Gran Turismo 6 vs Gran Turismo 5: Visual Damage Comparison

[NixxxoN]

When you have nothing to contribute...infer the other guy is immature..fail 3.
Don't tell me, let me guess, next one is, "I bet my Dad could beat up your Dad", or the ever reliable, "I know you are but what am I?"

Yeah, if you involve dads in this I guess I was right.
Perhaps now you could chill out and not go to "hysteria mode" when someone refuses to buy your ideas.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Yeah, if you involve dads in this I guess I was right.
Perhaps now you could chill out and not go to "hysteria mode" when someone refuses to buy your ideas.

When you have nothing to contribute and someone calls you on it, just call him "hysterical" to attempt to discredit everything he says. Fail #4. Keep going and we'll eventually have to call Guinness about this. Here's a hint. Play the ball, not the man.

 

[NixxxoN]

Lol, there's nothing to be played, the thing is tho, you said "fail" on me first, then I said "fail" on you back, and you said that it was a personal attack. Here's a hint: be a man (providing you're a dude) and dont tell the ref to give the opponent a yellow card, its ridiculous.

Now back on topic: I dont care about visual damage because I rarely ever crash, and I'm serious. Please Kaz, focus on the damn Track Creator + GPS!

 

[Johnnypenso]

Lol, there's nothing to be played, the thing is tho, you said "fail" on me first, then I said "fail" on you back, and you said that it was a personal attack. Here's a hint: be a man (providing you're a dude) and dont tell the ref to give the opponent a yellow card, its ridiculous.

Now back on topic: I dont care about visual damage because I rarely ever crash, and I'm serious. Please Kaz, focus on the damn Track Creator + GPS!

When all else fails, question your opponent's manhood. Fail #5.

 

[NixxxoN]

Well, seeing that you continue with this attitude, I'll have to put you on the ignore list and so I will save myself a lot of time by not having dumb discussions. When you grow up I'll remove you.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Well, seeing that you continue with this attitude, I'll have to put you on the ignore list and so I will save myself a lot of time by not having dumb discussions. When you grow up I'll remove you.

Perfect:tup: Fail #6 by the way:tup:👍

 

[Nexus]

I dont care about visual damage because I rarely ever crash, and I'm serious.

That's nice, but not all of us are driving gods like you.

 

[Johnnypenso]

That's nice, but not all of us are driving gods like you.

"If everything seems under control, you're not driving fast enough" - Mario Andretti,

 

[ScottPuss20]

I think the issue is always going to be the standard cars. They're not designed for damage, so the options are:

1. Spent time on each one modelling polygonal damage states, detachable parts, etc.
2. Make some sort of procedural system.

We've seen from GT5 that a procedural system just looks silly, because to have it really look good it would need a whole bunch of information about the underlying structure of the car and the materials to actually work. Basically, they'd be rebuilding the cars in BeamNG or equivalent anyway, and so they might as well just rebuild the whole car as a premium.

It's just another example of how standard cars drag the overall quality down. Polyphony really need to focus on getting the important and popular standards made into premiums. I'm sure they know which cars are important and popular, they have all the online data they need.

Get. It. Done. PD. Don't let your need to wave your willy around lumber GT7 with a crappy damage system.

Wouldn't it be easier to put premium bodies on standard cars that allow for realistic damage?

 

[RandomCarGuy17]

Wouldn't it be easier to put premium bodies on standard cars that allow for realistic damage?

Um, it doesn't work like that. You can't simply put a premium body on a standard car, you would have to do an entire remodel.

 

[ScottPuss20]

Um, it doesn't work like that. You can't simply put a premium body on a standard car, you would have to do an entire remodel.

Well, that's what I meant.

 

[Imari]

Wouldn't it be easier to put premium bodies on standard cars that allow for realistic damage?

That's basically what I said.

Basically, they'd be rebuilding the cars in BeamNG or equivalent anyway, and so they might as well just rebuild the whole car as a premium.

So yes, I agree. As has been pointed out, a standard car with a premium body is in fact, a premium.

Polyphony really need to focus on getting the important and popular standards made into premiums.

 

[mister dog]

That's nice, but not all of us are driving gods like you.

I bet @NixxxoN doesn't need realistic engine sounds neither because he uses his eyes to drive.

 

[ScottPuss20]

That's basically what I said.

What I meant by "putting premium bodies on standard cars" was that the exterior would look premium and the interior standard.

 

[Nexus]

What I meant by "putting premium bodies on standard cars" was that the exterior would look premium and the interior standard.

That would be practical, but PD doesn't seem to be practical.

 

[Imari]

What I meant by "putting premium bodies on standard cars" was that the exterior would look premium and the interior standard.

Fair enough.

We do have cars like that already, and people tend to put them in the "premium" group, but I understand the distinction you're trying to make.

I really think that if they're going to do that though, then it should be one way or the other. If they're going to make new premium bodies but not interiors to save time, they should probably be not making interiors for new premiums either. Both save time, and both would allow more premium bodies to be made. Which is presumably the point.

On the other hand, if they still think it's important that new premiums have a full interior, it should be just as important that these standards that are being upgraded have an interior as well. In which case they should probably identify which standards are most important/popular and do those first.

