Damage build in GT5 - READ FIRST POST before voting

[ceiling_fan]

Also, what would happen to the driver in a crash? If it was 100% it would get quite messy. Not to mention losing the E rating.

 

[Peter]

I can't believe you all want to see this happen to these beautiful cars. Kaz loves cars too much for 100% damage physics. 50% the most or GT5 loses me as a fan after 11 years strong. And the car makers wouldnt want their cars to just fall apart like they're glued together with bubblegum.

 

[TeamStig]

I went with 25%. Of course I'd love to see a better damage model if they could pull it off, but this one seems the most feasible given the short time frame.

 

[GTracerRens]

I think Amar is right. And might be a good idea to place some safetry cars in there. I love them! But I don't want to have it as realistic as shown in your pictures, but wheels flying around the circuit and stuff would be awesome! I don't think I would join a 8h endurance online though...

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

I can't believe you all want to see this happen to these beautiful cars. Kaz loves cars too much for 100% damage physics. 50% the most or GT5 loses me as a fan after 11 years strong. And the car makers wouldnt want their cars to just fall apart like they're glued together with bubblegum.

I can't believe anyone would drive a performance car at 5 mph because he's afraid it's gonna get scratched. GT is not a gallery showcase, it's a racing game. I love sports cars too, but that's not gonna keep me from using them for their intended purpose - racing.

Sports cars are meant to be driven hard; it just so happens that when a hamfisted driver makes a mistake, he's gonna pay the consequence (not intentional, by the way)

Simple solution: learn the consequences of pushing a car out of it's limits, and it won't happen to you...

Or never drive it out of the garage.

 

[PSNkilluminati]

What are the odds of GT5 being at e309? and i heard FM3 would release this year withh 400 cars and 100 tracks can GT5 beat that? Any way i chose 25% I really don't care about PERFECTION i just want to make sure i can't go 180mph into a wall.

 

[greenlightning]

I would set 50% as the target to achieve. However there is still many things that need improved before damage is implimented. A.I. and how cars interface with each other is still an area that needs big improvements. Sounds is another big area. I choose not to vote as the choices are shown. I believe that damage will be limited to race cars or tuned / race prepped cars only. That is fine by me and better than nothing. After all we are talking about racing and not driving a car around a track. Racing a bunch of show room floor cars around a race track is not very realistic. I would like to believe that the creater of the game has a passion for tuning/modding factory cars into racers. The presence of Sema winners certainly indicates that. 100% damage would not be very benificial to the game and most users would have to change the settings so that it is perhaps only 50% or less. We always talk about what manfactures charge to license their cars for the game. However I think now more than ever they have a lot to gain from having their cars in the game. First of all the advertising is enourmous. I would full expect new models to continuasly be released through out GT5 life cycle. I doubt that I would buy a car soley based on GT series however it would certainly point me in the direction to look. In the future I would expect real time advertising in online racing. Meaning that bill boards etc. may not always be the same.

 

[Worst_Driver]

I will be more than satisfied with or without damage
If damage is what it takes so long to make that game, I would be so 🤬 off about it
Why do people are still making threads about damage?

 

[Squasher]

What are the odds of GT5 being at e309? and i heard FM3 would release this year withh 400 cars and 100 tracks can GT5 beat that? Any way i chose 25% I really don't care about PERFECTION i just want to make sure i can't go 180mph into a wall.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=115870

Basically, odds of GT5 at E3 and having more content then forza are pretty good

 

[Tenacious D]

By the way, I did this poll as a sort of lightning rod to attract the damage arguments, plus to add a bit of sanity and common sense into the discussion. I hope letting people see in a hypothetical way what is involved would be illuminating, and make damage rants die down a bit. A big wish, I know...

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

Wow... you guys who really want 100 percent really have faith that Kazunori is some sort of magic wand weilding wizard. Then again, stranger things have happened. Killzone 2 lived up to the 2006 trailer...

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.

Okay now, you're waffling worse than me.

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.

I don't either, but I still see that PD and SONY have a lot of prestige riding on GT5. With Metal Gear Solid and Killzone causing such an impact, and with Uncharted 2 and Ratchet & Clank coming with their own tqake on epically pushing the videogame envelope, I have to think that Kazunori sees it the same way, that his reputation is at stake.

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.

I don't think this is possible in racing games. Every PC sim that I'm aware of lets you disable damage.

