Stevisiov
I'm not really a crusader for damage, in fact I can take it or leave it, but to deny damage isn't part of motorsport is inane. Professionals crash, its part of racing, we could ignore it to make things more convenient, or we could make it more realistic, your choice.
...
I am sure PD will work something out, but it seems a tricky matter.
Some prefer a challenge over a win.
Thus endeth this thread. Done, dusted.
The important thing to note, and to think about, is that each person has their own individual
expectation of how realistic (and even what realistic
means) a game should be, not only in regards to damage, but also handling, AI, race length, sound, graphics etc. etc. etc. yadda snore.
So essentially, we need choice. Now in most games, that sort of thing is difficult to implement; it becomes cumbersome and difficult to balance unless gross compromises are made that will inevitably alienate a good proportion of gamers.
In racing games, it's so much easier to achieve. Even the earliest of racing simulators have had the ability to scale the difficulty and realism of many facets of the gameplay / racing / simulation (whichever you choose to hide behind.)
What this means is, we
can have all the scenarios between being able to crash into the moon at Mach 5 and it doing F-all to the car, all the way up to being on the edge of an adrenaline rush / cardiac arrest for fear of even
looking at that slightly-proud curb through your steamed-up visor in the middle of a torrential downpour.
Each to one's own, as they say.
The challenge, then, is how to seamlessly and intuitively integrate the "settings system" into the game so that it suits each player's needs without them having to obsess over checkboxes and sliders (unless they want to, of course!)
