Do we really need Damage?

[Tenacious D]

So what does that live us with? A game identical to GT4, just a little tweaked and of course with better graphics. Funny, it's been the same for every GT game, it's never actually a much better game, it just looks better.

Wow, seems we get another craste and QSpec every other week in here.

Well, damage isn't going to suddenly make GT5 any different in the other aspects, so I don't see why you waste all your time on it. You know, lame tweaks are going to still be lame tweaks, damage or not.

 

[yeti]

I was thinking of the GRID video this morning when I read that, where the tire barrier collision sent tires flying and bouncing. If that kind of physics is in GT5, I'd be quite overjoyed. And probably wrecking my car a bit into barriers just to watch, but then I'm a weirdo.

I still think damage of some sort is in, and in just over 30 days, we'll know for ourselves.

Agreed...

I'm wondering - going back to the 150G crash that KY talked about... and then the mentions of other 80G crashes in real life... I suspect that the 80G crashes had deformable objects that they were crashing into... thus absorbing some G's into them... if the object you crash into cannot deform - then the G force of your car stopping will be higher...

And of course - if your object cannot deform - then the G-forces will be higher still... when a car hits something - the deceleration is not measured on the front bumper - it is measured by the driver... who is not physically linked to the car...

So perhaps the 150G figure comes from the car?

C.

 

[Antti-san]

So what does that live us with? A game identical to GT4, just a little tweaked and of course with better graphics.

Even though I'd still be disappointed if GT5 didn't have any damage, saying that GT5/Prologue is identical to GT4 is a major overstatement.

In my opinion, the driving physics we have in Prologue are a HUGE improvement over GT4. Now you can actually tell the difference between FWD and RWD! While it's nice to have nifty graphics, to me the driving model is what matters the most, and in this department Prologue certainly qualifies. 👍

 

[JAGUAR1977]

Same goes for damage, but somehow I do not see ih happen soon..

I don't understand this stance, damage is absolutely CRUCIAL to GT5 taking the next step forward, and being taken seriously as a racing simulation, moving beyond just being the best driving game on a Playstation system.

Are you aware GT5 does not have damage, as shutting down the discussion here will be nothing compared to when the press get hold of the news.

You can write the headlines now, all of GT5's other improvements will be ignored if damage is not implemented, it really is that important.

Regardless of whether you believe damgae will affect sales, it should be a matter of professional pride for PD to implement damage considering the financial/technical resources and time the team now has at their disposal. Damage changes entirely how you approach the game, the lack of it is one of the major reasons why GT5P's online racing is such a joke.

A driving simulation should consist of far more than pixel perfect cars and tracks, especially when you consider most of those 600+ cars won't be used by the majority of users. Damage is a fundamental part of a driving simulation, PD could launch with 300 cars and damage, supplying further cars and tracks through DLC, and the game would be rated higher.

 

[DJMaky]

Call me a weirdo, but I would like to see my 260,000Cr Ferrari F430 crash at 270+ km/h, see the people running away from the fence, tyres flying everywhere, little pieces of my red Ferrari.......

 

[s15specr]

45 million GT games sold so far says "hello". Causal players do not give a jack damn about damage, while hardcore represents just tiny fraction of overall players.

Look at GTPlanet, probably the biggest GT community in the world - so far, it has 123,376 members registred. Worldwide. GT4 coped over 7 million in sales. Worldwide. And it had no damage.

Damage is not importatnt sales-wise. It is important from perspective of creating overall immerssion of the game but it's addition will not boost its sales to any noticable numbers.

And I'll again point out tha presciouss resources used potentialy to create a damage of any kind could be used for more imporatnt purposes than creating a wreck out of beautiful car.

I fully understand what you mean by this, lets face it, if GT5 has damage or not were still all going to buy it, however, damage would be really nice and would make the game get higher ratings which would make people buy it

 

[Tenacious D]

You can write the headlines now, all of GT5's other improvements will be ignored if damage is not impleented, it really is that important.

And then there are statements like this.

