Damage build in GT5 - READ FIRST POST before voting

[Havok_]

I too am one who doesn't care much for damage and although i know GT5 will be a fantastic game, i think the damage is not well done at all.

The Impreza in the Gamescom videos just has superficial damage and the perfomance doesn't seem to be affected at all. This is what i wanted to avoid in the GT series. If damage was implemented and they were going to take a year longer to develop GT i figured that they would have done a bette job than what i saw.

I just want to play GT5 already, i know that this whole damage issue is the main contributer for the delay but for gamers like me i would have been fine without it.

 

[TorqueHappenS08]

I dont know, That GC footage was just a demo anyway. Wait till TGS. As kaz once said the E3 trailer was just a tiny percent of the real game.

 

[GTracerRens]

I too am one who doesn't care much for damage and although i know GT5 will be a fantastic game, i think the damage is not well done at all.

The Impreza in the Gamescom videos just has superficial damage and the perfomance doesn't seem to be affected at all. This is what i wanted to avoid in the GT series. If damage was implemented and they were going to take a year longer to develop GT i figured that they would have done a bette job than what i saw.

I just want to play GT5 already, i know that this whole damage issue is the main contributer for the delay but for gamers like me i would have been fine without it.

Yes, I think it it's better without damage than "only on selected cars". But the in-car-camera is very important and useful to my opinion. In GT5P there was the prototype of the GT-R without a cockpit cam, so I never drove that car.

 

[.:KidNextDoor:.]

I would say 25-35% for now until they make a new GT and technology advances. Maybe 50% for WRC and NASCAR for added realism but 25-35% for all other races. That would do me nicely just to have at least that amount of damage than none at all

 

[DaddyVDUB]

I too am one who doesn't care much for damage and although i know GT5 will be a fantastic game, i think the damage is not well done at all.

The Impreza in the Gamescom videos just has superficial damage and the perfomance doesn't seem to be affected at all. This is what i wanted to avoid in the GT series. If damage was implemented and they were going to take a year longer to develop GT i figured that they would have done a bette job than what i saw.

I just want to play GT5 already, i know that this whole damage issue is the main contributer for the delay but for gamers like me i would have been fine without it.

Agreed, IF this is all damage is going to be I am pretty PO'd it was'nt worth all this time.

 

[Tenacious D]

i know that this whole damage issue is the main contributer for the delay but for gamers like me i would have been fine without it.

I'm not sure you can say that if you think of all that was involved in the development of GT5. And keep in mind that these are just the things we know:

• 1,000 cars painstakingly modeled.
• At least 20 tracks painstakingly modeled, but probably more like 60 or more, plus variations.
• Damage implementation.
• Physics recoded and polished.
• (I think this was the major roadblock, personally) SONY ordered Polyphony to focus on getting GTPSP ready for launch first, when Kaz mentioned several times that GT5 was his priority, and GT Mobile would have to wait.

And keep in mind we have scores of features Kaz and SONY have yet to reveal, and are holding back for TGS in four weeks. The workload Kaz and his team must have endured over the past two years for these issues and more was probably a severe grind.

 

[Tenacious D]

I think it's time for a thread bump. The reason being that I keep seeing misguided posts which say things like "Other games have all these cars with damage. There's no excuse for Polyphony now."

As people like Scaff, who at least did work in the industry have mentioned, getting just a fraction of carmakers to agree on anything to do with their cars is both time consuming, frustrating, and expensive in regard licensing costs. If a car company is reluctant, they can sometimes be persuaded with lots of money. And with certain companies like Ferrari, lots of money can still get them to budge very little, and if you've ever torture tested a Ferrari in a Forza game, you'll know what I mean.

I have no idea how many auto companies are involved in GT5 with a roster of 1000 plus cars, but you can bet that very few of them are left out. Australia might finally get the love they deserve. But for Kazunori-dono this also has to be THE WORST HEADACHE EVAR!

Just think about it. On the one hand, you have a few companies like Ford who will let you do almost anything short of crushing the driver compartment and setting it on fire, and some like Ferrari who want their cars to be indestructible and showroom perfect no matter what. And in between, you have perhaps 60 carmakers, each with their own list of demands.

And almost none of them agree!

And you have to produce this game before the end of the world.

You can go the Forza route, and finess in as much as you can get away with, and end up with cars that damage differently in the same impact.

You can go the traditional Gran Turismo route, and forget about damage entirely, and shrug off the resulting criticism.

You can go the Ferrari Challenge route, and have all cars suffer minimal damage defined by the most stingy car company, probably Ferrari.

You can try something in between, where street cars suffer no damage, and race cars can get demolished and suffer rollovers fairly realistically.

So, what's the best answer?

This is what you naysayers and whiners need to keep in mind, who've never had to deal with moving goal posts like this with millions of yen at stake, and your reputation on the line.