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

I'm still wondering about this myself, and it would allow Kaz to make damage fiends feel content. I don't expect any trickery from Kazunori, such as adding racing tires to a 240SX making it automatically into a racing or tuning class car and subject to damage. He values the relationship with the car companies too much, I'm sure to try any shenanigans like that. But tuners are in essence light race cars, so this has potential. I don't usually race a flat stock street car in GT4 anyway.

@ Amar, I decided against adding another level below 25% because the lowest is a variable, so within that limit would fit perfectly the type of damage implementation we had in GT2.

Now, for my own opinion...

I'm still wondering about you 100% people. Are you serious? For one thing, literally realistic damage is impossible because no car maker will allow the driver compartment to have any damage at all, even race cars. For another thing, I've come to realize that even 75% is very serious. To put this in perspective, consider that with your body, this is the equivalent difference between three and four broken ribs. Even a minor wreck at 75% has the possibility based on the accuracy of the model to end your race.

I'm also thinking that any damage work PD does has been planned on from the start, as I noticed a few screen shots of cars being modeled, and the screen included interior construction and engine designs. Hmm...

I may be selling GRID a bit short, but it seemed that damage talk was more at an arcade level than sim, but with spectacular damage modeling. Since Polyphony is at least as technically competent as Codemasters, I don't think GRID style damage is out of reach. Also, the difference between one-third and one-half damage might not have much impact at all on game engine performance. Lastly, I know MS is made of money, but I believe Kazunori has a much better relationship with the automotive world than Microsoft, or anyone in Turn 10.

So... I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that GT5 will have something in the range of GRID's 50%, even though the situation seems to favor less. My apologies to Codemaster if I'm completely wrong about their game.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

I'm still wondering about you 100% people. Are you serious? For one thing, literally realistic damage is impossible because no car maker will allow the driver compartment to have any damage at all, even race cars. For another thing, I've come to realize that even 75% is very serious. To put this in perspective, consider that with your body, this is the equivalent difference between three and four broken ribs. Even a minor wreck at 75% has the possibility based on the accuracy of the model to end your race.

Well, I just said what I would have in a perfect world. Whether manufacturers are gonna let that happen is a different issue.

 

[fasj6418]

I voted for 25%, but i don't think that will happen.

It's a shame i can't assure you guys anything, but let's pretend for a moment that i'm with a group of friends in a bar talking about the subject. I would say something like this:

"Off course GT5 is not gonna have damage, they are focusing all their work on other things. Hey, things they promised ever since GT1 are still not in the game, so why would something that Kaz doesn't want be in? Something so time consuming, hard, expensive and difficult to do, why? Off course the game will not have damage".

Well, maybe posting this without telling a little story would make me a little arrogant, but that's what i would say if we were talking in a bar about damage.

I've been following GT since 1998, and i don't get fooled by some quotes made out just to please the press. I'm part of the press, i know how it works. They have to say they are working on it, but when the game is realesed, they will come up with a good excuse to justify the absense. The final game might end up being so good that people won't be so hard on it.

I would love it to be as realistic as possible in terms of racing, and that includes some kind of damage, but, i know how hard it is to do. I don't think it's among their priorities.

Maybe we get mechanichal damage, and that to me would already be 75% of what i want from damage. If the engine can blow because of wear and tear, if the gearbox can be blow because of miss shifts, and if tires can blow and wear out realisticaly, that's more than enough for me. I don't really worry about a fallen bumper if we get the mechanichal aspect nailed down.

Now, Amar, ever since those posts, everything you say we will try to interpretate in a way of "Oh, he is trying to say something", so, reading your post, what i make is, you already now that realistic damage is not in the game, and probably also heard some kind of explanation, from PD. We will know (or have clues) at E3, but all the signs point to no damage.

The only ones pushing for damage are the press, the fans, and sony. Teh developer has never come out to say that this was a main goal for them.

PROVE ME WRONG PD! GIVE ME MY MECHANICHAL DAMAGE PLEASE!

 

[Tenacious D]

Well, I just said what I would have in a perfect world.

Hrm... I had a feeling that some of you were "cheating."

