Do we really need Damage?

[amar212]

And what about rally races?

Should we dive into the Grand Canyon and explode?

I started to hate this place because of the overall "damage" thing in last days, it was never so Goddamn hard to explain all pros and cons. Your post regarding poll Tenacious is a nice try, congratulations.

Maybe someone will finaly start to use the brain before splling the thoughts.

But this is new Pandora's Box: TRACK DAMAGE. My God, does it ever ends?

 

[dzidza]

for the track it would be better that PD does track bumps correctly and not the way it is now, all flat. With bumps the FF would be more interesting

 

[yeti]

Something has occured to me about this damage thing: The track

Currently the only non-solid track objects are cones. Adding damagge to cones means that all tire walls also have to be destructible, or you will total your car by hitting tire walls only.

So not only do cars have to be deformable, but so do the tracks.

Just a thought to keep in mind. Whatever effort needs to be done on cars for this also has to be done to tracks if they do damage the way Kazunori Yamauchi discusses.

I'm sure I posted something similar in this thread ealier...

As Physics dictates - for every action - there is an equal and opposite reaction.

C.

 

[RAVELLRON]

And what about rally races?

Should we dive into the Grand Canyon and explode?

I started to hate this place because of the overall "damage" thing in last days, it was never so Goddamn hard to explain all pros and cons. Your post regarding poll Tenacious is a nice try, congratulations.

Maybe someone will finaly start to use the brain before splling the thoughts.

But this is new Pandora's Box: TRACK DAMAGE. My God, does it ever ends?

the next will be driver damage....

joking... but i know that gt5 will be the best of all the time, but people that don't want damage, for me, are person that don't know how to drive, cuz it's like that everyone have fear to crash the car....or they crash frequently..

 

[Kingdizzi]

With all the comments amar is making it seems I was right in thinking no damage in GT5.

 

[Jay]

But this is new Pandora's Box: TRACK DAMAGE. My God, does it ever ends?

Next it will be atmosphere damage! Watch those C02's!

 

[RAVELLRON]

With all the comments amar is making it seems I was right in thinking no damage in GT5.

quote, sounds good..

 

[amar212]

With all the comments amar is making it seems I was right in thinking no damage in GT5.

Haha, but I really have no idea will damage be in GT5 or not. All my posts in countless damage debates are just my private opinion regarding that matter. DO not draw any conclusions from my subjective stance please, because it has nothing to do with actual development of the game.

t...but people that don't want damage, for me, are person that don't know how to drive, cuz it's like that everyone have fear to crash the car....or they crash frequently..

Just imagine any race with MR cars and take into account that all potential damage during impact would be suffered by car in front, because car that bumps him has his engine safely preserved in his rear. Forza 2's online experience says "hello"

 

[RAVELLRON]

Haha, but I really have no idea will damage be in GT5 or not. All my posts in countless damage debates are just my private opinion regarding that matter. DO not draw any conclusions from my subjective stance please, because it has nothing to do with actual development of the game.



Just imagine any race with MR cars and take into account that all potential damage during impact would be suffered by car in front, because car that bumps him has his engine safely preserved in his rear. Forza 2's online experience says "hello"

i agree, but is reality, and in online races there will be private rooms and/or on/off option to disable it

 

[mr_VOLCANO]

And what about rally races?

Should we dive into the Grand Canyon and explode?

Yes, that would be great!! Do you defend invisible barrier around track? Not having chance to slide off road in rally is just wrong.

 

[II IVORBIGUN II]

the next will be driver damage....

joking... but i know that gt5 will be the best of all the time, but people that don't want damage, for me, are person that don't know how to drive, cuz it's like that everyone have fear to crash the car....or they crash frequently..

Ironically im not keen on damage not because I don't know how to drive but because im wary of others.The only solution is that damage is optional online/offline and this can be changed to on/off/cosmetic.


Have to laugh at those who voted 100% damage in the poll on the other thread. Like I have said previously those who keep harping on about full damage would quickly change their minds. Infact if GT5 is released with full damage which cannot be turned off, I can guarantee within 48hrs of racing online many would be posting back on here asking for the option of turning this off!

You may want realistic racing but unfortunately online you meet players with
different abilities. In the real world of say F1 all drivers are professionals with fairly similiar abilities which is why you see such close racing without many incidents. You can never recreate this online when racing against strangers which is why damage should be optional.

If GT5 has the option of collisions off/damage off I can guarantee within 1 month of GT5 being released 60% of hosted rooms will have these options off!!

 

[Tired Tyres]

100% damage and the game deletes your save as well! Combined with a save that is locked to the PS3 so no one can download a save.

100% accurate mechanical damage, not necessarily visual, would suit me fine.

 

[Nomino]

100% accurate mechanical damage, not necessarily visual, would suit me fine.