 

[sanavain]

The problem is Yamauchi is hoping to use realistic damage in a game, nothing like what other car racing games do. This could hurt the reputation of a car manufacturer, which is why they are reluctant to allow it. http://www.product-reviews.net/2008/11/13/ps3-gran-turismo-5-crash-damage-problems/ Maybe we never get 100% damage in the gt serie.

 

[Devedander]

I don't want to see dead people in ripped apart car chasis while driving, reasltic or not.

I think the standard should be based on getting enough damage that the cars driving ability is hampered appropriately for the impact, all the way down to wheels falling off and the engine failing (basically a forced end of race).

I can respect the driver safety cage golden halo, and I can respect some corners being cut in exactly how horrific the damge looks as long as it's somewhat dramatic. I just want the punishment for bad driving and collisions to range all the way up to a race ending level if you do it bad enough, and that bad enough needs to be about on par with reality.

So if in reality it would shear the car in half and throw body parts, but that's not what visually happens, that's ok with me as long as the damage is still visually significant and the car is forced to stop the race because it would be undriveable.

As examples I was happy with how damage was portrayed for rallisport 1/2 and toca 2/3... an appropriate increase in detail relative to the time and hardware differences, but around those levels and with race ending damage possible is what I would like to see..

 

[lbsf1]

i want cars that can be destroyed crumpled and scratched like in burnout paradise. however burnout has fake car companies not real ones. if it is a real driving simulator is should puinish you for damaging the cars. I do karting going over kerbs car bend a sproket and stop your race or often you just have a problem for no reason you want a real driving simulator make mechanical damage a priority.

 

[Coiler]

While gt is a mass product, 50% dmg is the best way to go. IMO.

 

[FLASH48]

I really don't care if there is damage or not! But mechanical damage i would go for that. I can't believe some one would think they can drive, the same in real life as in GT5 and not get hurt. They would have to have some major wires crossed!

 

[MowTin]

I think dents, scratches and cracked glass and mechanical damage is enough.

Whatever they do it has to compete with Forza 3 and Shift. If GT5 is not better than Forza 3 or Shift the reviewers will point that out and it will be an epic fail considering the amount of work they poured into GT5.

But one thing for sure, you can't have cars that take no damage at all like in Prologue. That's just silly. Every time I slam into a wall in London and keep going it kills the immersion for me.

I voted for 25% because it has to compete with Forza.

But I want to add that car rollover is more important. If you take a turn too hard the car should get on two wheels. But it should be done right like in LFS where it feels like something with weight that's tipping over. There should be that moment when you don't know if you're going to flip or come back down on 4 wheels. Even Dirt 2 doesn't get that right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QczRWAt63iQ

 

[Maggot666PL]

I'm said, I can't anything to what Tenacious D said... again.

As examples I was happy with how damage was portrayed for rallisport 1/2 and toca 2/3... an appropriate increase in detail relative to the time and hardware differences, but around those levels and with race ending damage possible is what I would like to see..

No, you wasn't. There was no Toca 3, you're talking about TRD3 (a.k.a. DTMRD3 or V8SC3) . And I agree, this level is already very good, but I'd like GT to aim a bit higher. While completely realistic damage is quite unnecessary (there is no good reason to crush drivers, rip them apart and so on - it ain't no FlatOut), it would be nice to see real causes resulting in real damage, even if hampered down a tiny bit. But the way Forza, or even worse - System 3 with their FC and SCC go - is a complete joke. This kind of damage is just an eye candy, and a poor one.

Having the certainty that slamming your car into a wall at high speed (even not directly, just "giving it a shoulder") will result in terminal damage, accompanied by wheel loss, smashed front end and even some minor intrusion into the driver compartment? The ability to use this kind of damage would've been breathtaking (I can imagine LAN/split screen 30-lap races with this kind of Damocles' sword hanging over your head...).

That being said - I'm okay with GT having no damage till they're able to achieve their goal (and hopefully it's no less than my dream). But I'd like to see the non-visual damage, also very easily (as in: even a slight thump results in drivability-impairing damage) done to your car, implemented as a substitute. For the reason MowTin mentioned - London without damage tends to be quite annoying.

 

[Tenacious D]

There was no Toca 3, you're talking about TRD3 (a.k.a. DTMRD3 or V8SC3) .

You're from Europe though, and the game was packaged and named differently in different regions. In America, it was commonly known as Toca 3, as the "Race Driver" part was pretty small. But we know what you both mean.

I think we're either going to get Ferrari Challenge level damage, with the probability of full to 50% damage for race cars, or no damage at all for street cars and light to 50% damage for tuners and race cars. And hey, personally I'd be fine with that. I never raced recklessly in FC unless I was fighting like mad for a first place finish, and struggling to out bash the bots, but that was rare.