I know you're all about the damage, but this is just incorrect. Yes, if damage is left off for later, the gaming media, PC sim freaks and Forza fanboys will be all over it. However, the gaming media hasn't dumped on Prologue, and they aren't going to give GT5 a Fail if it has no damage at launch. And it's still going to be a multiple platinum seller just on pre-orders.

 

[Lucas]

STOP....I know where you're going. The quality of these games overall or the damage model itself is not what matters. Argue all you want about how fake it is in Forza, but it's there, and on that point they're ahead of GT because it's non existant on the latter.

You obviously don't know where I am going, because you are basically saying that a game with everything we want GT5 to have, no matter how bad or unrealistic it is, is better than GT5 in those aspects. I'm sorry, but I can't argue with a person like you. You will always want to have the lead, no matter what I pull off to say to you. You want to be ahead? Fine, go ahead. Just don't crash against the wall.

 

[JAGUAR1977]

And then there are statements like this.

I know you're all about the damage, but this is just incorrect. Yes, if damage is left off for later, the gaming media, PC sim freaks and Forza fanboys will be all over it. However, the gaming media hasn't dumped on Prologue, and they aren't going to give GT5 a Fail if it has no damage at launch. And it's still going to be a multiple platinum seller just on pre-orders.

Posters in this thread are not all about damage, they simply expect PD to push the so called 'Real Driving Simulator' forward with one of the fundamentals of actual driving and racing, that is damage.

The technology is now available to produce realistic damage with a whole host of driving games, from sim to arcade (iRacing, NFS Shift, Codemasters F1, Grid etc.), implementing it.

If we are just going to get GT5P with more content, better online and useless media features like GT-TV, the series will struggle to justify it's 'Real Driving Simulator' tag.

 

[DaddyVDUB]

This is the ONLY time I have Offically said this ...PRIVATE ROOMS
I Want to race the guys I know who are highly skilled and "VERRY Trustworthy".

 

[Leonidae]

Yes, we do need damage.

Why? Well, since KY is a perfectionist, the damage will be as realistic as possible. This also will mean, that we hopefully have to pay for the repairs, and getting the suspension realigned etc. But my biggest hope in this damage-issue is that it would drop the amount of the morons who drive to wrong direction, punt and shortcut and use the run-off areas.

 

[Lucas]

I think though that it would take more than GT5 to perfect damage as much as they have done from GT1 to GT5 with the driving simulation. I think I'm in my good right to say that, if there's damage, it will be nowhere near perfect.

 

[DaddyVDUB]

ENOUGH BASHING KY and PD, We all know they are the standard as far as PS3 racing is concerned. So can we please trust them to give us more than we expect. As usual

 

[Northstar]

Maybe they should give us something to talk about instead of staying in silence. Until we get actual info on the full game the only thing to do relted to the full game is to either make wish lists or complain about how long it's taking.

 

[Leonidae]

haven't you noticed? they're following the Nissan's blackout procedure regarding the GTR.. keeps every competitor on their toes.

 

[Tenacious D]

The technology is now available to produce realistic damage with a whole host of driving games, from sim to arcade (iRacing, NFS Shift, Codemasters F1, Grid etc.), implementing it.

iRacing - I have yet to see damage.

NFS Shift - I have yet to see damage.

Codemasters F1 - doesn't exist.

GRID - impressive wrecks but arcade physics.

Let me tell you what I have seen.

Forza series - about 25 percent damage, and different levels depending on the car.

Ferrari Challenge - less than Forza.

GTR - about 50 percent, and these are race cars in a racing sim.

rFactor - have yet to try it, but I hear it's the same as GTR.

Live For Speed - cars that squish like clay or cardboard.

TOCA - pretty good all around, but a lot of shortcuts in the game engine and sometimes questionable physics. HORRIBLE wheel controller implementation. Car damage is often like LFS, just weird crumple effects.

Burnout - cars that shatter like models.

Motorstorm - the same.

F1 CE - looks fairly realistic, but haven't bought it yet.

