Damage build in GT5 - READ FIRST POST before voting

[Tenacious D]

Here is a poll which should keep people entertained, but hopefully also make people think.

You are now Polyphony Digital's boss. It's your job to get the game into a condition which will both please the fans and reviewers, impress fans of competing games, fit within a certain release window, and make a nice profit. The item in question, since everything else is solved (for the sake of the poll), is damage. You hash out a meeting in which the options are discussed, and this is what the group heads report back.

• Minimal, less than 25 percent: other than zero damage, this is easiest, and has the least impact on release date, as much study and basic work has already been done. There are seven car companies who insist on no damage of any kind. The project cost of buying them out is an additional two percent of net profits, which SONY should agree to with a favorable profit study. Additional time required past proposed release date is three months, Dec 2009-Feb 2010. SONY will want to know why this is essential if holidays 2009 is missed.
• 25 - 35 percent: the workload increase for this is much more than expected, but not unreasonable. There are fifteen car companies who say they will refuse to allow their cars to suffer this much damage. The project cost of buying them out is an additional five percent of net profits, which SONY has stated is excessive. Additional time required past proposed release date is five months, Feb-Apr 2010. SONY will insist on provable mass initial sales, along with demonstrable PS3 sales figures.
• 50 percent: this will have a substantial impact on the project at all levels. The physics team want to know the precise boundaries of effected performance and any additional degradation in race, as well as how repairs will function in game. Track modelers will want to know what to build into their current work. In addition, thirty car makers refuse to allow this level of damage to their cars, and this accounts for nearly half of the car list. Negotiations will be very difficult, and expensive, estimated to be an additional 8 - 12 percent of net profits, which SONY has stated is unreasonable. Additional time required past proposed release date is six to nine months, May-Aug 2010. SONY will demand insurance in the form of Polyphony Digital pay and budget concessions if sales are not in the range of 4 - 5 million copies within one calendar year of release, the anticipated reaction of SONY executives. This could seriously affect downloadable workload and schedule, not to mention employee relations.
• 75 percent: this is a problem. While much of the staff would like to tackle this objective, this is a level of damage which almost no game maker has seriously implemented. The most efficient way to achieve this realistically would be to license the Digital Molecular Matter software, and incorporating it in the GT5 engine properly will require at least five months of study, in addition to one month of staff training in using it with current tools. This is in addition to the estimated six months of work in parsing out the code workload between the CPU and SPEs, and number of SPEs required to manage collision and damage modeling, and insuring that there is minimal performance hit to RSX. The network team has indicated that this build would require months of work on their end as well, to insure minimal lag, and this does not include track damage modeling coordination. There will need to be compromises. Weather and time changes may have to be dropped, due to Cell engine constraints. Resolution may have to be reduced, and effects reworked or dropped. Liveries may have to be much simpler, or dropped. Furthermore, only seven car makers will agree to anything remotely like this. The cost of negotiations cannot be calculated. This will put the projected release date into holidays 2010, or beyond. SONY is likely to cancel any damage work entirely with this premise. We recommend this not be considered for GT5, or even mentioned to SONY staff.
• 100 percent: we have concluded that completely realistic damage won't be possible for the forseeable future, through at least two generations of computing technology.

Okay, this is like a doomsday scenario, but from what I've read, something very like this takes place in many game projects. So, what do you guys think if this is the situation Kazunori and his team is facing?

I left out a few factors, because I didn't want this to be multiple choice, and I didn't know how else to do such a poll. You can also post on the other possibilities:

• Visual damage only
• Mechanical damage only

But keep in mind, this doesn't change the workload on Kaz and the lads would be facing all that much.

With that, have at ye. But think before you vote.

 

[lmracer]

This is a fairly comprehensive poll. It is hard to speculate what direction GT5 is going considering the information available right now. I am going to place my marker in the middle of the field for now and assume GT5 will have basic damage models. I do not suspect dismembering parts of the car is likely. Can you imagine all the additional textures required if the cars lost body panels? It would be useless to model such a brilliant car if the fender gets torn off and beneath it is something that looks like a damage model from GTAIII. I would expect the sub-frame body structure to be as precise as the exterior.

 

[RacingFreak2k3]

Hmm...this is very tricky indeed. Now, I would LOVE to see damage in the 50 percent range, but I think if PD hit the 25%-35% range, it would make critics shut up enough about no damage because people would at least be able to see it, and assuming mechanical damage would come with that, it would make enough of an impact on driving performance to add enough of another dimension to the game. So I voted for the 25-35% range.

If the given scenario were to be true...I don't think the amount of manufacturers lost is worth a 50% damage rate in my opinion. If there was 25% damage, with full mechanical damage, I would be ecstatic. I don't know how PD is planning on doing there system, if they even end up doing damage, but I think there will be enough in the game to make people overlook damage as well. We'll see how it goes. Nice poll btw 👍

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

Well I suppose that the goal is to eventually achieve 100% simulation, so they should aim for 100% in everything they do. Anything else would be half@$$d.

