About Ferarri and Car Damage...

[Rikusaki]

Is there any real proof that this is the reason Damage isn't happening right now?
I need more proof than an interview with KD.

Why would Ferrari Challenge (A BRAND EXCLUSIVE) game have damage if Ferrari truly held that stance?

I love Gran Turismo and I will definitely pick up this game, but what if this is just an excuse for being behind in development?

 

[Dave A]

It's not about damage, it's about damage to all the cars to the same degree. If PD wanted to they could strike up an agreement with each manufacturer and just do as much as each manufacturer would allow to each car. That however would result in a terribly unbalanced game where some cars lose wheels and some cars don't even get a loose bumper. Forza 2 to a degree did this but only with regards to parts falling off. Some cars parts would come loose but never come off but on other cars they'd come off quite easily. But Kaz has repeatedly said he want to do damage properly, that doesn't mean one ding and your cars out, but it means he wants the quality of it to be up there, with the rest of the game (AI excluded). This means he will want each car to be damagable to the same degree, which I can't imagine how hard will be to get all the manufacturers to agree to do to all the cars. Also concerning Ferrari, no one has confirmed that Ferrari are the issue here, Kaz mentioned them once when illustrating a point but their use so far is not connected to anything other than being used to get a point over. I don't think Kaz needs an excuse or would use one, he didn't with GT4. If GT is delayed he'll just say it is.

 

[Rikusaki]

Thank you for clearing that up.

 

[Shouden]

Although, you could easily get around the whole "different damage models for different cars" by only allowing those cars with the "inaccurate" damage model to be raced with each other and exclude them from the other races. kind of like the Special Cars from GT4. This way, you could have your full damage model for most of your cars. And even include the special cars in certain races.

The trick is to have the damage model to be consistent with all the cars in the race, I think. The biggest challenge will be to get the interiors to translate the damage as well as the exteriors.

But, PD did mention that, to do the accurate damage models, one would have to model each body panel of the car separately, and we have seen them doing just that. This has also lead PD to potentially be able to implement some other things, including custom bumpers, hoods, lights, spoilers, tires, grills....in fact, this would allow for the greatest modification variation ever. You could even potentially implement a custom coloring system to color ever panel separately.....cool, huh?

 

[Kryz11]

Is there any real proof that this is the reason Damage isn't happening right now?
I need more proof than an interview with KD.

Why would Ferrari Challenge (A BRAND EXCLUSIVE) game have damage if Ferrari truly held that stance?

I love Gran Turismo and I will definitely pick up this game, but what if this is just an excuse for being behind in development?

Ferrari Challenge has RACE cars mostly. Besides is not as GOOD of a sim as GRAN TURISMO in terms of handling and how cars behave.
MY TAKE: When PD went to Ferrari, ask if they could use their cars in ultra realistic was Ferrari agreed. Then PD ask them if they could DAMANGE the cars in ULTRA realistic ways... Ferrari declined. Because everyone knows Ferrari brakes a lot, and are like butter going down the highway. I bet that's the main reason why Ferrari wont approve damage. Because of the SIMULATOR aspect.

Or maybe PD is just making excuses because PS3 wont handle KAZ's dreams?


At least PD should make damage and breakable parts (brake pads, suspensions etc) for Race cars only and Highly tuned cars.

 

[G.T.Ace]

Ferrari Challenge never was and never will be a good argument for damage.
You can drive full speed in the barrier of the first chicane in Monza and everything that will happen is, that the front bumper goes down and maybe the windshield gets some scratches. Forza is better, but still far away from something i really want.

 

[Dave A]

Although, you could easily get around the whole "different damage models for different cars" by only allowing those cars with the "inaccurate" damage model to be raced with each other and exclude them from the other races. kind of like the Special Cars from GT4. This way, you could have your full damage model for most of your cars. And even include the special cars in certain races.

I hope not. That is not a situation I want GT to end up in where only certain cars can race against other cars. I have nothing against event restrictions but I don't want to not be able to race a Dodge Viper against a Ferrari F430 (cars used purely as an example) because one can take more damage than the other. It would be irritating as hell and needlessly restrictive.

