TCS and ASM

Does anyone here use the TCS and ASM? I turn them both off 90% of the time, but I'll occasionally leave ASM at 3 and TCS at 2 with really high powered rear drivers like my 1110 hp Viper or even my 620 hp Griffith. What abuut you guys?

I hate the ASM!!!! grrrrrrrrrrr :devil:

You get the car all nicly set up to drift into and out of a corner, and it takes over and straightens the car up and loses all your momentum, often pushing you into a wall.
I never have it on.

The TCS however can be your friend. Its the only way to get a good launch when starting, and can give you a lot more control with the powerfull RWD cars.

I have it set from between 1-4 depending on HP.

I never use TCS or ASM, and I don't allow anyone who tries to race me from doing so. It's simply a matter of keeping it real. When you think about it, the purpose of GT3 is for it to be a real driving simulator. How can it provide a genuine simulation, when half those cars are not even available with traction control and such? Plus, not using the assists makes you a better understand driving dynamics for high powered cars. And as for TCS, if you need to eliminate wheelspin without TCS and careful usage of the analog accel/brake still doesn't cut it, you can cut down on the wheelspin with the parking brake by tapping it as you accelerate. Of course this only works on rear/all wheel drive cars. Try it on a fully powered Escudo, it helps put the power to the ground.

i leave asm off, but i need lvl 3 tcs for my arta or it spins too much

Let it spin! That's the joy of power. Or find the car's limits in acceleration using the right analog stick for accel/brake (or use the GT Force).

Another thing... I wish the game engineers had figured out a way to create a setting controller for the ABS. In the Gran Turismo games, nearly all the cars behave as if they are equipped with ABS, and it is impossible to practice threshold braking. When you hit the brakes at the end of a straightaway, the car brakes way too perfectly, simply by jamming on the anchors. Real life doesn't work that way.

Originally posted by Morpheus XIII
It's simply a matter of keeping it real. When you think about it, the purpose of GT3 is for it to be a real driving simulator. How can it provide a genuine simulation, when half those cars are not even available with traction control and such?

Yeah right and let me guess you use the simulation tires instead of the racing ones huh? The purpose of a simulator is to prepare you for real life conditions and they do that by controlling aspects of the simulation that you couldn't in the real life.

what's the best setting for drifting?
which levls of asm and tcs?
i find it best when i leave both off for the arta nsx, but i tend to spin if another car touches me

well..prove me wrong

Originally posted by SkyNex721
Yeah right and let me guess you use the simulation tires instead of the racing ones huh? The purpose of a simulator is to prepare you for real life conditions and they do that by controlling aspects of the simulation that you couldn't in the real life.

Actually, I use simulation tires for drifting. Properly set up, it works pretty well, nice breakaway. But it's just for kicks.

Anyways, are you saying that a driving simulator is much more realistic when you can do ludicrous things to the car? How is it that being capable of controlling impossible variables prepares you for reality? Aren't commercial airline simulators state-of-the-art machines which allow pilots to get a sense of what reality really is, without actually putting themselves in harm's way? Pilots train for hours upon hours in these simulators, getting every little detail about how a real commercial jet functions in real life. What if the simulator had a feature like "autoland" where the pilot could let go of the yoke and just watch the plane land itself, and the pilot used this all the time? Such technology doesn't exist in the airline industry, so I'd say the pilot would be pretty screwed when it came to actual landing. In relation, say that you drive with TCS and ASM all the time, not once ever discovering what life without computer aid is really like; would you really feel safe if you hopped into a real life JGTC Skyline, where you have NO traction control or other such feature? Trust me, you would be wishing you had left them off.

Okay say there were no simulators and all the pilots had to learn everything in the air. How would they get better at landing in the rain? Fly around all day until it starts raining? With a simulator they can make it rain whenever they want. Or make it windy, hail, whatever. Now do you get what I am saying.

BTW you are taking this "driving simulator" way too far. It's a video game. REAL simulators don't let you crash your car at 200mph and then let you drive off without a scratch.

Originally posted by SkyNex721
Okay say there were no simulators and all the pilots had to learn everything in the air. How would they get better at landing in the rain? Fly around all day until it starts raining? With a simulator they can make it rain whenever they want. Or make it windy, hail, whatever. Now do you get what I am saying.

Hmm, looks like we have misunderstood each other. If you read my previous posts carefully, you will see that I am not saying that simulators are bad for society. As a matter of fact, I am agreeing with you in saying that difficult simulated environments are beneficial aids in understanding the concepts of racing dynamics. That's why I said it is good to leave TCS and ASM off--that would be the equivalent of landing in the rain, as you stated. TCS and ASM give you a false sense of security, and as in real life, MOST race cars don't have either of them.

Originally posted by SkyNex721
BTW you are taking this "driving simulator" way too far. It's a video game. REAL simulators don't let you crash your car at 200mph and then let you drive off without a scratch.

You don't need car damage to understand that you've made a mistake. The simple fact that you've touched a wall automatically tells you that you would be in trouble at this point in real life. On the other hand, if you can get through a race without any contact, then you know you've got the basic essentials down. I never stated that GT3 was a professional simulator. I am simply implying that GT3 provides the most realism in comparison to ANY other commercially available driving game.