 

[TofuStoreDrift]

My head hurts now I would say -25%, so I could get the game out and start making money. But I'm greedy like that

 

[RAVELLRON]

75%

 

[GTracerRens]

I think Polyphony Digital tries to get the 100% it's a simulation game and the damage in Forza 2 is useless. You can't even crash your car when driving at 200 km/h into the wall. I think it is possible to give the cars a damage model like in Burnout Paradise and that would be great. From the other side might it be better to have a light damage model. So you won't crash your car in an endurance event and you don't have to start the race over...

 

[TheCracker]

I voted 100%, but wouldn't necessarily want it to be hugely accurate at the same time. As long as the damage looked some where in the region of what you'd expect from a certain kind of crash i'd be happy. I'm more concerned that the damage causes changes to how the cars handle is accurately modelled.

But i suppose it all comes down to how much 'value' PD places on Gran Turismo with damage in the market. If they think it will greatly boost sales of the game, they'll surely be more inclined to invest in new technology and increased staffing levels. If their market research points to damage not making much impact on sales they'll likely either not bother with it at all or implement it half-heartedly and wait to see what kind of reception it will get when the game comes out. Although they come across as perfectionists, they've half heartedly dabbled with stuff before, so i wouldn't rule this option out.

 

[Tenacious D]

My head hurts now

I know. I haven't even voted in my own poll yet because the premise I created is kind of scary. I'm such a waffler.

I would like 75 percent damage with GRID's epic crash visuals, but I'm afraid my scenario may be all too accurate. And since the only game like GT I'm remotely aware of being Forza, this may be all we can realistically expect from a game which includes civilian street cars. And keep in mind that MS being a monopoly is extremely rich. The prospect of having race cars take damage but street cars not is interesting, and possibly tuners as well, but I think the effect would be completely out of balance. Another out of balance option would be only visual or mechanical damage. I think this would please very few people.

If I'd been thinking straight instead of trying to finish before bedtime, I would have included a zero option, but oh well. Those people can voice their opinion in here anyway.

I'm going to ponder this a bit more and maybe vote tonight.

 

[ceiling_fan]

Minimal, because I generally try to avoid crashing

 

[DJMaky]

I'd like 100% if possible, but again, if it's not perfect.....

 

[MeAgainstYou]

if there are any damage.. give me the best! 100%. or isnt this the best game in the world!?

 

[patriotzero]

%100 or no damage i ve been waiting 5 years.

 

[GTracerRens]

Just the 100% and 75% is also great. But still it won't be great if you crash your car while in an endurance event. I hope there isn't an option to turn damage off.

 

[Rash-182]

Best option? How about the same rule PD is using on their games? Realistic but playable for everyone

 

[Patrik]

Please folks, stop creating new threads about things been duscussed already... Damage is the most discussed topic on this forum I think...

 

[amar212]

Best option? How about the same rule PD is using on their games? Realistic but playable for everyone

Exactly my thoughts, but it's very hard to communicate such ideas these days.

Tenacious, you should have also give an option for around 5% damage - that one would include usual race-per-race tyre damage (as all in previous GT games), axle damage (as seen in GT2) and overall car damage through usage-wear (as seen in GT4 with mileage counter and correspondent Chasis Recycle feature).

Please folks, stop creating new threads about things been duscussed already... Damage is the most discussed topic on this forum I think...

You're efforts are worthless young Padawan

And some for fuel the flame even more - below is what video-games should provide, yes? No? Come on, we want damage, we want 100% damage, yes? No? How come? Damage, damage, we want damage! Yes? No? But.. but...

Oh and few another points:

What about SAFETY CAR after the crash?
Who REMOVES the CRASHED vehicles AFTER the damage?
Who actualy CLEANS the DEBREE?
Are you taking control over Safety Car or Crane as a mini-game? Is Debree Cleaning also a mini-game?
Do you MAYBE QUIT after the damage even if you're host? And what if you are the host in 8HR OF LE MANS RACE and you get crashed in 3th hour of the race? DO you quit or you wait for next 5 hours for race to finish?
Is there FLAG SYSTEM during the DEBREE CLEANSING?

So many questions, so many possibilities..

 

[Patrik]

You're efforts are worthless young Padawan

Yeah I guess so...

 

[nyeboy]

For all we know, they've been working on damage since the beginning of development and are already on 50% damage.

 

[H20HYBRID_GT]

Well there really should be a flag-system when damage is in GT5, just to avoid the inevitable chaos ...
And I really have to hope they don't let us rely on other players as host AGAIN , that's far more important than damage imo.