So your claim about a whole world of games which have realistic damage is a little thin. And about iRacing. Let's say it has the most incredible detail of any racing game ever. Keep in mind that it costs over $150 US a YEAR to play! For that price, it had better be the best ever in everything.

Now look, I'm with you on damage for GT5. If you've been following my posts, you might have possibly noticed this, as well as suggesting that those who hate damage with a passion give it at least a try. I'm even pulling for PD to surprise us with a damage implementation that's up to as punishing as real life.

HOWEVER, going on and on about how a whole gob of people won't buy it, the gaming media will give it a huge red F, every other modern game has realistic damage or whatever is entirely disingenuous. And ranting about it won't change any minds or make history any different.

Maybe they should give us something to talk about instead of staying in silence.

In case you haven't noticed, E3 is only 31 days off. Maybe some of us shouldn't act like it's years away. Believe it or not, May too shall pass.

ENOUGH BASHING KY and PD, We all know they are the standard as far as PS3 racing is concerned. So can we please trust them to give us more than we expect. As usual

This, I'll agree with. Amar's posts aside, I know GT5 is going to be something incredible just from the taste we have in Prologue. It ends up making me tired of my other racers, because just what I have access to in Prologue makes me hungry for GT5 above anything. Add Amar's post to the fire, and with the potential to see hundreds of street cars, tuners and race cars in high definition, improved physics, and dozens and DOZENS of tracks makes my mouth water. Include the possibilities of the return of race modification, body kits and a livery editor, a whole host of online tools such as community league building, and clamored for goodies like damage, weather, time of day changes and Career Mode, and I'll be in racing heaven for years.

 

[JAGUAR1977]

Just one example-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWGG92_8fMU&feature=related

Nine times out of ten, when GT5 is discussed, the first question is, 'Will it have damage'.

I figure Amar knows GT5 doesn't have damage so is trying to downplay it's importance. As a sim fan I will still buy the game, but GT5 will show whether 'The Real Driving Simulator' tag is justified, or little more than a marketing exercise.

 

[Tenacious D]

Gee, those iRacing wrecks are pretty underwhelming. I had to watch a few to see if I wasn't getting the point, and they all remind me of Live For Speed. Not only that, they're all glitchy, graphics are lame as usual, and the sound is awful.

I especially like how two Solstice pass through each other.

And I have to change something. $20 a month just to play iRacing, and then you have to buy each car and track, for between $15 to $25?? GAH!

One more edit. Here are a whole range of wrecks in iRacing. It's pretty clear where most of the work in the sim went.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfoR89NODmw

While the damage is fairly light for what the cars go through, the physics are pretty nice. If Kazunori-dono and the team could convince the car companies to allow something like this with at least a 50 percent damage implementation - both visual as well as mechanical, I don't think anyone would be unhappy.

Mighty big IF... But just over a month to go...

 

[JAGUAR1977]

Gee, those iRacing wrecks are pretty underwhelming. I had to watch a few to see if I wasn't getting the point, and they all remind me of Live For Speed. Not only that, they're all glitchy, graphics are lame as usual, and the sound is awful.

I especially like how two Solstice pass through each other.

And I have to change something. $20 a month just to play iRacing, and then you have to buy each car and track, for between $15 to $25?? GAH!

This is about realistic damage modeling, and by realistic they mean dints, bumps, crumple zones etc., not disintergrating into a thousand pieces.

iRacing is the benchmark for physics, track surface modelling, damage and online, GT5P is the benchmark for car models, which is arguably the least important aspect of a sim.

600 pixel perfect car models are for nothing if online racing descends into bumper cars going into the first corner. Judging passes, avoiding accidents and preserving the car is half the fun of sim racing.

 

[Jay]

Nine times out of ten, when GT5 is discussed, the first question is, 'Will it have damage'.

Is that right? That is never asked first by anyone I ever talk to, infact most people I talk to doesn't care either way.

