GT producer - Damage still the same.

[tillbot8]

It's not about something wrong or right, there are ton's of things wrong with this or any other game. It's more about priorities, for us and for PD. Many people, me included, think realistic crash damage is more of a sideshow than an integral part of the game. And PD's resources are not unlimited. Modelling damage on 1000 cars I would imagine involves a whole lot of programming time, which would mean that some other aspect of the game would get less attention. Given how many areas there are for improvement in GT6, that's not a tradeoff I'd be willing to make.

Oh I can understand PD writing out a plan and them evaluating that Modeling crash and damage physics would take a lot of time and resources! But I meant more for the People who are saying we don't drive to crash etc. To me that sounds like a cop out! It's an integral part of immersion and consequences of one's actions! To not implement it for whatever reason! Okay I can live with that! But sometimes it seems like blind followers will support whatever they put in no matter what! And in the long run that could damage the potential of future GT's as they will not feel a need to push the envelope!

 

[sems4arsenal]

I'm glad this got a post in the news section,really hope PD realise what a mistake it is..

 

[dylansan]

If you want to smash cars up then just play GTA IV, simple as.

GTAIV's damage model is actually pretty much the same as GT5: everything melts and clips through the rest of the car.

 

[Nomadpt1]

Knew damage would be unchanged once they announced standard cars are returning. How would it be possible to give standard and premium cars an equal level of damage? Its just not possible.

Can anybody really say the above wouldnt add to the game? That damage isn't needed? I use to make excuses for Polyphony Digital, but not anymore. I kissed their butt and was one of their biggest apologists all the way up to GT5. But now, after it appears they've learned little to nothing from GT5, Im not giving them the benefit of a doubt anymore

you have to think. shift 2 has 151 cars with all dlc's. GT6 will have 1200 plus dlc's so doing 1200 cars damaging model isn't the same has doing 151 cars

don't even talk about project cars because it has about a 5 car list it's normal that every car is well done

 

[Conquerer]

you have to think. shift 2 has 151 cars with all dlc's. GT6 will have 1200 plus dlc's so doing 1200 cars damaging model isn't the same has doing 151 cars

don't even talk about project cars because it has about a 5 car list it's normal that every car is well done

Well, Shift 2 doesn't have 800 PS2 models.

PD has no excuse for not having a proper damage model for the premium cars. As for the standards, there could still be a more generic damage model that's much better than the one now.

 

[TokoTurismo]

you have to think. shift 2 has 151 cars with all dlc's. GT6 will have 1200 plus dlc's so doing 1200 cars damaging model isn't the same has doing 151 cars

don't even talk about project cars because it has about a 5 car list it's normal that every car is well done

My thoughts excatly. It's normal because think about it. Having less cars will have better damage, but having tons and damage like Shift's damage, not so much. It makes sense for PD not to include heavy damage with over 1200 cars imo.

All they do need, is mechanical damage and keeping the damage the same as is. 👍

 

[Imari]

don't even talk about project cars because it has about a 5 car list it's normal that every car is well done

Riiight. Is the 7 key on your keyboard broken? Last I checked pCARS was aiming for a 75 car roster and looking to surpass that by quite a bit.

 

[Foxiol]

Riiight. Is the 7 key on your keyboard broken? Last I checked pCARS was aiming for a 75 car roster and looking to surpass that by quite a bit.

Still not enough and physics are lame in the current state. No hope for that to change too much. (Full member since October 2011 and about to ask for a refund...)

I play rFactor 2 and AC and both are way ahead of pCARS. Graphically is great but sometimes over-saturated with effects and textures/colour palette.

Let´s see what happens with it but it can´t compete against the top simulators on PC (rFactor 2 with real road and tyre degradation, AC with great graphics, physics and laser scanned tracks and iRacing with one of the best physics and suspension model, laser scanned tracks and the best online by far).

GT6 by how it is looking it is way better than pCARS, talking about physics, FFB (both things way important) and even graphics. For ME.

 

[Stumps_GTI]

I could have lived with better damage, but as is, is still fine too.
Realizing the undertaking to have ALL cars in the game capable of sustaining realistic damage would be too much time involved I'd guess.

 

[Dodzzz]

Lol, I don't hit.. so I don't need damage.
Even if I hit, I'd reset.

 

[Nomadpt1]

Riiight. Is the 7 key on your keyboard broken? Last I checked pCARS was aiming for a 75 car roster and looking to surpass that by quite a bit.

I was kidding I already knew it that had a plus 30 car list, I was kidding. But still a 75 car list is a very small one

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Mechanical damage is more important than visual, I wonder if ultra expensive flight simulator used by Air Force or Commercial pilots do have hyper realistic visual damage ? I don't really think so - it would be the last in the airplane maker checklist, probably the plane would be torn to pieces like in most run of the mill flight sim and the explosion would be cartoony . But realistic mechanical damage that simulate the real thing would be mandatory for pilot training. The same might apply to simulator used by Formula 1 teams.

That's the most important in GT, mechanical damage and failure that adheres to real life situation, whether the visual is good or not. If the car's totaled, doesn't matter it it's burning in pieces or deformed it's gone.

 

[Spagetti69]

Mechanical damage is more important than visual, I wonder if ultra expensive flight simulator used by Air Force or Commercial pilots do have hyper realistic visual damage ? I don't really think so - it would be the last in the airplane maker checklist, probably the plane would be torn to pieces like in most run of the mill flight sim and the explosion would be cartoony . But realistic mechanical damage that simulate the real thing would be mandatory for pilot training. The same might apply to simulator used by Formula 1 teams.