Even in GT4, I wouldn't bumpercar my way around a track, unless I was getting frustrated with a race, and then I'd do over rather than cheat. Most of us here will deal with whatever Kazunori gives us, because those car makers are the ones who have the final say on what we get to experience.

 

[Dravonic]

100%

I don't care how much it costs, how long it takes, how bad it may be for the game in terms of sales. GT is about realism, and seeking realism no matter the cost should be PD's goal.

It's not like they don't have the money or the time needed. GT5P alone sold 4 million copies. Most full games don't even get near that. Also 5 years of development is enough time to come up with 75% damage at least. Not that 10% they showed us at GC.

 

[Devedander]

No, you wasn't. There was no Toca 3, you're talking about TRD3 (a.k.a. DTMRD3 or V8SC3) .

Yes, and I mean to say Rallisport Challenge too Man that was an awesome game... did anoyone NOT like RSC?

Most of us here will deal with whatever Kazunori gives us, because those car makers are the ones who have the final say on what we get to experience.

I will deal with what I can get because it's what I can get, but I don't support just passing the buck... it was KY's choice to announce damage, and if he can't deliver, it's his words on the line. Car manufacturers didn't make any claims, so I don't hold them responsible.

If Sony sells me a crap TV, but the problem is a part made by XYZ company in the TV, I still blame Sony, it's their product, they sold it to me.

 

[Tenacious D]

Yes but Dev, it's not wise to speak in negative hypotheticals all the time in dealing with certain companies, as you've tried to psychoanalise me. Like saying Sony could sell you a crap TV, which they aren't, ever, just a bit overpriced. No?

It's also not a good idea to put words in someone else's mouth or twist them to suit your negative views. It seems like ever since Kazunori-dono said he was going to try and put damage into GT5, you've taken that as some sort of flat out promise of 100% damage on every car. Which he did not.

In fact, for those wanting 100% realistic damage, since I'm unaware of any PC sim which delivers on that, asking for it in GT5 is kind of a stretch. Maybe the team can whip up something convincing, but I think my poll post is pretty accurate, that it'll take a polycore PS4 to handle such physics calculations on the fly.

And by the way, saying that car companies refusal to allow something is "passing the buck" is just goofy. Do you want to see GT5 with cars locked up because Kaz tried to sneak something by them? Won't happen, plus he has to go back to them to renew permissions for GT6.

 

[Devedander]

Yes but Dev, it's not wise to speak in negative hypotheticals all the time in dealing with certain companies, as you've tried to psychoanalise me. Like saying Sony could sell you a crap TV, which they aren't, ever, just a bit overpriced. No?

Ummm, I don't speak in negative hypotheticals all the time... but if they are the current points of interest, that's what I would be talking about... I know a lot of people on here seem to think lack of information is an opportunity to celebrate at what's still possible because it hasn't been denied... I just happend to look at lack of information as a worrisome situation lack of confirmation. Until that changes, I don't think being skeptical is at all out of place.

You can bet as soon as something that really impresses me is officially announced, I will be right up there with everyone else cheering.

I don't know if Sony has ever sold a crap TV, I would think every company has had a lemon at some point, but it was an analogy... I should have probably chose samsung or something to avoid confusion...

It's also not a good idea to put words in someone else's mouth or twist them to suit your negative views. It seems like ever since Kazunori-dono said he was going to try and put damage into GT5, you've taken that as some sort of flat out promise of 100% damage on every car. Which he did not.

We can play the game of technically what was said and bring out lawyer speak to define what "is" means. But in context, under the circumstances, there is an implied meaning. I don't think anyone wasn't at least a little bit shocked to learn that only limited cars in GT5 would have damage instead of all. That makes it the reasonable meaning to take away, and you can't even realistically argue that PD and KY didn't know that when the announcement was made... I mean claims that they don't want to release it without taking the time to do it right... you can defend the technicalities, but the spirit of the meaning the way it was said is really not very questionable, and there is no way KY and PD's PR team didn't know that.

In fact, for those wanting 100% realistic damage, since I'm unaware of any PC sim which delivers on that, asking for it in GT5 is kind of a stretch. Maybe the team can whip up something convincing, but I think my poll post is pretty accurate, that it'll take a polycore PS4 to handle such physics calculations on the fly.

I can only speak for myself, but when I say I want realistic damage I don't mean those shorn in have, tearing ribbons of metal pictures we saw earlier. I mean I want damage that reasonably reflects what happens and more importantly damage that punishes you appropriately for collisions. Basically no glaring ommissions or vastly unrealistic represntation of an impact. Keep it clean for the kiddies and within reason for the hardware and programmers, but do it right.

I (we all) have waited for PD to do it right... well I just want it done right.