See, I went to great lengths to paint the premise as very real life, full of gritty game and industry politics and strong, greedy egos. Very not ideal, very imperfect world, with a PS3 that's not powerful enough to run the Starship Enterprise. I wanted to establish this as something where you had to weigh pros and cons, consider reasonable limitations and technical constraints, not just point your finger and say, "Make it so." But I won't browbeat anyone too much over it, because a GT game with uber realism would sure be heaven on a Blu-Ray.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

In that case, the question should've been "What level of damage will it have?", instead of "What should it have?". But I digress.

Like I said before, I'm well aware there are several factors in the picture. We can't say exactly how far they can go since we don't know what their plans are, we don't know all of what they're trying to fit in. All I ask is for them to give their best shot at 100%, instead of dodging the issue altogether.

 

[premhz]

I voted 50% but want 100%. Every other driving/racing game has damage(and realistic weather...F1CE) and we have been waiting for 5 yrs for GT5,so come on just do it and get it out already!

 

[j8mie]

I voted for 50% for the time being. One day we will get 100% realistic damage on a GT game, but not just yet. I don't see the point in holding up the games release by several months just for one brand new feature. PD are best to give us some damage so we get used to it and then over time add more damage with updates and when new versions come out.

As much as I would love full on damage from day one I'm more eager to play the game.

 

[Ardius]

I won't vote because really I don't really want to see damage at all in the game, not the visual kind that this poll is talking about.
Where is the option for "mechanical damage only"?

I doubt we will ever see damage implemented beyond 25% that all the manufacturers will agree to. The problem with GT having more manufacturers and cars than any other game is that they have to acquire more licenses than any other game along with convincing more people.
I can see mechanical damage being far more likely to be implemented and adding far more gameplay wise.

 

[Griffith500]

Maybe we get mechanichal damage, and that to me would already be 75% of what i want from damage. If the engine can blow because of wear and tear, if the gearbox can be blow because of miss shifts, and if tires can blow and wear out realisticaly, that's more than enough for me. I don't really worry about a fallen bumper if we get the mechanichal aspect nailed down.

The only ones pushing for damage are the press, the fans, and sony. Teh developer has never come out to say that this was a main goal for them.

PROVE ME WRONG PD! GIVE ME MY MECHANICHAL DAMAGE PLEASE!

I'd like to echo this sentiment. Though, I still think deformed suspension / steering is a must, to avoid taking risky shortcuts etc. Say you bump a curb a bit hard, in a "real" car, that would upset the tracking and force the steering centre off, so you drive down the straight with the wheel "turned"... etc. It could even damage a link, upsetting the geometry and giving you masses of understeer turning left, but uncontrollable oversteer turning right, for example.

'67 US GP: Jim Clark, winner (right rear wheel)

In that case, the question should've been "What level of damage will it have?", instead of "What should it have?". But I digress.

You ought to have read the first post, all is made clear there (in a roundabout way ) Your views are still welcome in a post before/after you've voted, of course... 👍

 

[NLxAROSA]

I have seen several games (mostly on PC) that have had damage implemented very nicely years and years before the release of GT5.

As a matter of fact, one of the games with a really good damage implementation was Colin McRae Rally 2. It had suspension and wheels deteriorating if you drove over too many rocks or cut too many corners hitting ditches and stuff like that, the mirrors and bumpers coming off if you hit a tree or something like that, and it was all done very gradually. (Apparently Subaru and Peugeot are not among the manufacturers complaining if their cars get smashed ). Mind you, this game was released in 2001!

Other games that come to mind are Richard Burns Rally and of course Race07/GTR-Evo. All these games feature damage in a way that is very gradual (e.g. one crash will not make the car look like in amar's pictures ) but it is just the right amount to make you think twice about making silly moves. It's not so much about being able to break stuff into little pieces, but have it detoriorate the car's behaviour in a subtle manner.

So it's definitely possible to do it in a nice, controlled manner. Still, I wouldn't mind if GT5 didn't have it.

 

[Tenacious D]

Where is the option for "mechanical damage only"?

If I'd thought about it a bit more, I could have made a more comprehensive poll including just mechanical damage and similar percent ranges. But at the bottom of the first post I invited those who just wanted mechanical or visual damage to post, and so far there are 3 or 4 mechanical only posts, which is about the fraction I expected. Personally, and it seems for most, this is a rather unpopular position.

You ought to have read the first post, all is made clear there (in a roundabout way )

Rather like, "There's a bomb you have to diffuse, and it's ticking..."

I have high expectations for GT5, for two reasons.

