're saying is still relevant to this thread as it's intended to cover as much of the game as possible, not necessarily only the driving. So any findings are valuable. I have experienced the exact same thing as you're saying though, that's what I meant by "getting stuck in silly places" where the wheels just barely have too little grip to move the car, even though it should do so with ease under any other circumstances.
On the note of ABS: During the Daily Playlist (PC) earlier we did a few races in the rain, one of which was with compacts so I decided to go with my Panto. When braking hard in the rain you can both see and hear your wheels alternating between a skid and a roll. Braking just under the traction limits prevents the wheels from locking and the car was slowing down way faster than if you'd brake fully, which is why I'm saying that we want precise values for how much you can brake with each wheel type and perhaps a set of graphs to illustrate the traction loss based on speed.
I quite honestly feel like going this far into it is a little too much for me, simply because I have no set braking points for any track. Whatever vehicle I'm using, whatever track I'm on and whatever the current weather is I rarely ever try to brake at the same points twice. Instead I get a feel for how the vehicle at hand behaves at said moment and try to give it as good guesstimates as I can. "I start braking at the green pole and this manhole" alright, cool. But it's a bit too "rigged" for my liking, I'd rather not think about what I'm doing. In my opinion it's better to keep an eye on the road ahead and figure out where I want to position my car before the next turn and how I'll get out of the turn. This helps me in emergency situations aswell as battles where optimal racing lines go straight out the window and can not be relied on anymore. Side trading, when two drivers switch what side of the road they're on through a turn, completely go against the optimal line. Instead it creates two alternate lines just for the sake of keeping the battle and, most importantly, both drivers moving. But racecraft techniques dont belong here so I'll stop right here before this gets out of hand. There are other threads on this forum for this sort of talk, so go there instead please. Note that I'm saying "I" very often here. This is how I go about it all and I find that this works best for me. So I'm not saying that those of you that want exact data for some of this stuff is doing it wrong, I personally feel that driving based on set indicators is just going to cause problems in the long run.
|
|
Dim
Member
They don't think the universe be like it is, but it do. -Black science man
Posts: 736
Registered on: March 2015
|
Post by Dim on Jun 26, 2015 20:17:00 GMT
It may be possible to write a program that emulates the same button presses every time you run it, but that would take a long time to do
|
|
|
Post by tjezc☻ on Jun 27, 2015 15:50:28 GMT
It may be possible to write a program that emulates the same button presses every time you run it, but that would take a long time to do For PC, that shouldn't be too hard as you don't have to interact with the game itself, right? You just have to access the controller/keyboard/mouse/-input- interfaces?
|
|
Dim
Member
They don't think the universe be like it is, but it do. -Black science man
Posts: 736
Registered on: March 2015
|
Post by Dim on Jun 27, 2015 15:53:19 GMT
It may be possible to write a program that emulates the same button presses every time you run it, but that would take a long time to do For PC, that shouldn't be too hard as you don't have to interact with the game itself, right? You just have to access the controller/keyboard/mouse/-input- interfaces? Yup, but i'm not sure how to do it, i ain't no expert
|
|
|
Post by tjezc☻ on Jun 27, 2015 16:05:09 GMT
For PC, that shouldn't be too hard as you don't have to interact with the game itself, right? You just have to access the controller/keyboard/mouse/-input- interfaces? Yup, but i'm not sure how to do it, i ain't no expert No clue either, and I should be the expert :$
|
|
haydugjr
Member
Posts: 359
Registered on: March 2014
|
Post by haydugjr on Jun 28, 2015 14:31:07 GMT
Someone download a macro program. Make a race where after X seconds (preferably at a high speed) you turn 90 degrees onto another road. I'm thinking up by that bridge near the military base. Use the macro program to Hold W indefinitely and pres A or D after X seconds. Always starting from the same point, always turning at the same time and same amount because you're using a button. Edit: for anyone with basic coding experience: www.autohotkey.com/
|
|
konchy
Member
Posts: 8
Registered on: June 2015
|
Post by konchy on Jul 1, 2015 15:09:46 GMT
Over these past few days, I did many multiple laps of LotheronPrime's Rockford Flyby with the Jester Racecar. I tried a few different wheels to compare how they feel against each other.
From the most grip to least grip, this is what I found: Muscle > Offroad > Low Rider > Tuner > Stock
I did not test the other tires. The tires with the most grip very rarely spins out but also suffers from more understeer. Whereas the tires with the least grip gives the car more oversteer but can spin out more easily when going over bumps/uneven terrain.
As to which wheel is the best, it mostly depends on your driving style and as to whether you prefer oversteer or understeer.
Please note that this is just purely subjective speculation. Your own results may vary
|
|
|
Post by OverdrivePedal on Sept 17, 2015 12:35:50 GMT
As a newcomer, reading all of this in one take (and also in the working hours) probably made me miss some parts. But from what I get, as you apply more pressure to the suspensions, higher boost it gets, hence the kerb boosting. I have two questions with that:
1) does doing "invisible" wheelie on cars all the time, be it forward or backwars depending on the WD and track (apart from going in ramps that requires a different air control) apply this pressure too? So we get a slight boost all the time? Or is that a completely non physical move?
2) does a car getting heavier affects the pressure on the suspensions? if heavier spoiler affects the CoM (feltzer example), do they also apply weight; pressure the suspensions for the said boost? Probably it only recalculates CoM, though no bad in asking.
|
|