 

[balang_479]

all they need to do is make each damage like they would in real life, they shouldnt depend on other cars damage.... simply as realisticly as possible.

 

[G.T.Ace]

"All they need to do" lol?

 

[Obli]

... Then PD ask them if they could DAMANGE the cars in ULTRA realistic ways... Ferrari declined. Because everyone knows Ferrari brakes a lot, and are like butter going down the highway. I bet that's the main reason why Ferrari wont approve damage. Because of the SIMULATOR aspect.

I very much doubt that PD want to simulate build quality and reliability.

It's certain manufacturers that don't want their beautiful cars to show significant damage in game. Seems daft, as other manufacturers' cars will also be damaged.

 

[balang_479]

"All they need to do" lol?

its alot but, they should change the amount of damage a car gets depending on other cars...

 

[Dave A]

I might be misunderstanding you here so if I am I apologise, but if I'm not then that would create and incredibly unbalanced game with different cars suffering different extremes of damage. It would be unpredictable, unrealistic and completely unbalanced. That's the kind of thing we don't want GT to be, more unbalanced. GT4, as great as it was, was very unbalanced, particularly in the choices of cars you raced against in certain competitions, you'd have a grid full of average to slow cars and then a Ford GT. We don't want to add to frustrating inconsistencies like this, especially not on a level as cruscial and game play affecting as a damage model.

Thinking about it the other understanding I'm getting is if you mean have ever cars damage only go so far as the least any manufacturer will allow, so say Ford say yes, do what you want, Nissan say don't damage the sub frame and Ferrari say scratches and bumper damage only then all cars can only have scratches and bumper damage then sure you keep a balance but the damage model ultimately becomes run of the mill. Though if mechanical damage is implemented well on top of that then you can still create that extra level of immersion and influence the game in the intended way.

 

[Shouden]

Ferrari Challenge has RACE cars mostly. Besides is not as GOOD of a sim as GRAN TURISMO in terms of handling and how cars behave.
MY TAKE: When PD went to Ferrari, ask if they could use their cars in ultra realistic was Ferrari agreed. Then PD ask them if they could DAMANGE the cars in ULTRA realistic ways... Ferrari declined. Because everyone knows Ferrari brakes a lot, and are like butter going down the highway. I bet that's the main reason why Ferrari wont approve damage. Because of the SIMULATOR aspect.

Or maybe PD is just making excuses because PS3 wont handle KAZ's dreams?


At least PD should make damage and breakable parts (brake pads, suspensions etc) for Race cars only and Highly tuned cars.

okay.
1. Just because they're race cars doesn't necessarily mean they get to use damage. and if, I'm not mistaken, Ferrari Challenge has more than just the Ferrari Race Cars in it. that would be dull if that's all it had, considering that would be about a million different variations of like 5 cars.

2. Actually, on a Top Gear episode (i believe) they showed the Ferrari testing facility where Ferrari literally tests their cars until they explode. You don't do these tests and release a car that breaks easily. Ferrari just simply likes their cars looking all pretty and shiny.

3. umm.......PS3 is the most powerful gaming console with anywhere from 50-200GB per Blu-Ray disc of space to use. I don't think it's the PS3 that's the problem (although, there are reports that the programming for it is hard, but then again, it is the most advanced gaming console to date. This is why people are starting to do the PS3 coding first and then downgrade to the 360)

4. Again, just because they're race cars, doesn't mean their fair game for destruction. Remember, Volkswagen yelled at PD for using the Diablo without permission, I suspect manufacturers would whine if they saw their race getting destroyed without their permission as well.

 

[Shouden]

I might be misunderstanding you here so if I am I apologise, but if I'm not then that would create and incredibly unbalanced game with different cars suffering different extremes of damage. It would be unpredictable, unrealistic and completely unbalanced. That's the kind of thing we don't want GT to be, more unbalanced. GT4, as great as it was, was very unbalanced, particularly in the choices of cars you raced against in certain competitions, you'd have a grid full of average to slow cars and then a Ford GT. We don't want to add to frustrating inconsistencies like this, especially not on a level as cruscial and game play affecting as a damage model.