1. Kazunori has a great and growing reputation in the automotive and racing world. In the early days before GT1 came out, they all wondered who this yahoo even was. Now, everyone wants to be his friend. Gran Turismo is a fantastic showcase for their cars and gets perhaps multiple millions around the world seriously thinking about buying one of their vehicles. He can probably use a lot of influence to schmooze car makers these days, but we have yet to know for sure how far this goes.

2. The PS3 is extremely powerful. I just built a 2.8 ghz triple core Athlon AM3 chipset PC with 4 GB, and this would smoke it, but it also cost about $600 US more. But in some ways, the PS3 blows everything away. It has EIGHT 3.2ghz cores, unless one SPE is taken away from use to run the PS3, and while it only has 256MB of ram for game code and another 256MB for the RSX GPU, this is still enough to get Metal Gear Solid 4 and Killzone 2 to run with cinematic graphics and minimal pop up. Prologue is amazing, and it's the early build of the GT5 engine. While some of us in the early days were saying it really needed more ram, at leasy system ram, it seems that game coders have learmed from the skimpy PS2 how to shuffle their cards around to get much more out of the hardware than they have reason to. And they seem to have a handle on how to use those six or so SPEs to do many things from managing A.I. to working with the RSX to optimize graphics.

F1CE is an early game in the PS3's short life, and it seems to be an amazing accomplishment. Polyphony is a developer which has been notorious for pushing the Playstation hardware, like Konami, Insomniac and Naughty Dog, and with all this horsepower available, I couldn't be sure what Kaz and the lads would have to leave off. Ferrari Challenge is another game which has much of what we want, and this is from a smaller, less capable company. In my first post, I illustrated some of what a game company has to wrestle with as far as budgeting resources, and Kazunori does have his own priorities, not to mention the car makers. But if anyone can squeeze much of what we want into GT5, Kaz and his team can do it.

Now, if only May would hurry up and pass...

 

[yeti]

/off-topic...

Why do you call KY "Kazunori-Duro" - and not "Kazunori-san" like every other uninitiated westerner?

C.

PS - apologies for any spelling mistakes in the 'japanese' words!

 

[Tenacious D]

The Japanese use a range of suffixes to denote different things, such as "-kun" or "-chan" at the end of a male or female to denote friendship or close attachment. "-san" is a generic term like Sir or Madam. There are two which denote high respect, superiority and reverence, and these are "-dono" and "-sama." A few years ago I was referring to Kazunori as Kazunori-sama, until I found out that "sama" means something on the verge of worship, which is just a bit much. So, a quick explanation.

Is it June YET?

 

[blkvzgo]

I voted 25-35 percent, as I believe we won't get anything better than that, although it will probably look better, since GT5's graphics are far better than Forza's. And I really don't understand why we are told that manufacturers don't want to see their cars damaged, Forza had an impressive list of car manufacturers, and all of them could be crashed. Yes, Microsoft is a rich company, but so is PD. But of course there are some things I'd like to see before damage, for example some minor tweaks to the physics engine, a normal tire system. These things are much more important to me, as in my opinion GT is about giving us an opportunity to "drive" cars most of us would never be able to drive in real life, and making it as realistic as possible. Whether we can crash or not is not that important, at least for me.

 

[Peter]

I can't believe anyone would drive a performance car at 5 mph because he's afraid it's gonna get scratched. GT is not a gallery showcase, it's a racing game. I love sports cars too, but that's not gonna keep me from using them for their intended purpose - racing.

Sports cars are meant to be driven hard; it just so happens that when a hamfisted driver makes a mistake, he's gonna pay the consequence (not intentional, by the way)

Simple solution: learn the consequences of pushing a car out of it's limits, and it won't happen to you...

Or never drive it out of the garage.

I never said no damage at all, but 100% isn't user friendly enough and people will call GT5 the game that's too hard to play.

 

[Tenacious D]

I really don't understand why we are told that manufacturers don't want to see their cars damaged, Forza had an impressive list of car manufacturers, and all of them could be crashed.

This puzzles me too. This has to have something to do with earlier game companies (EA?) rendering damage to a level that some car makers didn't like compared to others. Then again, I'm sure that most of them have argued over performance differences they didn't appreciate, yet they still want their cars in these games. I don't know, humankind is a strange race...

there are some things I'd like to see before damage, for example some minor tweaks to the physics engine, a normal tire system.

