Gran Turismo 7 Will Feature Most Extensive Tuning Mode in Series

This thread is very funny becuase most of the responses here appear to be unaware that outside of the pc sim racing community, "tuning" in reference to racing games means upgrading and car modification and not adjusting setups the way we use it.

So yes, GT7 will feature a very extensive tuning system, because the overwhelming majority of racing sims don't feature any tuning (rfactor is literally the only relevant sim which even has the option to begin with and basically nothing outside of the default content actually utilized that feature) so the game will be above them in that regard.


Also, GT has always had setup tuning in the sense that pc simmers use the term anyway lol

Richard Wilks said:

You basically proved my point. Who wants something serious, rfPro.

The rest, use the best toys they can get, that you named yourself, and i dare to say is for sure mainly to just get a basic understanding of driving around the track and setup.

Click to expand...

you don't understand how it all works. teams don't boot the sim on one pc as you do at home, they have one pc managing suspension physics, another does tyres, another one does engine and so on. they run heavily modified versions of the physics for the specific car they run, mainly because they have the real data to put in the physics engine that usually are missing, for obvious reasons, in commercial versions of yhr sim, and they have other pcs that runs telemetry. but all of that runs on the basic core of rf1, rf2, ac pro and so on. the only thing those systems have in common with the version of the sim you run at home are the ui and the graphics, stop. rf pro is only used in the automotive industry, road legal cars.

SuperMonacoGP said:

you don't understand how it all works. teams don't boot the sim on one pc as you do at home, they have one pc managing suspension physics, another does tyres, another one does engine and so on. they run heavily modified versions of the physics for the specific car they run, mainly because they have the real data to put in the physics engine that usually are missing, for obvious reasons, in commercial versions of yhr sim, and they have other pcs that runs telemetry. but all of that runs on the basic core of rf1, rf2, ac pro and so on. the only thing those systems have in common with the version of the sim you run at home are the ui and the graphics, stop. rf pro is only used in the automotive industry, road legal cars.

Click to expand...

No you are the one who doesn't understand.

Unless they have either a) a version of said software that they can do that, or b) the source code of said software, they can't do what you describe.

Its not the Data. Teams change a lot more than that, F1 teams that is, they have their own tire models programmed, and a lot more stuff. rfPro allows that modularity, of pluging in their own routines and implementations. AC rf1 and rf2 don't. They allow at best some channels you can source telemetry from, and of course, the "modding" aspect we have at home.

So no, teams USE rfPro, and rfPro and what the teams have is a totally different ball game from the toys we play with.

Richard Wilks said:

No you are the one who doesn't understand.

Unless they have either a) a version of said software that they can do that, or b) the source code of said software, they can't do what you describe.

Its not the Data. Teams change a lot more than that, F1 teams that is, they have their own tire models programmed, and a lot more stuff. rfPro allows that modularity, of pluging in their own routines and implementations. AC rf1 and rf2 don't. They allow at best some channels you can source telemetry from, and of course, the "modding" aspect we have at home.

So no, teams USE rfPro, and rfPro and what the teams have is a totally different ball game from the toys we play with.

Click to expand...

dude, whatever suits your idea of how racing teams train. you surely know better than Aris Vasilakos, who explained what I just said to you, but hey, what does he know right.

SuperMonacoGP said:

dude, whatever suits your idea of how racing teams train. you surely know better than Aris Vasilakos, who explained what I just said to you, but hey, what does he know right.

Click to expand...

Yes Aris Vasilakos, the man who once insisted the mazda RX7 FD could actively turn it's rear wheels, then backtracked when was proven wrong, and who made a comedy of errors in much of the vanilla AC content, to the point that in this very website we have patches to fix his work.

Indeed, what does he know...

And like he wouldn't say anything to boost his game's "creed". Who has an agenda, me, who has no vested interest in any game's success, or one of the key players in one of these games...