Right, so the tyres and wheels are shot, you can hardly control the car, yet when you look at it from the outside view, it looks perfectly normal with no visual damage...riiiiiight

 

[FoolKiller]

And what about rally races?

Should we dive into the Grand Canyon and explode?

I started to hate this place because of the overall "damage" thing in last days, it was never so Goddamn hard to explain all pros and cons. Your post regarding poll Tenacious is a nice try, congratulations.

Maybe someone will finaly start to use the brain before splling the thoughts.

But this is new Pandora's Box: TRACK DAMAGE. My God, does it ever ends?

I actually think you are reading my post the wrong way. I am not promoting the idea of track damage. What I am saying is that if PD does damage the way they say they want it to be that we have to realize that track damage is an integral part of that, because it affects the car damage. In your example of the Grand Canyon I shouldn't total my car by hitting orange mesh fencing. Hitting fencing and tires should not have the same result as hitting a concrete barrier.

Basically, I am saying that people who think damage is a must need to recognize just what all would be involved for PD to pull it off in a realistic way, because some of them will be extremely upset if they side swipe a mesh fence and have half their car ripped off like it was a concrete wall.

And really it doesn't even require the track to be damaged but for the cars to react to the different materials and objects appropriately. Of course then it will look weird to hit a tire barrier and react like it was a wall but only have damage than can be repaired.


My goal is not to make the damage debate worse, but to inject a bit of sanity into it.


And for the record: If we did fly off into the Grand Canyon and explode it would be cool for the first couple of times.

 

[amar212]

My goal is not to make the damage debate worse, but to inject a bit of sanity into it.

I know FK, I was being sarcastic - because damage as a subject is far more complex than just modelling the damage model for the car, but majority of people are looking at it only through that prysm.

 

[Tired Tyres]

Right, so the tyres and wheels are shot, you can hardly control the car, yet when you look at it from the outside view, it looks perfectly normal with no visual damage...riiiiiight

How many race drivers do you know that can look at an outside view when they are in the car?

 

[FoolKiller]

I know FK, I was being sarcastic - because damage as a subject is far more complex than just modelling the damage model for the car, but majority of people are looking at it only through that prysm.

It wouldn't be that big of a deal if they didn't have real tracks that were expertly modelled. I notice in Dirt you either wreck by hitting something solid and unmovable, like a tree or boulder, or you just pass through a bush or destroy a hay bail. That works great for Dirt, but in GT you can't have similar damage and invisible walls or mesh fencing without it looking rather stupid.

 

[Stevisiov]

Just to throw another spanner into the works, lets say realistic damage means you leave bit of car on the track when you crash; a bumper for example. What happens when a trailing car runs over it, does it pass through as if that bumper wasn't there? does the safety car have to come out while marshals clear all the mess of the track when a car stuffs it into the barrier on a tight street circuit? that would be realistic right.

For me I want realistic damage or just not bother. Or mechanical but not visual. THere are more important things for me. Dynamic weather and day night transitions for endurance races is much higher on my list of priorities. Silly scrathced paint and dented bumpers is something I would rather not have at all.

 

[Antti-san]

Ironically im not keen on damage not because I don't know how to drive but because im wary of others.The only solution is that damage is optional online/offline and this can be changed to on/off/cosmetic.

Well, if GT5 has damage, I agree that the player should be able to turn it off if they don't want it, like in Forza. After all you already have a choice of either standard or pro physics in Prologue, so why not have the same option for damage as well? 💡

 

[Ardius]

Just to throw another spanner into the works, lets say realistic damage means you leave bit of car on the track when you crash; a bumper for example. What happens when a trailing car runs over it, does it pass through as if that bumper wasn't there? does the safety car have to come out while marshals clear all the mess of the track when a car stuffs it into the barrier on a tight street circuit? that would be realistic right.

For me I want realistic damage or just not bother. Or mechanical but not visual. THere are more important things for me. Dynamic weather and day night transitions for endurance races is much higher on my list of priorities. Silly scrathced paint and dented bumpers is something I would rather not have at all.

Thats easy to solve, just say have the debris on the circuits only stay for a lap or so then disappear, I doubt anyone is particularly bothered about having fully animated marshals and safety car just for the sake of making it look realisitc. It would be nice but I doubt its worth the effort.

I agree that I'd rather have mechanical damage than visual, it would make endurance races require a different skill from hotlapping finally, especially if clutch wear and engine wear came into it, it requires a whole different way of driving and a lot more strategy with pace and driving style.

 

[Lucas]

All that I know is that, one way or another, bad implemented damage in a driving simulator will eventually ruin it. That's why I'd rather stick with damage in arcade games, where it really doesn't make a difference whether it looks good or bad.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

Why does everyone assume that if PD implements damage it'll be bad???