 

[Northstar]

They should set it up like Forza where if the host drops out another player is made host.

Also, nice pics Amar, that's why I voted 50%

 

[Mt. Lynx]

I say 100% damage, hands down.
Debris and clearing the track are of course issues, like flags. Here´s one more: what if you only have light damage in an endurancerace, will you be able to pit for repairs?

The best option the way I see it, would be to have the game divided into two separate sections; the first section are roadlegal cars only, and no damage. Once you reach expert level (or whatever it will be called), all you get are racecars, and full damage!

 

[C-ZETA]

I'd personally be happy with 50%.

 

[RacingFreak2k3]

I'm quite surprised that 16 people have voted for 100%. I think we all know that is probably not going to happen...and based on the pics posted by amar....is there really any car manufacturer that would want to see there car like that?? If there was...GT might have 3 or 4 car makers in the game with 100% damage....

As I said before....I'd be EXTREMELY happy with 50% damage, but I don't think the loss of that many car manufacturers is worth it, hence I went with 25% damage (yes I know the Forza model isn't great), but when everyone compares Forza with GT, many people say....well at least it's there!!

Oh well, I'm not going to lose sleep over it....E3 can't get here soon enough!! That's what I'll lose sleep over haha.

 

[Robin]

I voted 50% because although the damage shown in something like Grid is not quite realistic it looks damn impressive and gives a realistic feel of a major impact. Even things like paint scraping would please me as we have not seen anything from PD yet.

Robin.

 

[Qronicle]

I also went for the 50%. I really cannot think about still not having GT this time next year, so that was the only possibility (quality/release date).
And I guess GRID's visual damage is more than enough

 

[Griffith500]

I voted minimal.

From a purely visual standpoint, I don't think it's that important to have "über-realistic" deformation of the car, though it would be really cool Amar's pics are really quite horrific when you consider the consequences for the driver / passenger / bystanders - the UK government may not mind that (in the right circumstances - higher age rating?), as it could serve as a stark reminder for the "younger players"...

Personally, I think that detachable parts could be a go-er - if we're already going to have interchangeable parts (I read somewhere on here a while ago that the cars are now modeled in such a way as to facilitate this - the tuner cars in GT5P are potential evidence for this system) then having bumpers, wheels, wings etc. "fall off" may be easy to achieve. I don't really see why manufacturers would cry about this so much.

For me, as I've stated elsewhere on these forums (recently, as well as not-so) mechanical damage is paramount - i.e. suspension geometry deformation / breakage when stressing the car (or bouncing off walls, kerbs, lamp-posts etc.) or reduced downforce (wing fell off...) or power (overstressing engine / drivetrain) etc. etc. This would add an element of depth, and I think shouldn't upset the car manufacturers to anywhere near the extent that something like the pics Amar posted would. It would also not likely require any third party physics plugins, which I believe are redundant in a racing game anyway.

PD could be quite sneaky / clever about it: if only racing cars can have damage, then fitting a "mod" (wheels, exhaust, whatever) should make the formerly road car a "race machine" and hence not at all representative of the road machine. Perhaps even racing tyres could designate the car "race-spec" I smell the potential for hefty disclaimer usage...!

Whatever happens, flexibility is key: we need to the ability to individually choose the level of damage in the game to suit ourselves, with many intermediate settings (including for ancillary effects, e.g. race flags). 👍

 

[Antti-san]

I voted for 50 percent. The best of both worlds.

Oh, and no matter how much I'd like to see damage in GT5, I think we already have too many threads discussing this!

 

[dancardesigner]

As much as i would like to see 100% damage, come on thats not gonna happen for a long time, its probably not even possible at the moment, i mean its not like every part of the car is even modelled, only the bits we're really going to see.

Plus as you start bringing in new features like damage, it just makes you realise more problems, in terms of whats not actually implemented into the game such as debris collecting and so on like Amar said.

A lot of people will never be satisfied, as a race in general we always want more. Id be really happy with 50% damage but to be honest i think theres other factors of the game that need to be improved first like the sense of speed and force feedback.

I know theres no gforces and whatever but come on, if it was even close to like driving a real car my dad would not crash into a wall the first corner he approached when he tried the game, a newby would just be able to take the wheel and drive, maybe not fast but at least get around the track lol.

Also has any one noticed just how much a delay there is between steering input and a reaction on screen?, crt is not to bad but HD tvs are terrible for it, especially my pioneer 42".

 

[JAGUAR1977]

The target should always be 100% damage, but 100% car models aren't possible either, does that mean PD should continue with GT4 car models until the hardware allows for perfection?

Games like iRacing and Grid have shown very convincing damage modeling is possible on current gen hardware, I'm sure F1 2010 and Dirt 2 will take that to another level still.