Do we really need Damage?

[machscnel]

Now before I start let we make it perfectly clear, I would prefer damage in
GT5. But given the choice between more cars/tracks, improved car customisation, weather effects etc or damage, I'd be happy to drop damage and heres why.

A lot of people have said GT5 won't be realistic if it doesn't have a damage model. To an extent this is true and I can see where they are coming from, but in my opinion a decent driver will never use the damage model. For instance, in all my ours on Prologue I have never hit another car/wall with enough force that would have done any damage and remember, I'm not even an average driver. So all those man hours for a feature that many will never use.

The next point is that in professional competitions, damage is need so that if you come off, you will be damaged enough to slow you down, atleast til you reach the pits. Now, at the top level of Gran Turismo racing, if you come of the track far enough to hit something, I'd say your race is pretty much over anyway. How often IRL does a car that's been damaged, get back into the pits, get repaired and get back out there to win the race?

Another point I've heard is that it will discourage punters/cheaters(wall-riders). Let we make this clear. No matter what Polyphony do, there will always be cheaters, punters on the other hand is a problem you can control. Join GTPlanet and race in there series. My experience with GTP sanctioned events was absolute class. Don't get me wrong, there was rubbing, bumping etc but it was done in what I'd call a clean matter. I recall a Lotus raming my heavier, earlier braking car up the backside. The Lotus actually slowed down to let me pass after this:tup:

Do we really need damage. I think the answer is no. For a lot of us it is something that we will never see. And as shown above I don't think not having it will affect gameplay as much as some people have made out.
Just thing of all the extra things we could have if we didn't have damage. Maybe even(now I'm speculating) not having it will allow Gran Turismo to finally be graced by Porsche, Lamborghini etc. Just think about it.

 

[XxTH3_ST1GxX]

having damage i think would be a commodity... many want damage, but dont need damage.. i would have the same intention to buy whether or not it had damage

 

[premhz]

We need it,it`s overdue and everyone else had it a long time ago. Turn it off if you don`t want it.

 

[Gulf]

machscnel
You argumented everything very well and I completelly see your point. But we don't really need 25 different Skylines on the game. Do we?
Is just a nice feature to have and something that i would really like to have in the game.

Cheers,

 

[machscnel]

having damage i think would be a commodity... many want damage, but dont need damage.. i would have the same intention to buy whether or not it had damage

Good to hear. I've been hearing people say the wouldn't buy GT5 is it was released without damage, which is a shame, considering it is not even an integral part of the game

 

[machscnel]

machscnel
You argumented everything very well and I completelly see your point. But we don't really need 25 different Skylines on the game. Do we?
Is just a nice feature to have and something that i would really like to have in the game.

Cheers,

Yeah I agree with you. The "variety" in Gran Turismo is a matter of contention for me. I don't like having slightly different models of the same car, but I assume because they are so similar they are easier to model so I don't think Polyphony is wasting too much time on them. Now I'm not sure, but I think a damage model would be a very time and space(memory) consuming exercise. Anyone know?

 

[Antti-san]

We need it,it`s overdue and everyone else had it a long time ago. Turn it off if you don`t want it.

Amen, brother!

 

[machscnel]

We need it,it`s overdue and everyone else had it a long time ago. Turn it off if you don`t want it.

Yeah but I can't turn it off and swap it for more car/ tracks can I? I all the other games that have had damage, did it make any difference? I recall playing GTR, flying up Eau Rouge(corner in Spa), sliding off, hitting the wall. I'd say my car was 50% percent damged and I lost 10 spots because of my crash. Now, if there was no damage, yes I could theoretically catch them back up, but if you could catch the guys you were racing after coming off and losing a good 5-6 seconds, then you probably should be racing someone harder anyway.

 

[amar212]

Answers here:

www.yetanotherdamagethread.com

here

www.usethesearchbutton.com

and here

www.damageornodamagethatisthequestion.com

 

[Worst_Driver]

There are features more important than damage as you said earlier

 

[Terronium-12]

I could do with or without damage, I mean it hindered my experience in Forza 2 because it didn't offer a sense of speed...only thing it offered was "If I go into this corner too quickly I'll almost definitely oversteer and crash into something."

I'm more concerned with features such as a day/night cycle, varying weather conditions, and an improved working pit lane.

Just to name a few.

 

[Hyst]

Do we have any proof that the inclusion of damage will, without question mean less cars/tracks?
Are people making this argument solely on disc space?

 

[XxTH3_ST1GxX]

i would rather just have harsher punishments for those who hit the wall (based on how fast you hit a wall, you get x amount of penalty time), and just use the extra game space for something more important than damage

 

[Jtrek]

there is too much focus on the unnecessary things in this game.. As long as I have played this game it has been about simulating the drive of hundreds of different types of cars.. I could care less of damage..

 

[Northstar]

What I don't get is why so many people here are willing to settle for less. Sure we don't need damage but it would really make the game more realistic. Of course the point is to not crash, but there is nothing funner than smashing an Enzo head on into a wall at 200mph and not paying a dime or getting injured. Honestly until I know what is and what isn't in the game I want everything as close as possible to real life.

 

[Lucas]

Do we have any proof that the inclusion of damage will, without question mean less cars/tracks?
Are people making this argument solely on disc space?