 

[Tenacious D]

This is about realistic damage modeling, and by realistic they mean dints, bumps, crumple zones etc., not disintergrating into a thousand pieces.

iRacing is the benchmark for physics, track surface modelling, damage and online

I suspect that the iRacing team is trying to give you guys a fairly reasonable mechanical damage build, because the visual stuff looks pretty mediochre. But listen, peace out, I'm asking for damage too, and at a level which would make many kids cry if they were forced to use it.

And Jay, you're right about the R34 in Forza 2. I keep dropping a number for some reason.

 

[Nomino]

Do we need damage? No. Do we want damage? Yes.

 

[Nomino]

Yes, we do need damage.

The only things we NEED are air to breath, water to drink, food to eat, and depending on where you are, degrees of warmth and shelter.

So, cut the melodramatics please people, and also quit justifying why damage hasn't been put in yet because Kaz is a perfectionist. If he was a perfectionist, he'd have put some kind of damage model in from day 1, and refined it over the years just like he did with the rest of the game. All this garbage about manufacturers not letting him show their cars being damaged or scratched - rubbish, because plenty of other games show licensed cars getting bashed up, including Ferrari.

Do I want damage? Yeah, sure I do. I also want it to be way slicker than the crap that's in Forza 2.

I think though that it would take more than GT5 to perfect damage as much as they have done from GT1 to GT5 with the driving simulation. I think I'm in my good right to say that, if there's damage, it won't be nowhere near perfect.

If it will not be nowhere near perfect, that means it will be somwhere near perfect... Make your mind up.

 

[Lucas]

I'm sorry, I thought I was human, thereby allowed to commit mistakes. One way or another, I couldn't have given a better response to all the posts in the thread that you just have given.

 

[highgroove]

I'll skip debating your dubious claim of each GT being "leaps and bounds" better each time (Not one GT had damage? Are you sure?), for the sake of the argument.

The problem is you're using the supposed previous absence of damage to justify not adding it at all. Using the same logic, Ferrari didn't have to be included since GT has sold well without it before. Porsche can stay out for the same reason. Day/Night and weather cycles don't need to be added. Heck, just make a port of GT4 and it should be just fine because it will sell the same as it did when the original released!

Clearly sarcasm isn't one of your strongest points. I can't help but feel that didn't you even read what I said. You could not have missed my point any more than you have. Surely even yourself (again I can only assume, based on your previous post theres a high probability my assumption is wrong) can understand, that for something to progress the game has to include new features and ideas, etc. Which up till now, every GT title has delivered in relation to its predecessor.

I am fully aware there was "damage" in a previous GT title, but if you class that as damage, I suggest you re-educate yourself on the subject. So far the closest GT has come too damage was mere excessive tire wear to a point where the car no longer reacts to the steering input of the player.

To re-iterate the point I tried to convey in my previous post, it's not essential for GT5 to have damage for someone to say the series has advanced. GT5 is such a vast improvement over GT4 in almost every aspect, nobody can argue that? Not even yourself...

 

[Tenacious D]

Well, it was a small point, but GT2 had a very basic mechanical damage system. Your car could suffer a bit in a few areas in a collision, such as chassis or drivetrain, so your car might pull in one direction or another. But for those who say Gran Turismo hasn't progressed besides graphically just mystify me. Some even say they're using the same tire sounds as GT1, which means to me they're basically deaf.

I'm unaware of any pro racecar driver using GT2 to sharpen their skills, and yet we have stories of racers using GT4 to get acquainted with real life race courses, so that when they go to practice, they already have the track down and brake points sorted out. I'm sure we're going to hear more of that with GT5.

 

[amar212]

Just for the record, I have no goddamn idea will GT5 have damage or not and I'm not "downplaying" anything - all my points are strictly subjective because I'd like that precious resources of hardware are being used for more important things than damage.

I'd prefer changing times of day for tracks, weather options and such to be implemented 10X more than damage. I tend to race private rooms only and I see no point in having damage because my friends tend to race clean.

However, everybody has a right to have his own opinion.

 

[Hyst]

You think the game should not have damage because the people you race with race clean?