Originally posted by Morpheus XIII
You don't need car damage to understand that you've made a mistake. The simple fact that you've touched a wall automatically tells you that you would be in trouble at this point in real life. On the other hand, if you can get through a race without any contact, then you know you've got the basic essentials down.

that's true, when my friend crashes with the indy car i just laugh

Originally posted by Morpheus XIII


Hmm, looks like we have misunderstood each other. If you read my previous posts carefully, you will see that I am not saying that simulators are bad for society. As a matter of fact, I am agreeing with you in saying that difficult simulated environments are beneficial aids in understanding the concepts of racing dynamics. That's why I said it is good to leave TCS and ASM off--that would be the equivalent of landing in the rain, as you stated. TCS and ASM give you a false sense of security, and as in real life, MOST race cars don't have either of them.



You don't need car damage to understand that you've made a mistake. The simple fact that you've touched a wall automatically tells you that you would be in trouble at this point in real life. On the other hand, if you can get through a race without any contact, then you know you've got the basic essentials down. I never stated that GT3 was a professional simulator. I am simply implying that GT3 provides the most realism in comparison to ANY other commercially available driving game.

OOOooohhhhh!! I didn't know that you were agreeing with me. Sorry about that bro. Most of the time I am posting really late at night and I am not all there. :D

The Airline industry has this thing called ILS which when combined with the latest in GPS and computer controlled fly by wire systems means that most modern airliners can infact land themselfs. The poilet only needs to apply the brakes once then plane touchs down.
:)



GT3 is in not the best driving simulator out there, I think the old orginal version of Indycar racing my pyprus was far better. But it was almost too good, and was limited by the the simply fact that all the information had to come visualy form a computer monitor. This is something that greatly limits all personal computer and consol based simulators, you miss the actual feel of the G forces etc working on the car.

I believe GT3 and the other two before it are simply the best combination of the simulator and arcade possible. The driving model is just awsome, while the ablity to wind huge and often unrealistic amounts of power out of cars and not have them breakdown adds a level of fun to the game unmatched by any other.

As I stated at the start of the thread I dont use the ASM, but I do use the TCS. Why? well there is no clutch in GT3, and the acclerator control simply isnt as precise as it is in a real car. (even if your using the analoge sticks, or even pedals, your relying to much on visual input and the programing of the computer model) I find the wheel spin effects, and in ablity of the computer to do things like ride the clutch the most unrealistic part of the game. For example its very hard to get the cars to do proper doughnuts, and the FWD drive cars even with 2-300hp will still be stoped from moving with the handbrake. My little 160hp civic is quite cable of draging the back wheels down the raod, im sure a civic with twice that ph would also manage the same thing.

GT3 is an awsome awsome game, but I think it makes to many concessions to the arcades to be a true driving simulator.
But with out those concessions I dont think the game would be anywhere near as good as it is.

Originally posted by Moppie
The Airline industry has this thing called ILS which when combined with the latest in GPS and computer controlled fly by wire systems means that most modern airliners can infact land themselfs. The poilet only needs to apply the brakes once then plane touchs down.
:)



GT3 is in not the best driving simulator out there, I think the old orginal version of Indycar racing my pyprus was far better. But it was almost too good, and was limited by the the simply fact that all the information had to come visualy form a computer monitor. This is something that greatly limits all personal computer and consol based simulators, you miss the actual feel of the G forces etc working on the car.

I believe GT3 and the other two before it are simply the best combination of the simulator and arcade possible. The driving model is just awsome, while the ablity to wind huge and often unrealistic amounts of power out of cars and not have them breakdown adds a level of fun to the game unmatched by any other.

As I stated at the start of the thread I dont use the ASM, but I do use the TCS. Why? well there is no clutch in GT3, and the acclerator control simply isnt as precise as it is in a real car. (even if your using the analoge sticks, or even pedals, your relying to much on visual input and the programing of the computer model) I find the wheel spin effects, and in ablity of the computer to do things like ride the clutch the most unrealistic part of the game. For example its very hard to get the cars to do proper doughnuts, and the FWD drive cars even with 2-300hp will still be stoped from moving with the handbrake. My little 160hp civic is quite cable of draging the back wheels down the raod, im sure a civic with twice that ph would also manage the same thing.

GT3 is an awsome awsome game, but I think it makes to many concessions to the arcades to be a true driving simulator.
But with out those concessions I dont think the game would be anywhere near as good as it is.

Good calls on the latter two-thirds of your statement. :)

About the pilots--they still need to first align with the runway, counter-act wind, set the flaps progressively, set the throttle, set the air-brakes to autodeploy, then brake, apply reverse thrust, retract the spoilers, and then you're safe on the ground. The ILS only maintains a proper heading and allow your computer to numerically 'visualize' the landing, which is a plus for landing in zero visibility.

ASM is always off for me, just because it causes understeer a lot. I usually just leave the TCS at 5. Occasionally I'll lower the TCS to about 2 or 3.

Originally posted by Morpheus XIII


Good calls on the latter two-thirds of your statement. :)

About the pilots--they still need to first align with the runway, counter-act wind, set the flaps progressively, set the throttle, set the air-brakes to autodeploy, then brake, apply reverse thrust, retract the spoilers, and then you're safe on the ground. The ILS only maintains a proper heading and allow your computer to numerically 'visualize' the landing, which is a plus for landing in zero visibility.


Only on older ILS systems. the new Aircraft such as the 747-400s and Airbus's need only be pointed into the ILS cone. The plane does the rest, manages throttles, flaps etc and maintians a perfect glide slope, even in a crosswind. (of course a strong wind require's pilot assitance).
The pilot need only apply the brakes, and reverse thrust. The plane will even steer itself in a straight line down the run way on the roll out.

I guess in the unlikely event of all three cockpit members in a 747 captain, copilot, and engineer dying of heart attacks, any of the passengers can play hero and land the plane. :p hehehe...