 

[Lucas]

I take that as me, since I triggered the question. I really don't care if they add damage or not, I shall buy the game (if I can) anyway. I just will find that people complaining about bad implemented damage will hurt KY more than not implementing damage at all. Remember: Better not to implement damage and be thought a bad game designer than to implement it wrong and remove all doubt.

At least that's my opinion. Not a good one to be trusted, though, with so many members calling my arguments silly, stupid, idiotic or the like lately on this boards...

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

Nah, people are more critical of PD for NOT including damage as it is right now. Nobody's taking points off the other racers for having damage, even if it's not perfect (which is more than what can be said of GT). Did anyone complain for GT 1 not having perfect driving dynamics? Hardly. It's considered one of the best games ever, even when the physics were nowhere close to real life.

 

[Tenacious D]

Did anyone complain for GT 1 not having perfect driving dynamics? Hardly. It's considered one of the best games ever

Well... it's considered a monumental game in racing history. But there was quite a fuss raised when we in the west learned that GT1 physics were messed with quite a bit, even to the lessening of gravity! It seems this opinion has more to do with nostalgia over accuracy. For instance, many prefer GT3 to 4 because it came first and you could do donuts, while most areas of physical properties were improved quite a bit in GT4.

But on the damage issue, it is weird how unrealistic cartoon level damage such as in Forza is hailed, while it's actually about as realistic as no damage period. I can see the point, but I don't think anyone takes the time to ponder it logically. However, if Kazunori okayed Forza level damage in GT5, I'd be fine with it, and I suspect the damage fans will rejoice around the world. Reviewers though, they will be interesting to watch.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

The funny thing is, GT is the only game I know for which this happens (for example, Tekken 3 was considered to be the best of the series, not the first one). If the GT series had made more substantial gameplay improvements since the first, people would forget about GT1 in no time.

On Forza; like I said before, something is better than nothing; Forza has the feature, GT doesn't for whatever reason. I'm of the opinion that you can get faster times in a Smart ForTwo than on a Nissan GTR with no wheels. Like the GTR, Gran Turismo has the potential to be the end-all-be-all driving sim...if only they would complete all the basic elements, including damage.

 

[RedBaron]

Almost all racing games have damage nowadays and those which call themselves a simulator have it all. So GT5 without damage would will be like beautiful lady with no breasts.

But in fact, I'll be fine with just removing those invisible walls, enable more interaction with surroundings (throw down those border tapes on Eiger with mild touch during drift and not obtain crash into box full of glass there for nothing), realistic colission detection between cars and walls and cars and cars, appropriate crash behaviour then like friction, slowdown, spinning out etc.

But full damage with percentage setting depending on player or race host, having to pay for repairs, spare parts, lacquers and so, take photos of damaged car with rotating pieces of tyre thread going so so into boxes there will be just beautiful new dimension of the game.

 

[II IVORBIGUN II]

I think some people need to realise that this is still a video game and some of the requests on this thread would not make good gameplay.

For example paying for repairs. Who on earth would be happy having to pay for repairs if some idiot online completely smashes your car up?

I know this thread is talking about damage but I find the community of GT5 seems to have a different mentality to those on the FM2 forums. For example many people harp on about damage when IMO having vast online features i.e scoreboards is more important to gameplay than damage is. If you look at FM2 there is alot of focus towards hotlapping as shown by the vast amount of leaderboards. However reading the posts on this forum there generally seems to be a lack of interest towards hotlapping which I find strange.

I would love to see car clubs being added into GT5 with its own leaderboard. This would be an excellent addition to GT5 because points could be awarded for wins online but also points could be awarded based on your time trial positions.

Sorry for going off topic but this would add far more to the gameplay than damage!!

 

[Ardius]

However reading the posts on this forum there generally seems to be a lack of interest towards hotlapping which I find strange.

I find that strange too because I get the impression that the majority of drivers here prefer hotlapping.....there have been many, many competitions with hotlapping and there are several sub-forums dedicated to it along with threads even for other games.
Of course hotlapping is only a small part in racing, hence why the majority won't focus on it. Some like to drift, some like to just race, some like endurance, etc etc.

 

[II IVORBIGUN II]

I find that strange too because I get the impression that the majority of drivers here prefer hotlapping.....there have been many, many competitions with hotlapping and .

Apologies because I must admit I don't post here on a daily basis so I might of missed these competitions.

As you say we all enjoy playing racing games in a different way. I enjoy racing but only against friends I can trust and if I did race against strangers I wouldn't want damage on. My passion is most definately hotlapping especially if the leaderboards are very competitive. For example yesterday I was hotlapping on Maple Valley Short on FM2 and just knocking tenth off my laptime moved me 60 places up the leaderboard!!

I just feel some are being shortsighted. Like I say those who want 100% damage with no option for this being turned off will be back on this forum complaining within 48hrs of GT5 being released. The host must be given the option for turning this off or cosmetic otherwise GT5 will be ruined online!