And by the way, saying that car companies refusal to allow something is "passing the buck" is just goofy. Do you want to see GT5 with cars locked up because Kaz tried to sneak something by them? Won't happen, plus he has to go back to them to renew permissions for GT6.

First off, I don't think anyone from PD has actually said that, it's just a line used as a potential out to defend PD's limited damge.

Secondly it is passing the buck. And no, jumping to the other end of the scale with some off the wall example doesn't make it any less so.

When you say something will be there (implicitely if not explicitly) and then you fail to deliver, YOU failed to deliver. Why is not the issue.

I am happier to accept it than something lame like "we all wanted to watch movies for 5 years so just didn't work on the game". But it's still a case of, if you offer but then can't deliver, you failed. If not, no failure would be anyones fault but the lowest link in the chain.

MS isn't responsible for RROD, it's the chip maker that makes the gate in the processor at section C443G... wait no it's not, it's the metal works who purified the copper, wait no it's not, it's the mine workers fault who dug up the ore, wait no it's not, it's the company who made the shovels fault...

The last entity in the chain I deal with is the where the buck lies. Going on from there is passing the buck...

 

[moshic]

But I want to add that car rollover is more important. If you take a turn too hard the car should get on two wheels. But it should be done right like in LFS where it feels like something with weight that's tipping over. There should be that moment when you don't know if you're going to flip or come back down on 4 wheels. Even Dirt 2 doesn't get that right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QczRWAt63iQ

Totally agree with you. I think this is an important thing that the game must have for be a lot more realistic. When we turn hard, for the crashes and when we go to the pozzolana.

 

[alba]

25% Standard physics / 75% Professional physics (Keep some resources for dynamic weather obviously!)


*ahem*

 

[Cheshyrkat]

100% or at least the option for 100% as a Ultra Pro Sim mode or something. It has never been done before in any game Ive played in a truly realistic fashion and I would love to see it in the GT series. Maybe as an extra mode similar to the HD mode in GT2 (or GT1). At the very least the damage level should be comparable to what has been done before in past games but I truly want the option of tin can, car crushing, race ending physics.

 

[Devedander]

100% or at least the option for 100% as a Ultra Pro Sim mode or something. It has never been done before in any game Ive played in a truly realistic fashion and I would love to see it in the GT series. Maybe as an extra mode similar to the HD mode in GT2 (or GT1). At the very least the damage level should be comparable to what has been done before in past games but I truly want the option of tin can, car crushing, race ending physics.

I would think definitely an option as I can imagine it would get VERY frustrating for most people.

 

[Maggot666PL]

^^ +1
I agree, this level of damage should be optional (and possibly for the chosen cars only, if it's too complicated to implement, I could live with that). You don't want to cuss and grind your teeth when you launch GT to have some fun or earn easy credits, even if you are a hardcore gamer.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

Personally I would enjoy 100% damage, but it's not realistic to expect car manufacturers to go along with that.

 

[Tenacious D]

Considering that I'm unaware of any racing game with 100% realistic damage, I wouldn't just lay it at the feet of the carmakers. It seems that even the PC sims pass the buck on that aspect, as it most likely would require as much work on the racing physics to create realistic crashing effects. We'll have to see what will make it into GT5.

Maybe in GT6, Polyphony could just add a few more car lines, a number of tracks, and then devote a lot of work on environmental effects such as weather and time of day changes if they don't make it into 5, as well as spectacular collision effects at least as good as in GRID and DiRT. With those carmakers which would go along with it, anyhow. Then they could call it "The Real Driving and Wrecking Simulator."

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

Considering that I'm unaware of any racing game with 100% realistic damage[...]

At least not the licensed ones (with real cars).

 

[Tenacious D]

Are you talking about rFactor, SUPER N? If so, I'll have to fire it up for a torture test sometime this fall. Err... hopefully not Motorstorm and Burnout!

I have to say that whatever Kaz and the lads give us, I'll be happy with. If damage for race cars and possibly tuners is at the level of the GamesCom demo, I'll be happy with that, which looks to be between Ferrari Challenge and Forza as far as I can see. What I really like about it is the smooth rendering like we see in PC sims, no hiccups while the game thinks for an instant. If we got that, I know some people here will go lolling off to Forzaland or their PC sims, but the other several million of us won't be too bothered.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

What I meant was that the limitations are not so much technical as much as licensing issues.

 

[Tenacious D]

Well...... I don't know. When it comes to Polyphony, SONY has enough sense to realize that each GT game is an investment that pays big dividends. Who else would tolerate a game slipping a release date of a year?

I forget who made the Formula 1 game a couple years ago, but apparently they could afford to get a pretty decent damage build, and they didn't have Kazunori's resources. As I said before though, I'm sure we'll know more in a little over a week.