Thinking about it the other understanding I'm getting is if you mean have ever cars damage only go so far as the least any manufacturer will allow, so say Ford say yes, do what you want, Nissan say don't damage the sub frame and Ferrari say scratches and bumper damage only then all cars can only have scratches and bumper damage then sure you keep a balance but the damage model ultimately becomes run of the mill. Though if mechanical damage is implemented well on top of that then you can still create that extra level of immersion and influence the game in the intended way.

Well, another idea would be to include two damage models (a full and partial or "simulated") and basically have the Ferraris or whatever tagged with the code for the partial damage model, so when you enter a race with one of them, that's what's used, but if you were to enter a race with like a Viper or something, then the full damage model would be used.

A compromise like this, might be what happens. Either that, or PD and Kaz talk Ferrari and the other "hero car makers" (Hero Cars are vehicles in movies that don't get destroyed. i.e. in the "2 Fast, 2 Furious" there were a set of cars that were destroyed [known as stunt or "villain cars"] and a set that was there to look good and made it through filming without a scratch (the hero cars) and a third set that were used for all the close ups. This last group isn't really even driven and usually are highly glossed. these are known as "Beauty Cars" into an exclusive full damage model license.

 

[arvin charles]

Ferrari Challenge has more than just the Ferrari Race Cars in it. that would be dull if that's all it had, considering that would be about a million different variations of like 5 cars.

A million variations of 5 cars? I sincerely hope you're joking! I'm not going to list them, but I'm pretty sure they have more variety in racing cars than the numerous variations of the Skyline GT-R in GT.

Anyway, I'm probably one of the few on here that, if it came down to it, would take Ferrari over damage.

 

[Kryz11]

okay.
1. Just because they're race cars doesn't necessarily mean they get to use damage. and if, I'm not mistaken, Ferrari Challenge has more than just the Ferrari Race Cars in it. that would be dull if that's all it had, considering that would be about a million different variations of like 5 cars.

2. Actually, on a Top Gear episode (i believe) they showed the Ferrari testing facility where Ferrari literally tests their cars until they explode. You don't do these tests and release a car that breaks easily. Ferrari just simply likes their cars looking all pretty and shiny.

3. umm.......PS3 is the most powerful gaming console with anywhere from 50-200GB per Blu-Ray disc of space to use. I don't think it's the PS3 that's the problem (although, there are reports that the programming for it is hard, but then again, it is the most advanced gaming console to date. This is why people are starting to do the PS3 coding first and then downgrade to the 360)

4. Again, just because they're race cars, doesn't mean their fair game for destruction. Remember, Volkswagen yelled at PD for using the Diablo without permission, I suspect manufacturers would whine if they saw their race getting destroyed without their permission as well.

Good points..

So how about we GTPlaneteers write HATE mail, or Really Reasonable letter?

WHY the heck not? GTPlanet is one of the biggest FORUMS for Gran Turismo and we demand damange?

SO common GT-Planet, write letter in very respectable manners, we have so many members so give them charts how many would love to see realistic damage, maybe they would change their minds.. I bet if we succeed, PD would mention GT-Planet in FULL GAME Send the letters to the manufacturers. GTPlanet is huge forums, so I do not see a reason why not

 

[rofajole]

I still ask myself if GT really needs damage. I would like damage to maybe like engine, tires, and suspension, but not cosmetic damage. GT is a game made to be beautiful and pretty and giving it cosmetic damage, it could end up something like GRID, in which you drive and don't care about your care unless to make it to the end of the race in first place.

 

[McLaren]

I very much doubt that PD want to simulate build quality and reliability.

Very much a given that it won't happen, unless no one wants to see GT6 & Polyphony flogged with lawsuits by manufacturers.