I believe they are making this argument solely on disc space. If they spend time doing damage, they will have less time for cars and tracks. I believe it is actually pretty simple. As you can see, the longer the list of cars, the longer they will have to work to damage them. If PD were not to include damage, then it's pretty factible that the game will indeed have more cars.

Of course the point is to not crash, but there is nothing funner than smashing an Enzo head on into a wall at 200mph and not paying a dime or getting injured.

Funner is not a word that my brain can process.

 

[Northstar]

I believe they are making this argument solely on disc space. If they spend time doing damage, they will have less time for cars and tracks. I believe it is actually pretty simple. As you can see, the longer the list of cars, the longer they will have to work to damage them. If PD were not to include damage, then it's pretty factible that the game will indeed have more cars.



Basically, you are saying that there's fun present when you crash a real Ferrari in real life. I think I missed the point, but when did crashing became something fun?

Well, have you ever heard of a game called Burnout or been to a Demo Derby.

 

[Lucas]

I actually have, but the main purpose of the game is to crash cars. It is actually the most praised feature on it. Without it, the game would suck because of its arcade feeling. In GT5, however, why would you need damage, other than to make it a bit more realistic, that is? You are not supposed to go and crash every player to win. Or to make a fun factor out of it.

 

[Hyst]

I play Gran Turismo because it is as close to driving any of these cars as I will ever get. I want to feel like I'm driving them - i.e., I want them to feel realistic. However, I also want everything outside of the car to be realistic as well, adding to the overall realism, something which has been lacking (and, some would argue, entirely non-existent) so far. This 'additional realism' includes damage, weather effects, day/night cycles, track temperature, etc.

 

[Patrik]

Another thread about damage, now that's great! 👍

Damage is important for GT's reputation, if nothing else. They better make it, or it's not a "REAL DRIVING SIMULATOR"...

 

[Earth]

Yes damage is needed but not essential

 

[Tenacious D]

If any of you watched the GRID crash compilation video, it even showed a clip of a car striking a tire barrier, sending the tires flying! While damage isn't essential by a long shot, it really would add a lot to the experience and make you more conscious of taking chances with your precious cars. And they really should be precious to you, as they are to me.

Edit: well, since Der Alta closed the other thread, my personal opinion is that at the very least, a Forza 2/GTR Evo level of damage will be included in GT5 at release. However, I also believe we could be surprised by something more.

 

[thugbear2005]

Based on the argument of disc space, the PS3 does have a hard drive. Also, they will probably come out with car and track packs afterwards.

 

[GordonS]

Well, yes we need it because a lot of people has anticipated it so much. I, personally, couldn't care less of damage modelling if PD is not allowed to do it realistically. I'm 100% sure you can't flip your car in GT5. Tell me I'm wrong.

 

[S13180sx]

I feel damage would be good because it would force people to take less risks and make the game more realistic. If you know that you tap someone online there is going to be some damage to the car you are less likely to ram people.

If they had damage I hope its 100% realistic - as in one signifigant crash and your out.

I dont see the point of having damage for visual purposes - I dont like how in games like NFS, GRID etc you can hit the wall at 200kph and drive away.

Damage should be more functional then visual in my view, something more like GTR Evolution is perfect for me.

 

[RedBaron]

I can live without it. For me it would be enough if car had real behaviour during colissions with other cars and walls.

 

[Cobra_NZ]

Apparently this is yet another DAMAGE thread. It obviously means that it is an integral part of what fans want GT5 to be.

I for one would definitely want damage in GT5, It's definitely overdue, as in it was promised a decade ago.

Of course many promises have been broken along the way in the GT saga and many dates have been pushed back. But if Sony/PD/KY believe they can milk the GT pony for another game without giving the fans what they really want they'll do it again.💡

I remember how damage was a definite thing for GT5. It's funny how two things are happening now. It's becoming less and less likely, and more and more people are telling themselves that it's not that big of a deal, just so they can live with the fact that they'll go and buy it despite probably saying they would not buy another GT game if it didn't have damage a few years back.

So many games now in the last few years have had cars flipping and great damage and fantastic livery customization features. But the biggest driving game franchise in the world, branding every big and small thing with their logo, and proudly sporting the title "The Real Driving Simulator", does not have damage.

I remember the cool Forza Motorsport 2 competitions a year back, very cool close and challenging racing that was a pleasure to watch on YouTube. The first GT5P competiton I've seen yet, organised by Logitech, was a farce. All the ramming and wall riding just turned it into a joke.

I'm sorry but if on consoles like the PS2 "Enthusia Professional Racing" and XBOX360 "Forza Motorsport 2" "GRID" "Need For Speed Prostreet" can process, skid marks, 3D spectators, DAMAGE, particle effects and 3D trees and exciting track side and beautiful background scenery... What is the big GT doing? Making 1 zillion polygon cars and advertising them? Give the fans what they want I say, and DAMAGE is one of the things we want!

 

[da_f1_man]

I think damage HAS to be in. Speeding along on a street circuit pushing things to the limit knowing one mistake and your race will be finished. It really adds to the thrill and excitement. Bouncing off walls without punishment just feels like I’m cheating.

 

[Rash-182]

I can live without it. For me it would be enough if car had real behaviour during colissions with other cars and walls.

this would be ok, but stil..

 

[ZANELE]

If I want to play with bumper cars i would go to an amusement park . If there is no damage in GT5 I am not going to buy it unless everything else in the game is flawless/perfect and still i might not even buy it.