GT producer - Damage still the same.

[ShiftingGears]

I turn off visual damage whenever I run rooms, simply because for the most part, the visual damage looks unrealistic and hideous. If it was well implemented, then yes I would have it on.

 

[Ranman20]

Why are you dissapointed? This is not NFS, the producer wants people to see the beauty of the cars, not smash them up. I could care less about damage. It be would neat if it was a little better, but it really doesn't bother me. GT is a racing game where crashing will loose you the race, its Burnout paradise.

He did say it is similar to GT5, so there is a chance that it could be slightly better.

How are you going to call GT a sim if there is no damage?

 

[lancia delta hf]

Kaz said it.

No he really did, honest.

Its a shame he doesnt realise why some people like myself turn it off, That is to say because its patheticaly implementd, hit wall at 150mph>get bck on track>car wants to turn right or left>drive for a lap or two for car to fix itself.

I want visual aswell as proper mechanical damage, I find the "why do you want to drive to crash all over the place" arguements completely ridiculous, I want consequences for my driving and that of others, No one buys this game because its a driving sim (Its a driving sim angle is laughble too, Unles people start on a grid on their daily comute to work?), They buy it to race, So pd should try to bring everything that comes with racing and that includes car failure too, Thats what i want from damage and i know thats what my friends i race with in a league want too,

The bottom line is pd need to keep moving forward rather than release games and have people say why havent they put this or that in it.

 

[snowgt]

How are you going to call GT a sim if there is no damage?

You can simulate the effect damage has on driving the car. You don't need to simulate every effect of damage (like driver fatalities...) or display it visually, especially if the hardware can't cope with it properly. I'd rather have them concentrate resources on other things, like AI.

 

[Organ-Donor]

I turn off visual damage whenever I run rooms, simply because for the most part, the visual damage looks unrealistic and hideous. If it was well implemented, then yes I would have it on.

Agree.

 

[sems4arsenal]

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..

That's actually how a product works,people want a feature ,makers implement it,Every one is happy

 

[TetreRouge]

No it's not as simple as that at all. You're a big Le Mans fan, aren't you? Surely you remember such incidents such as what occured in last years race to Davidson, or maybe the year before to McNish? Neither of those 'wanted to smash cars up' but the accidents happen and seeing damage like that in a game would be much more immersive.

It might be more immersive, but for online it will just attract the type of dweebs who only play racing games to cause huge accidents.

 

[Johnnypenso]

That's actually how a product works,people want a feature ,makers implement it,Every one is happy

Actually no. There is a laundry list of dozens upon dozens of items that fans want, but the development budget has finite limits.. You can only do so much and some things don't make the cut or are not a high priority for PD/Kaz. Damage has never been a high priority for PD and likely never will.

 

[Samus]

It might be more immersive, but for online it will just attract the type of dweebs who only play racing games to cause huge accidents.

That's not an excuse not to include it though. If it was you might as well not include really fast cars either, the faster people go the bigger crash people can cause whether there is damage or not.

Plus there is the key point that if you have problems online you can either kick the offender(s) or disable damage. Again though, it's not an excuse not to include extensive damage to begin with.

 

[GMHV8]

To be honest I don't really like damage so it doesn't bother me that the Damage Model is the same and as PD said they're not about "crashing cars around".

As for the part about the AI mentioned in the OP that doesn't fuss me either as I mostly race online anyway. Granted I will do all the A-Spec events and Seasonals too etc.. but yeah the AI hasn't really annoyed me much, the idea is to win and if I want a challenge.. I'll race online.

 

[MustangManiac]

It might be more immersive, but for online it will just attract the type of dweebs who only play racing games to cause huge accidents.

I think what attracts those types of dweebs is the not having a damage model so they can slam into all the cars they want. If we had a proper damage model they would slam into one car and their race would be over so what is the point of doing so. It would also end the cheating by cutting corners and bouncing off barriers if it would tear up the car.

 

[sems4arsenal]

Actually no. There is a laundry list of dozens upon dozens of items that fans want, but the development budget has finite limits.. You can only do so much and some things don't make the cut or are not a high priority for PD/Kaz. Damage has never been a high priority for PD and likely never will.

That's the thing it should be on the top of the laundry list.

Never been a priority for a racing sim?

 

[finnracer]

I think what attracts those types of dweebs is the not having a damage model so they can slam into all the cars they want. If we had a proper damage model they would slam into one car and their race would be over so what is the point of doing so. It would also end the cheating by cutting corners and bouncing off barriers if it would tear up the car.

However an extreme damage model would probably have different settings (we have that now!) so damage can be reduced or turned off, so said dweebs would still be able to do their thing, although I agree it would keep them away from the more serious rooms! 👍

 

[Johnnypenso]

That's the thing it should be on the top of the laundry list.

Never been a priority for a racing sim?

Not a priority for Kaz/PD...big difference. This game, perhaps more than any other in the history of videogames, follows the personal preferences of it's founder and leader. I'd say generally that if Kaz wants something and it's in the budget, it gets done. If he doesn't want it or it's a very low priority it doesn't even come up in meetings, memo's, emails etc.

