What would your reaction be if GT5 is released without damage?

  • Thread starter skingg
  • 243 comments
  • 17,025 views
Panel and glass damage would be the ultimate in sim, as long as the mechanical was there like having the wheel "X"degrees out, after a rub or tap going on to fully undrivable.
Also a bit of steam coming over the bonnet after running into another car or barrier, then going on to overheat.
Panels rubbing on tyres.

YES I WOULD BE VERY DISAPPIONTED WITH NO DAMAGE but it wouldn't stop me driving the game.

Same here, but I'll settle for even less visual treats as long as the damage is there.
I have some really good memories from doing endurance racing in games like rFactor and fighting the wheel and missing aero parts going back to the pit and then the nerve wrecking wait for the pitcrew to fix things. And still getting a good result in the end.
 
The option to enable running and repair costs would be brilliant. Having to pay for new engine parts, tyres, fuel, body panels (optional!) would be fun!
 
I really doubt we'll see damage at all!! The reason being is the lack of power of the console and not because PD or the manufacturers don't allow it.

Since then I always had a thought that the lack of damage on GT5P (as an update) and most certainly in GT5, is because of the lack of power of the console.

Opinions??
Lack of power? :lol:

Dan Greenwald
Unfortunately, different manufacturers have radically different hang–ups. Also, the hang–ups are not proportional to the real–world prestige of the brand or its importance to the Forza franchise. I’m not going to name names, but I will rant a little bit.

One American manufacturer will allow damage all day, but is adamant about cars not rolling over. We have several other manufacturers that will only allow roll–overs if all of the others agree first—hell of a Catch 22. One of our European marks can’t be used in PR materials as solo, winning or losing. It must always be pictured with other cars and dead even with them. Another European brand will allow painting and decals, but we can’t allow players to put “thunder” on the side of the car. I’m not even sure what that means. I assumed it meant lightning, but when I asked that specific question, the representative was very insistent: “no thunder”.

We have brands that charge ridiculous fees and make pretty “meh” cars. We got very popular brands that make awesome cars and charge next to nothing. Some brands are dead set against downloadable content. Other brands are willing to sponsor DLC.

There is a huge difference in how thorough each brand is when approving the car renders. On version 1, we accidentally submitted a car render from one Japanese manufacturer to its rival as one of their own cars… and they actually approved it as their car.

As you’d expect, these licenses are usually a lawyer to lawyer affair, but sometimes I get involved so we can escalate the matter higher up in the company. Some brands control other brands. Some brands hire outside licensing companies. Other brands have a licensing division within their legal or marketing departments. Sometimes different regions of a brand control the licensing, but usually it’s at a corporate level.

We have one European manufacturer that allows damage and rolling over, but is fairly unreasonable about upgrades and painting—core features to Forza. Truth is, I’ve spent 80% of my licensing time with just this brand. All that, and we still only got the licenses signed for half of the cars that we built from that brand. And yes, that means we spent months building cars that will never make see the light of day. I had to do back flips just to keep the small group of their cars that I felt were critical—we even got Peter Moore involved with this brand to help us pitch a higher level of partnership.

In the end, it’s all about building a partnership—which takes time. The key is to show them that we have passion for their brand and will defend it. It helps that we make a simulator—they know our goal is to achieve reality and celebrate their brand in a franchise, not use their brand to sell a quick product.

http://forums.forzamotorsport.net/forums/post/65086.aspx
 
I would very dissapointed too, it don't need too be that realistic
for example i find GTA4(grand theft auto) very realistic in that point of view,
and i would more then happy with that kind of damage.

There's nothing else 2 do then 2 wait and see. I really hope whe get more then extra
cars & tracks, i'm waiting more then long enough and if it's taking that long it better be
VERY SPECIAL!!!
 
I wouldn't care, put simply.

Before someone takes on an epic rant on how it's so important I will still not care about it because it's not an important feature to me. It's a driving sim to me, not a crashing sim.
 
I've actually had a situation in FM2 where the lead car crashed and suffered heavy damage, then as I was on the last stretch, in the lead, the same car hit me head-on and completely ruined my car and a chance of winning. Jerks online will find ways to be jerks, damage included or not. So that doesn't bother me.

Personally I would settle for rollovers and realistic crash physics over visual damage...but that's just me.
 
But just think... if GT5 had "absolutely no damage" as a tag-line, the punters would all go to Forza to watch the carnage, instead!

Nothing but Turismo-nerds online for GT5! Joy! :lol:
 
Train simulators allow you to make mistakes...I spent a good portion of time crashing 100+ car and high-speed trains on mine! :lol:
 
Well having damage in GT would finaly make it a little less " static" . I dont realy care about car damage, but the problem is that GT is feeling more like a driveable modelviewer than a game. Not only are the cars completly static, but the track is aswell. Going off the track with your car doesnt effect the rest of the race in any way. You just lose some seconds and thats it. Even if there aint no car damage in GT5 i would at least like to see track damage. The driving physics in GT getting better all the time, but there aint any way of physics to the enviroment. It would be nice if you could damage a tire wall when you ride into it, leaving some tires spread around the circuit.