As a single player experience I don't think that's comparable at all.

As an online experience with randoms it would nice to see visual damage up ahead, that would explain the reason the guy is driving all over the place at 50 mph. Rather than assume he's trolling the lobby.

I don't think the Air Force use paint chips either. Different purposes and platforms here.

 

[Tired Tyres]

15 pages of this because of something said on kotaku of all places?

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

As a single player experience I don't think that's comparable at all.

As an online experience with randoms it would nice to see visual damage up ahead, that would explain the reason the guy is driving all over the place at 50 mph. Rather than assume he's trolling the lobby.

I don't think the Air Force use paint chips either. Different purposes and platforms here.

For the purpose of simulating, they are all the same when it comes to damage reproduction, mechanical is still at the top of the list. But, yeah, I made the wrong comparison.

I understand that for gaming online, some visual that standouts to other drivers, whether a car has a tire puncture, suspension damage, body damage or blown radiator, would be needed.

Maybe PD should add smoking engine bay + a little fire, shredded tires with rims scraping the tarmac, bent wheels + suspension, simple broken windows in addition to the current damage model used on GT5 ( crumpling deformation ). I think that should suffice and easy enough to implement.

 

[Cosbuster]

Mechanical damage is more important than visual, I wonder if ultra expensive flight simulator used by Air Force or Commercial pilots do have hyper realistic visual damage ? I don't really think so - it would be the last in the airplane maker checklist, probably the plane would be torn to pieces like in most run of the mill flight sim and the explosion would be cartoony . But realistic mechanical damage that simulate the real thing would be mandatory for pilot training. The same might apply to simulator used by Formula 1 teams.

Yes, imagine having a wing fall off mid-flight. Let's simulate it but not show it to the pilot who wonders what the hell happened. Planes are quite different from cars. By the time you get some sort of visual damage, it's usually too late and the simulation is over which doesn't hold true for racing.

 

[Spagetti69]

Maybe PD should add smoking engine bay + a little fire, shredded tires with rims scraping the tarmac, bent wheels + suspension, simple broken windows in addition to the current damage model used on GT5 ( crumpling deformation ). I think that should suffice and easy enough to implement.

I agree with this.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Yes, imagine having a wing fall off mid-flight. Let's simulate it but not show it to the pilot who wonders what the hell happened. Planes are quite different from cars. By the time you get some sort of visual damage, it's usually too late and the simulation is over which doesn't hold true for racing.

Exaggerate much, most flight sim would have basic visual damage, but not very detailed, simple parts broken up visually. I am more talking about enough visual to let others know the damage of a car when viewed from outside without having too much extra detail that would burden the rendering engine even more than it should. I would happy with damage icon alert on top of the other car when online if the visual is too taxing on the console.

 

[nickg07]

Most people turn damage off anyway.

 

[Samus]

Most people turn damage off anyway.

Citation required.

 

[TokoTurismo]

Most people turn damage off anyway.

Indeed they do.

 

[Scaff]

Most people turn damage off anyway.

Indeed they do.

You guys may do, but that doesn't automatically equate to all.

I always turn off the BGM when racing in sims, doesn't mean I think it should be removed or my choice be enforced on everyone else.

 

[TokoTurismo]

You guys may do, but that doesn't automatically equate to all.

I always turn off the BGM when racing in sims, doesn't mean I think it should be removed or my choice be enforced on everyone else.

Well for me in online free run rooms yes the damage gets turned off, but not thought of wanting it removed all together.

 

[United6694]

'The Real Driving Simulator'

I think it's about time they changed the slogan...

'The good looking simulator'?

 

[Spagetti69]

Citation required.

Kaz said it.

No he really did, honest.

 

[TwIsTeD_83]

Good.
There are enough Dirty Rooms in GT5 already

 

[Spagetti69]

Good.
There are enough Dirty Rooms in GT5 already

I don't understand your statement? Are you glad there's dirty rooms in GT5 or not? Are you saying lack of damage in GT5 equals dirty rooms?

I'm conflicted.

 

[praiano63]

I really don't care about visual damages, or at least ,they are not a priority for me ,even more if they don't have any consequences or sanctions. If i wanted to break a car in 10 pieces with a loud crah sound and slow motion triple stunt, i'll play burnout , this is a fantastic game for this.
What i would like to see in GT6, specially for online races, is mechanical damages that send you to the pit for a given time, corresponding to the level of damages. Same as Iracing. After several times , you and everybody on the track learn to drive clean, this is real respect, not fake simulation.
Those are the only kinds of damages i would like to see as an option in my favorite racing game.

><(((((°>°°°°°°°°°

 

[Dodzzz]

You guys may do, but that doesn't automatically equate to all.

I always turn off the BGM when racing in sims, doesn't mean I think it should be removed or my choice be enforced on everyone else.

Just because some people wants damage doesn't mean PD must make it happen.
But I'm sure they will add damage, better sounds, etc eventually.. but not in GT6 I guess.. they still have so many other things to do, like making better standards or even converting them all to premiums, better engine sounds, more tracks, etc..

 

[NCRthree]

More detailed visual damage is not a big priority for me. Mechanical damage should definitely be included and more refined.