Richard Wilks said:

Yes Aris Vasilakos, the man who once insisted the mazda RX7 FD could actively turn it's rear wheels, then backtracked when was proven wrong, and who made a comedy of errors in much of the vanilla AC content, to the point that in this very website we have patches to fix his work.

Indeed, what does he know...

And like he wouldn't say anything to boost his game's "creed". Who has an agenda, me, who has no vested interest in any game's success, or one of the key players in one of these games...

Click to expand...

...ok

Richard Wilks said:

No you are the one who doesn't understand.

Unless they have either a) a version of said software that they can do that, or b) the source code of said software, they can't do what you describe.

Its not the Data. Teams change a lot more than that, F1 teams that is, they have their own tire models programmed, and a lot more stuff. rfPro allows that modularity, of pluging in their own routines and implementations. AC rf1 and rf2 don't. They allow at best some channels you can source telemetry from, and of course, the "modding" aspect we have at home.

So no, teams USE rfPro, and rfPro and what the teams have is a totally different ball game from the toys we play with.

Click to expand...

Not to mention that RPG elements in racing games are pretty much used in Simcades and arcade-style racing games these days (The players use their virtual money to buy cars, upgrades, etc).

The last sim racing game to have an RPG element that I've known is GT Legends by Simbin.

As far as GT Sport with a wheel goes compared to Forza 7, it's miles ahead Forza 7 but its also miles behind the usual suspects in the PC sim market. Which means Forza 7 is literally garbage with wheel for me. Heck, at times i actually thought that the Forza Horizon game with everything put on 'simulation' drives much more believable than Motorsport.
Anyways, as far as GT7 goes, i do hope they will up their game in terms of wheel gameplay because i am quite sure the new Forza Motorsport will. Will GT7 or the new FM come close to the current leaders in the PC sim market? Most certainly not. But i still hope they will make a leap forward from the current version of their games.
Also, am i the only one a bit gutted about the fact that GT7 will not have a 120fps performance mode on PS5? After Kaz saying a few years ago that he actually wants to up the framerate for next gen games i was hoping he meant his own....
I feel like the 10TF on the PS5 could easily handle the visuals i have seen from GT7 at 1440p/120 while having also a quality mode 4k/60 as its basically only an iteration of the GT Sport visuals, its absolutely the same engine and from the latest tracks video with Kaz you can see at times how incredibly low-details those tracks and textures look if you pause the replay snippets.

SuperMonacoGP said:

you don't understand how it all works. teams don't boot the sim on one pc as you do at home, they have one pc managing suspension physics, another does tyres, another one does engine and so on. they run heavily modified versions of the physics for the specific car they run, mainly because they have the real data to put in the physics engine that usually are missing, for obvious reasons, in commercial versions of yhr sim, and they have other pcs that runs telemetry. but all of that runs on the basic core of rf1, rf2, ac pro and so on. the only thing those systems have in common with the version of the sim you run at home are the ui and the graphics, stop. rf pro is only used in the automotive industry, road legal cars.

Click to expand...

Literally where are you getting this stuff from?

Yes some clients use rF/ACPro to plug their Pacejka stuff in directly or whatever (And it's pretty awful and not representative from what I've seen, but I don't really know), however I'm gonna like a source for where you saw a team or OEM using a realtime sim running multiple processors which all handle one aspect of the physics. Like do you think they do realtime FEA or CFD or something?

From what I understand only a few of the very top OEM racing teams have anything even remotely resembling this kind of fantasy super sim that people think they do have. Most teams frankly don't have a super incredible model and they definitely don't input in "data directly" or whatever people think is done.

Most that I know of run rFPro or ACPro with their own model hooked in. I don't think most teams even have a big hall with a motion sim and a half cockpit, from what I've seen most guys just train on a personal setup with a Fanatec wheel or nowadays DD. Up to them if they use triples or VR.

Obviously the richer OEM teams have a motion sim half cockpit setup with projectors and probably? a very good model running, but I dunno where the idea came from that this is standard and all teams do that.

I don't have personal experience working in automotive so maybe I'm wrong, but I've literally never heard of this from anyone. Did you work at Toyota doing simdev or something or are you actually just making it up?