How many people are working on GT5? I obviously don't know, but I would assume more than enough to be able to focus on more than just one particular aspect of gameplay at a time.

 

[Stevisiov]

Live For Speed - cars that squish like clay or cardboard.

Gee, those iRacing wrecks are pretty underwhelming. I had to watch a few to see if I wasn't getting the point, and they all remind me of Live For Speed. Not only that, they're all glitchy, graphics are lame as usual, and the sound is awful.

I think you completely missed how good lfs's damage is. The visual side is rubbish, but the mechanical side is very good.

Chassis warping - If you crash hard enough the chassis warps so much so that the car can begin to crap.

Suspension damage - lots of different affects, you can damage the springs, damage the dampers, knock the toe our of alignment, knock the camber out of alignment, so much that it can increase wear on the outside (or inside, depending how your wheel gets orientated in the crash) of the tire and can cause a tyre failure. Certain types of suspension damage make the car undriveable, the most common from a knock is putting your tracking out.

Engine damage - shifting gear too late, pinging off the rev limiter, down shifting too early all can damage the engine. Its usually quite small and happens from prolonged abuse but can be significant. Something to watch for on the longer races.

Clutch damage - Most race cars allow flat shifting without causing any significant raise in clutch temperature, but too many flat shifts in the road cars increases the clutch temperature and the clutch starts to slip, if you continue the clutch burns out and your race is over, it becomes a skill to managed your clutch flat shifting can give you those extra few tenths when you need it but do it too often and you will pay.

Tyre damage, tyres are modelled very well in LFS, the circumference of the tyre is broken up into small segments, each segment has its own temperature and wear associated with it, if you have too much camber the outside segments heat up very quickly and wear much faster, also it allows flatspots to be modelled, when you lock a tyre the scrubbed segments of the tyre heat up dramatically and wears that part of the tyre significantly, on certain cars big flatspots are very noticeable, particularly the F1 car, the car vibrates just like in real life. If a a segment wears excessively then it causes the tyre to fail, locking up can be very costly in lfs so setting your maximum brake pressure just right is important.

All these little mechanical details makes you drive differently and setup the car differently, ultimately it makes the game far more realistic. Gran turismo tyre wear was great for its day, but it really needs an update. If Gran Turismo had mechanical damage like lfs, it would make it considerably more realistic.

Just make the visual damage a bit better though.

 

[Tenacious D]

I think you completely missed how good lfs's damage is. The visual side is rubbish, but the mechanical side is very good.

I did shortchange my post quite a bit, flipflopping back and forth without notice in discussing mechanical and then visual damage. After coming up to speed, so to speak, on iRacing and Live For Speed previously, they undoubtedly give their fans what they want for the most part. And is quite an achievement for both, as iRacing has a pretty small team, and as far as I know, LFS is still essentially just three guys! I'm still unexposed directly with iRacing, as I don't want to touch a game with the crazy costs involved, even for a free demo, and I have plenty of stuff installed on my PC as it is.

With Prologue, I can see that Kazunori's team is edging ever closer to reality. It's so close that I still get drawn back to it because the visceral experience with a wheel controller is so darn satisfying, and the visuals are just wonderful. The PS3 has the power and Polyphony has access to some of the best technology available to include some pretty amazing stuff in GT5. But... what will it be?

Amar makes a good point about spending resources wisely. I don't know what matters most, personally. After my bad experience yesterday with Ferrari Challenge's weather, I'm not so sure I want to see very much rain in GT5. Time of day changes should be easy enough for the PS3 to handle, I hope, and would like to see it. But after watching some of the GRID wrecks again, including collisions with the tire barriers sending tires bouncing, I keep thinking this might be the area to spend the most effort on to deliver that next bit of realism in GT5. A nice mix of visual eye candy mixed with a decent helping of mechanical stress and failure should make everyone very happy. Except for the weather guys, if that's left out.

But considering the team has been working pretty much full out on the game for at least three years, possibly four, I'm really optimistic that Kazunori-dono will deliver something very special to us. This year. *fingers crossed*