And this brings us to antother point that should be in GT if we get damage. Race rules, flags, pacecars. Since damage would be nice but it could be damn annoying when entire car/track parts are lying all over the place. We should get yellow flags where accidents happen, and some laps behind a pacecar when something real bad happens.

But well, GT calls itself "The real driving simulator" but at the moment they can better call it "The most static game in the world". Car damage wouldnt make the game directly much better but it would the first step to a less static more interresting racinggame.

Anyway, i dont think we get any damage in GT5. It will most probably be exactly the same as GT5: Prologue but just with more cars/tracks. :grumpy:
 
If damage was not in the game it would not be a huge deal for me. But if I am online there would have to be a more effective penalty system or some sort of ghost setup for online. Cant stand being rammed. Especially if I get rammed by someone and I get the penalty. People will exploit that any chance they get. This needs to be perfect before the full game is released.
For the single player they just need to keep working on the AI.
Allow us to turn on ghosts and damage just like Forza 2 offers. That way everyone can be happy one way or another. There is also another setting with damage but not collisions. This means you can go through people but you can still damage your own car if you hit a wall.
 
Last edited:
Your mistakes still cost you, in time, places, money, etc.

Exactly, but I spend more time not hitting other cars and walls thank you very much. Online damage would reap havoc upon races like it does on games like Grid where you find yourself damaged before turn 2 and in no position to win unless you were first into turn 1 and managed to get through clean. At least without damage you get the chance to catch up and have a good race.
 
Your mistakes still cost you, in time, places, money, etc.

I said that for the people who say that they "don't play GT to crash", "GT is not a crashing simulator", etc...You don't ever play a game to INTENTIONALLY make mistakes (unless crashing IS the objective of the game). But making mistakes is part of every game!

I don't intend on missing the apex on every corner. But how boring would it be if the game didn't allow you to fail? Likewise, I want damage, not because I INTEND to crash into other people, but because the element of damage can affect the race...just like in real life, which a "simulator" attempts to copy...
 
Some of the mindsets in here are appalling. How can someone genuinely not want damage in a game that claims to be the 'Real Driving Simulator'? I can understand preferring no damage to a shoddy, poorly-implemented system, but the way some of the people on this forum talk you get the idea some players would rather be able to bounce of walls at 150 mph than have an accurate crash model implemented. And if you think like that, to put it bluntly, you're wrong.
 
Some of the mindsets in here are appalling. How can someone genuinely not want damage in a game that claims to be the 'Real Driving Simulator'? I can understand preferring no damage to a shoddy, poorly-implemented system, but the way some of the people on this forum talk you get the idea some players would rather be able to bounce of walls at 150 mph than have an accurate crash model implemented. And if you think like that, to put it bluntly, you're wrong.

Real driving... not real crashing. :lol:

I said that for the people who say that they "don't play GT to crash", "GT is not a crashing simulator", etc...You don't ever play a game to INTENTIONALLY make mistakes (unless crashing IS the objective of the game). But making mistakes is part of every game!

I don't intend on missing the apex on every corner. But how boring would it be if the game didn't allow you to fail? Likewise, I want damage, not because I INTEND to crash into other people, but because the element of damage can affect the race...just like in real life, which a "simulator" attempts to copy...

Ever driven a ship simulator (I have, incredibly expensive stuff for something with graphics that are PS2 level...) or an aircraft simulator? No crashes. Once you crash, black screen. You're out. I was amazed at how much our $100,000 shipboard simulator and the multi-million dollar aircraft simulator the Mythbusters used (to test the myth of aircontrol giving instructions to a civilian trying to land an airliner) have in common. Crappy graphics and no crash physics. If you hit something, you're dead.

The point is not realistic crashing. The point is learning not to crash. As such, a real simulator focuses on realistic physics and handling. Not crumpled metal. This is why those darn industry simulators cost so much... reams and reams of physics data and calculations.

Of course, GT5P is far from the best simulator, but it's better than most. In online racing, you're already penalized for going off into the grass. Or into the sand. It takes forever to dig yourself out... and by then, your race is over. There's also wall-banging penalties (which are too kind, but can be fixed...). GT5P already punishes you for bad driving.

A simulator is a safe way of learning piloting or driving. If penalizing punters is the idea, entertaining them with debris will merely egg them on. Instead, black flag them. Drop them. A person hits the wall at 200 mph? Give him a black flag. Don't reward him with "oh wow... carnage!"

I like the online ghosting system much more than a possible crashing system. At least it attempts to let the rest of us race in peace while other people try to learn how to drive... :lol:

Wouldn't mind mechanical damage, though... quite challenging trying to pilot a car that won't steer straight, won't engage third gear and overheats when you hit redline.
 
I think damage should be implemented to make 'the Real Driving Simulator' become a more realistic driving simulator, not to punish idiots online.
 
Ever driven a ship simulator (I have, incredibly expensive stuff for something with graphics that are PS2 level...) or an aircraft simulator? No crashes. Once you crash, black screen. You're out. I was amazed at how much our $100,000 shipboard simulator and the multi-million dollar aircraft simulator the Mythbusters used (to test the myth of aircontrol giving instructions to a civilian trying to land an airliner) have in common. Crappy graphics and no crash physics. If you hit something, you're dead.