Having a two tier system may fix the damage problem, but it's a design that is a compromise that brings the worst of both options. I think either have no interiors (and maximise the number of cars), or have full interiors (and maximise the quality of the smaller number of cars available).

Having a little of both pleases no one, and irritates everyone.

 

[wowbaggerBR]

No, because we never crash.

But seriously, realistic visual damage simulation is something useless, that is hard to implement, and would take a lot of PD resources. They better focus on more important stuff, like the course creator, and a lot of other things.

Like the Moon.

 

[yabiggoose]

I honestly barely notice the hail damage in GT6.

As absurd as it may have looked, I preferred the damage system in GT5 visually.

 

[Pseudopod]

I think GT5 had pretty acceptable damage, for a developer that had never implemented damage in a game before. A bit of refining of it and they would have gotten far.

 

[NixxxoN]

That's nice, but not all of us are driving gods like you.

Then its more of a chance for you to finish the race. Its a win-win situation for everyone.

I bet @NixxxoN doesn't need realistic engine sounds neither because he uses his eyes to drive.

Honestly I would love to have realistic sounds, even though they are not really necessary.

Like the Moon.

The moon is only a bit of surface made of irregular terrain of grey color and lower gravity, I dont think it was so hard to create for them, and its cool.
When I said "other things" I was thinking about engine sounds like mister dog said lol
And of course, more cars and tracks. Its nice to have old cars but you get the feeling you dont get enough new cars.

 

[mister dog]

Honestly I would love to have realistic sounds, even though they are not really necessary.

Dunno, if all those missing features aren't necessary it seems you are easily satisfied. We aren't in the '90's anymore so people expect games to be more complete than they used to be. For example shooters must have breakable objects and surroundings now otherwise people will deem them unsatisfying, whilst 10 years ago that wasn't a necessity.

Same with racing games; nowadays most of us not only want eye candy, but good racing, an engaging career mode, good sounds, a decent online mode with leaderboards and yes also damage as that's part of the package.
PD just copy-paste their game up to the next installment without improving the formula, just because they know they don't have to innovate as their games sell millions anyway regardless of the quality.

If that doesn't bother you enjoy the game, but meanwhile the rest of us will be playing something a lot more fitting to the year 2015.

 

[NixxxoN]

Its so easy to ask for more and more, but you guys dont realise that developers cant do everything, you cant have a lot of this or that without having some drawback.

 

[FoRiZon]

Its so easy to ask for more and more, but you guys dont realise that developers cant do everything, you cant have a lot of this or that without having some drawback.

How on earth they can do more when they cant even complete the damn game!

 

[NixxxoN]

How on earth they can do more when they cant even complete the damn game!

Well, to be fair, games like GT keep getting updates for a long time, so they are only complete when they get the last update, so... you get what I mean.

 

[wowbaggerBR]

Its so easy to ask for more and more, but you guys dont realise that developers cant do everything, you cant have a lot of this or that without having some drawback.

That's the thing, when you don't have priorities set, your drawbacks will be noticed. When you have priorities you are able to communicate and reasonable people will understand.

So, in GT case, going mad on resolution (bringing along all the well documented graphics issues) was a priority bigger than the CourseMaker? Moon? Vision GT? Copy-paste PS2 assets?

 

[ToyGTone]

Dunno, if all those missing features aren't necessary it seems you are easily satisfied. We aren't in the '90's anymore so people expect games to be more complete than they used to be. For example shooters must have breakable objects and surroundings now otherwise people will deem them unsatisfying, whilst 10 years ago that wasn't a necessity.

Same with racing games; nowadays most of us not only want eye candy, but good racing, an engaging career mode, good sounds, a decent online mode with leaderboards and yes also damage as that's part of the package.
PD just copy-paste their game up to the next installment without improving the formula, just because they know they don't have to innovate as their games sell millions anyway regardless of the quality.

If that doesn't bother you enjoy the game, but meanwhile the rest of us will be playing something a lot more fitting to the year 2015.

Do you realise that most big games of today are rather incomplete...?

 

[Imari]

Do you realise that most big games of today are rather incomplete...?

Are they really?

GTA V is a notable exception, but I can't think of another recent incomplete game off the top of my head. I can think of games that are crappy, and games that are small, and games that are specifically advertised as beta versions or Early Access. But I can't think of a lot of incomplete games, let along big ones.

Give me a few to read up on, it's possible that there are ones that just aren't in the sorts of genres that I play often so I don't know about them.

 

[ToyGTone]

Are they really?

GTA V is a notable exception, but I can't think of another recent incomplete game off the top of my head. I can think of games that are crappy, and games that are small, and games that are specifically advertised as beta versions or Early Access. But I can't think of a lot of incomplete games, let along big ones.

Give me a few to read up on, it's possible that there are ones that just aren't in the sorts of genres that I play often so I don't know about them.

Well Of course GTA V is a completed game, it's made by Rockstar Games (which is in my opinion is one of the best Game company around the world) not by some repetitive FPS or sports Games maker or most mobile "games".

 

[mister dog]

Do you realise that most big games of today are rather incomplete...?

I think you don't understand my definition of incomplete, let's rephrase it in 'not up to date' then.

 

[ToyGTone]

I think you don't understand my definition of incomplete, let's rephrase it in 'not up to date' then.

Ops my bad then, Sorry.