 

[maxpontiac]

I honestly believe that damage is not being implemented into GT6 because of the PS3 and it's RAM issues.

 

[daus26]

Mechanical damage I can understand, but visual damage is nothing buy eye candy to me. Damage in GT5 made me realize how unimportant it was. It was also a pain trying to do that one "fall off door" trophy or whatever it was called. Besides the many times where I got bored and just crashed into walls, it was rarely a feature that I often see. Sure accidents happen here and there, but it doesn't happen often, and I hope not.

I don't have anything against having visual damage, but with it being on the PS3, it would definitely be better to focus elsewhere. Next gen PS4 GT should be able to handle it much better.

 

[JDMKING13]

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

This! I believe this was the same source that stated standards would have interior views in GT5. Why do folks get so bent out of shape, we barely know anything about the game guys. To say/think GT6 is going to have the same exact damage as in GT5 is not fair. GT6 is looking a lot cleaner than GT5, PD gould have cleaned up the damage and made it more aggressive. In the end we just have to wait and see. 👍

 

[Quakebass]

I actually just looked at the source of this info... And it looks like really poor reporting...

For one thing, the guy seems to know very little about the game. And it seems he isn't directly speaking with a PD rep. OR Kaz, rather one who very LIGHTLY discussed the items discussed here.

I don't think I'm going to take the article very seriously...

 

[daus26]

Well at this point, it's not a matter if we should take it seriously or not. It's what if it is true? We shouldn't expect better damage or similar damage, but rather just expect the worst. It can't hurt.

 

[glassjaw]

I honestly believe that damage is not being implemented into GT6 because of the PS3 and it's RAM issues.

Outside of Polyphony, I can't think of another developer that has had so much trouble with damage modeling. Codemasters for one has done great work on the PS3 in terms of their damage model. I understand their games run at half the framerate and those effects might not be possible in GT6, but surely Polyphony could even adopt a watered down damage model, like Forza 4's for example. I'd even settle for that. Just something beyond what GT5 implemented, which was a glitchy mess.

 

[ShiftingGears]

It might be more immersive, but for online it will just attract the type of dweebs who only play racing games to cause huge accidents.

I don't believe design decisions should be restricted by the lowest common denominator of online players.

 

[TwIsTeD_83]

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.

No I'm saying that in a game with mediocre damage like GT5 there are many dirty rooms.(and they're always full for some reason)
If damage is improved in GT6 then you'll see even more of that.
This will be a huge blow to the already low level of public online gameplay.
The kids will think : "Improve my racing line? Nah I'll just crash all day".

 

[Samus]

No I'm saying that in a game with mediocre damage like GT5 there are many dirty rooms.(and they're always full for some reason)
If damage is improved in GT6 then you'll see even more of that.
This will be a huge blow to the already low level of public online gameplay.
The kids will think : "Improve my racing line? Nah I'll just crash all day".

Not really, now people crash to win because there are no implications, with better damage there would be and people would know that using another car or wall to take a corner will not win you the race.

 

[NCRthree]

Very low priority for Kaz's vision so it's no surprise there's no big advancements.

It almost seems like there's two issues being discussed. Visual damage with flying body parts, broken glass etc...like in NFS games. And/or the repurcussions mechanically.

Do people want damage done so realistically that a car will be unmovable after a bad wreck? Oh I'd love that if I'd practiced all week for a 2 hr Enduro and get pushed off in the first lap in Turn 1 by some one else and end up with a totaled car. Too bad so sad, your race is over.

 

[Samus]

Ah, the mystical vision of Kaz. It's been a while since someone brought that up as a defence of something.

 

[NCRthree]

^ I'm not defending the damage or Kaz. Just saying why it's likely low on the list.
Besides, I'm an American. We love to see stuff get blowed up!

 

[lintels123]

What I would really like to see PD do is make the cars more prone to weight shift roll overs. Imagine seeing that at Autumn Ring in an online spec race! They should atleast have tire blowouts and broken lights. Best thing would be aerodynamic high speed flips, but thats not going to happen

 

[Voodoovaj]

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

You will also note that in the video, you can see the pop from one car model to a damaged models. The damage isn't procedural. In GT5, the damage is procedural so an impact moves the verts in the 3D model. This is the only viable option when using the old car models.

To employ a damage system as shown in the video, you multiply the time to model, texture, and implement each car by the levels of damage you want. So, for instance, that GT3RS is modeled 3-4 times over to get all the levels of damage it can have. Granted, it's doesn't fully take 100% of the time (of making the original car), but it still takes quite while.

 

[BoingsterGT]

Well that's kinda lame. I guess it makes sense though as damage isn't really the focus of the game.

 

[counter345]

I'd rather they prioritize physics, content and sound over damage. Damage would be awesome, but imagine the additional processing power it would take to track the flying pieces.

In my opinion, it's best left for the PS4, where processing power will more likely be more than doubled.