Two things:

1) Aircraft simulator does not equal driving simulator. A car crash, you can walk away from. That's why like you said, when you crash an airplane, there's no "bouncing off the floor" or "keeping it going after clipping another object"...you just die. Pass out. No point showing crumpled metal since you're DEAD (represented by a black screen).
2) On this point, the example you just gave is further proof that GT needs damage simulation if it really is a driving sim. An aircraft sim shows EXACTLY what you experience if you crash...GT? Not so.

The point is not realistic crashing. The point is learning not to crash. As such, a real simulator focuses on realistic physics and handling. Not crumpled metal. This is why those darn industry simulators cost so much... reams and reams of physics data and calculations.

Of course, GT5P is far from the best simulator, but it's better than most. In online racing, you're already penalized for going off into the grass. Or into the sand. It takes forever to dig yourself out... and by then, your race is over. There's also wall-banging penalties (which are too kind, but can be fixed...). GT5P already punishes you for bad driving.

And GT already does a perfect job at simulating physics - I'd say they had it down pat by GT4. So what are they doing with the extra power of the PS3 (since there's not much change in physics from GT4-GT5P)? Pretty graphics. Which I can appreciate to a certain extent, but I don't want them to ignore making a COMPLETE simulation.

The best way to learn not to crash is fear. Fear of destroying your car taking an overly optimistic corner speed. That's why people are willing to take gambles in the game - because there's no fear. That's why GT times at real life tracks are faster than what most people can do - because there's no fear. Penalties? Pff...by the time they get it working in a manner that COMPENSATES (it doesn't emulate real life, like a simulator should) the actual infraction, people have figured out exactly how to time it right and get away with it. Not to mention unfair penalties when someone grazes you and the game thinks it's your fault.
 
Last edited:
At the 1st corners caos and mayhem is one thing... but with damage would be the apocalipse :nervous:
 
Two things:

1) Aircraft simulator does not equal driving simulator. A car crash, you can walk away from. That's why like you said, when you crash an airplane, there's no "bouncing off the floor" or "keeping it going after clipping another object"...you just die. Pass out. No point showing crumpled metal since you're DEAD (represented by a black screen).

What? Plane crashes do not equal immanent death, there have plenty of belly landings, landings after wing clips etc etc (landing on water.......), even landings which has flipped the plane over breaking a wing off people has survived.

"bouncing off the floor" and "keeping it going after clipping another object" also doesnt mean death. This is the reason many flight simmers mod their flight sims to allow damage and crash physics, even Microsoft used to have them in built but locked them out (a quick file edit fixed that), though MS still used them in Combat sims.
 
I could seriously care less.

Forza damage - gives me headaches from how fake it is.
Grid - the cars begin crumbling before impact.

When GT7 comes out on a PS5, then i feel we will have the processing power to do GT with damage to where i and more importantly Kaz will approve of it.
 
Gran Turismo is a video game... we're playing GT because it is fun and replicates the fun of racing, not because we're training to be a professional racing driver. Some people might find accidents / damage appealing because that is what happens in motor racing and crashes are always interesting to see (providing no-one is hurt).

I don't think we should be comparing GT to aircraft / ship simulators.
 
I love how people that want a realistic damage model are dismissed as crash junkies. That's certainly the right attitude to have.
 
Some of the mindsets in here are appalling. How can someone genuinely not want damage in a game that claims to be the 'Real Driving Simulator'?
I know you damage junkies feel like you're beating your heads against a huge wall. Damage does add something invigorating to a racing game, when it's done right, but you have to keep a few things in perspective.

  • Gran Turismo has never had real damage. GT2 had some basic non-visible stuff, but it was very minor. When it failed to appear in GT3, hardly anyone cared. A few more cared when it wasn't included in GT4, but you guys remain a very vocal minority.
  • Racing games which include street cars have a huge hurdle to overcome, in that some makers won't allow any damage at all. Someone posted the tribulations of Dan Greenawald, head of Forza's Turn 10, and how different makers wouldn't allow certain things. This actually resulted in certain cars in Forza taking more damage than others. Add this to the fact that damage is only one third to one quarter what a car would actually suffer, and this is why Forza's damage modelling is held in contempt by many.
  • Damage is incredibly difficult to implement realistically. It's much harder to make a crash simulation than a racing simulation. Forza 2 has to hesitate for a tenth of a second when a collision happens to figure out what to do with it. Toca's damage system is okay, but cars crumple like cardboard boxes. Great damage modeling just isn't that common because it's a freaking headache to implement.
  • We want to see GT5 this decade. ;)

Besides, what are you going to do, not buy it? Buy Forza 2 or 3 instead? After the bad times spent wrestling with the bugs and flaws in Forza 2, the thrill was gone, and my bro is playing it now. And I don't have great expectations for Forza 3. After getting back into GT5 Prologue this weekend, damage would be nice, but frankly, I just want GT5, whatever form it takes.
 

Latest Posts

Back