Kyuubeey said:

So the teams just hire some guy to make a model of the car on the consumer sim's physics? No changes whatsoever?

Click to expand...

Yep, tweaking the numbers untill they are good enough to come really close to the real thing.
Don't underestimate the power of the current sims.
It's physics calculations. Enter the right values and you mostly get the right output.
100+1-3+12 is the same result on a supercomputer as on a calculator.
But most simming is done to master the (unknown) tracks, getting all the braking points right.
To make a basic setup for when they go to the track.
To make sure the track they test on is as close to the current state of the track they can expect a week later in real life.
Running a system with supercomputer behind it is extremly more expensive.
You also need to obtain and enter and propely manage all that data.
Ever seen a regular racing car running around with visflow paint or windspeed sensor cages on their car?

RichardHessels said:

Yep, tweaking the numbers untill they are good enough to come really close to the real thing.
Don't underestimate the power of the current sims.
It's physics calculations. Enter the right values and you mostly get the right output.
100+1-3+12 is the same result on a supercomputer as on a calculator.
But most simming is done to master the (unknown) tracks, getting all the braking points right.
To make a basic setup for when they go to the track.
To make sure the track the test on is as close to the current state of the track they can expect a week later in real life.
Running a system with supercomputer behind it is extremly more expensive.
You also need to obtain and enter that data.
Ever seen a regular racing car running around with visflow paint or windspeed sensor cages on their car?

Click to expand...

I was under the impression that most competent professional guys plug their own model in.

If you can give me names and examples of a high-level joint using standard videogame physics then I'm extremely curious to know who those are for future reference. I've heard of it being done but I was always under the impression it's not that common in high level motorsports.

Kyuubeey said:

I was under the impression that most competent professional guys plug their own model in.

If you can give me names and examples of a high-level joint using standard videogame physics then I'm extremely curious to know who those are for future reference. I've heard of it being done but I was always under the impression it's not that common in high level motorsports

Click to expand...

Well rFactor 2 has some very good physics specs and extremly high polling rates of data for simulating cars.
But don't judge their physics on the cars and tracks that are available at a download click.
I can't disclose any names of my customers.

RichardHessels said:

Well rFactor 2 has some very good physics specs and extremly high polling rates of data for simulating cars.
But don't judge their physics on the cars and tracks that are available at a download click.
I can't disclose any names of my customers.

Click to expand...

Actually I spoke a bit with more knowledgeable people and I think you're right indeed. I'm very likely mixing up racing teams and OEMs in my mind. I've definitely heard of pros using "consumer software" so I believe you, I think I'm just a bit confused.

Has anyone ever actually made a well correlated rF2 tire? I was also under the impression that the physical based model in rF2 is basically not able to be correlated accurately based on what some motorsport sim engineers have said. It makes sense to me, but I've also heard rF2 has been used professionally. Is it actually successful? Or do teams just not care so much if their car's accurate and it's fine if it's "kind of there"?

By the way, everything I can find points to you being a graphical designer and not a simulation engineer or a race engineer, so if you are able to clarify I'd appreciate it.

Played GTsport the other day for the first time in ages, its straight up arcade, without the arcade fun. Feels like I'm being assisted around the track. The series is aimed at the mass market, the demographic they target includes children as well. So don't ever expect them to aim for realistic physics, it just ain't gonna happen because children are not gonna be able to pick up and play..

The problem is PDI haven't made a game since GT4, though that was flawed but I still loved it. My good grace with Kaz has expired after the trash GT6 which was released after the massively poor GT5 , which was followed by GTS which addressed none of the issue I.e AI and career mode, road detail. They improved on sound slightly. Career and AI Iscegat will determine if GT7 is trash or a win for me. I d9nt need super realistic physics ( tough they need to be more fun than GTS ) as I have sims for that, I need the old GT magic back, but with 2020 standards. No diabolical AI or 25 year old career mode. That's not good and its tiresome after 25 years.