Kaz and his team definitely have their own philosophy when it comes to realism, but then, I've noticed every game maker does. Having dipped back into PC sim racing, they all have their own flavor. Take a car in rFactor, one of the GTRs, iRacing, Live For Speed, and all are distinctly different, and yet, each one has a flock of fans that insist their game gets it the most right. And then take a spin in Prologue, Forza 2 or one of the Toca games, and you have more differences, while not quite being stomped in the accuracy department as the sim fiends would lead you to believe.

Then again, there's real life. Tossing around in my Supra recently, I've concluded that Prologue is actually pretty realistic. Undoubtedly, GT5 is being fine tuned along with all the other work being done with it, but whatever they give us, I know I'm going to be happy.

 

[-ultraflow-]

I like the damage system of GRID, is not a destruction derby damage and have nice visual and mechanical effects!

We must assume that GT5 is not a game designed for cars destruction...

So I think GT5 as the real driving simulator would not abuse on damage, and focus more on mechanical damage than cosmetic.

👍

 

[Tenacious D]

http://www.yukom-client.de/client_space/audi_gb_08/pdf/02_1_de-nuerburgring_pcspiel.pdf

Anyone fluent in german, please translate this.

Cortesy of Double H of Neogaf.

👍

Thanks man, i'm almost sure this is new.

I forgot to post the most interesting bit, the video.

http://www.yukom-client.de/client_space/audi_gb_08/#/nuerburgring/wirklichkeit-und-illusion/r8

If only we could had the hud-less view in game, instead of only on replays...

Thanks to our own fasj6418 here for digging this up, this is a fascinating development.

You know this is going to be translated to death and spread like a flu all over the net tomorrow. Assuming this is correct and what we will get in GT5, and we're going to see full damage in race cars or close to it, what do you think? I had held open the possibility that this would happen, but assumed that Kazunori would sweet talk the automakers around the world into seeing things his way.

Is this a good thing. or good enough? Will this satisfy the damage fiends, or will there be an even bigger cry for PD to work it out with the car makers ASAP, and patch in damage for all vehicles? What will game journalists and the sim fiends think?

Personally, if this is the case, I see this as a boon for Polyphony, but at the same time a mixed bag. I think a lot of gamers are going to think the game is schizophrenic, where one level of racing has damage and another, none. I'll be content, but this is going to seem kind of weird.

But as JohnBM01 would say, I've rambled on enough, carry on with your own thoughts.

 

[chepu]

i voted 50%...sadly before reading the first post, i think that if damage its going to cost lamborghinis/porsches and a really good overall modification system...then i dont want damage, now if its going to be some damage in the game, ill be happy with reallistic mechanic damage and in the exterior part i dont care if its as lame as midnight club los angeles damage...now GRiD may look really good but thinking on the quantity of cars/tracks/lack of modifying..i just simply wont exchange all those characteristics..for damage!...

...short version, if GT5 comes with weather/environment change and a car modification system as good as forza`s (also counting the huge quantity of cars/tracks) i dont care about damage...but hey! its Just My Opinion

 

[Tenacious D]

i voted 50%...sadly before reading the first post, i think that if damage its going to cost lamborghinis/porsches and a really good overall modification system...then i dont want damage (snip)...now GRiD may look really good but thinking on the quantity of cars/tracks/lack of modifying..i just simply wont exchange all those characteristics..for damage!

Frankly, I agree. I don't like to pick and choose - so here I make a thread which forces everyone to pick and choose. But if it came down to having more cars versus having fewer cars with fairly realistic damage, I'll take more cars any day. I have plenty of games in which I can tear up cars real good. And others, not so good.

 

[johnnydazed]

As much as I would love 100% I voted >25%

The vast majority of players of this game are casual users just out for a bit of a hoon.
The amount of players who could actually finish a race most of their races if damage was 100% would be 20% or less I would think.

I would be stoked with paint stratches, crumpled hood, truck, side panels, shattered glass and with loss of bumpers, body kits and in extreme circumstances, wheels. But with a really good adjustable mechanical damage system.

The fun part for me will be paying after a race to replace panels, get wheels re-aligned and the paintwork back to normal to keep the sponsors happy, not finishing second because an AI car hit me from behind and left me limping to the finish.

I will be disappointed if its only race cars that can have damage.
I guess its better than nothing but it would be fully sick if all cars could have some level of damage.