 

[Dave A]

okay.
1. Just because they're race cars doesn't necessarily mean they get to use damage. and if, I'm not mistaken, Ferrari Challenge has more than just the Ferrari Race Cars in it. that would be dull if that's all it had, considering that would be about a million different variations of like 5 cars.[quote/]On it's own it might seem like there is little difference but manufacturers are far more lenient when it comes to damaging racing cars compared to road cars. take the ToCA and Race Driver games for instance, there is a reason they don't feature road cars, all the cars are either proper race cars or road cars that are race tuned. None of the cars are road spec in thoes games, and look at the damage models they are allowed to use. The second they include a Ferrari 360 road car in the game that damage model is thrown out of the window because the manufacturers will suddenly say no.

2. Actually, on a Top Gear episode (i believe) they showed the Ferrari testing facility where Ferrari literally tests their cars until they explode. You don't do these tests and release a car that breaks easily. Ferrari just simply likes their cars looking all pretty and shiny.

As do all manufacturers, this isn't the reason some don't allow damage. The two major factors are money, and public image. Public image being the bigger of the two factors when anything more than the most basic damage is suggested.

3. umm.......PS3 is the most powerful gaming console with anywhere from 50-200GB per Blu-Ray disc of space to use. I don't think it's the PS3 that's the problem (although, there are reports that the programming for it is hard, but then again, it is the most advanced gaming console to date. This is why people are starting to do the PS3 coding first and then downgrade to the 360)

I agree, I don't see the PS3 as being an issue here.

4. Again, just because they're race cars, doesn't mean their fair game for destruction. Remember, Volkswagen yelled at PD for using the Diablo without permission, I suspect manufacturers would whine if they saw their race getting destroyed without their permission as well.

Ofcourse, everything requires permission and a signed dotted line. But the truth is that the manufacturers are far more lenient in the way a race car can be used in a game to the way a road car can and that extends to damage modelling.

 

[Lain]

The manufacturers need to stop being idiots and just allow it for pete's sake. Polyphony could do like Firaxis did with Religions in Civilization 4 and just make all the cars equal. What'd obliterate one car will obliterate any car in GT5. That way, the manufacturers don't need to worry about their "public image" being hurt because one car is more crash-tolerant than their car.

Unless they're trying to shield the public from knowing that cars can crash and be destroyed. Which everyone already knows can happen anyway, so that'd be quite an idiotic reason to refuse to allow damage.

 

[RedOak]

But the truth is that the manufacturers are far more lenient in the way a race car can be used in a game to the way a road car can and that extends to damage modelling.

I think that's the real issue right there. Race cars are shown and known to be destroyed in races... not so much for "civilian" cars. Than again, following that "logic" and cheating a little, patching liveries and sponsors on every cars and adding a few "race car" looky things to stock cars might just be the solution to this problem.

 

[seanyb505]

Ok so, bad publicity for manufaturers: Car doing 170 hits the wall in turn 1 of Tokyo and is destroyed.

Good publicity: Car doing 170 hits wall in turn 1 of Tokyo and keeps trucking.

It seems to me that they would rather people think its ok to crash into things than to see the car damaged. But if crashing into things is only without consequence in a game, then why the heck does damage in a game mean that their cars are prone to crash and fall apart on the street? Am I missing something or did I forget to take my stupid pills today?

 

[balang_479]

Wouldnt making all the cars destroy loads but equally also make people safer???? they see that crashing at that speed will destroy the car so when kids go out and drive in real life theyll think twice.... instead of playing a car game where they can to 300mph into a wall and nothing happens..

 

[Dave A]

That's not how they see it, they don't look at it in the sense that seeing carsh crashed will make people think they shouldn't crash they simply see it as thier car being damaged. It's marketing, it's not logical a lot of the time. From the manufacturers point of view they would much prefer thier cars to look spotless all the time regardless of hitting a wall at 200mph. You get some manufacturers who are pretty lenient but others won't let you do anything unless you pay more and then it's restrictive and that's compared to the lenient oens who still restrict damage to panels and parts that are outwards of the sub frame and not to the sub frame and cabin. You will never see damage inside the cars or to the sub frames even if PD do get damage into GT.