Is this how damage should be?

  • Thread starter Fyshokid
  • 115 comments
  • 7,961 views
The speeds of mpact were high, I'm fairly sure a 200mph crash in a road car modern or not will leave very little car behind. The fact the car was bouncing all over the place and parts were flying off at the speed of light etc is due to the physics engine, which yes in my opinion was exagerrated. But the actal damage modeling was brilliant.
 
The speeds of mpact were high, I'm fairly sure a 200mph crash in a road car modern or not will leave very little car behind
I'm not saying that the car wouldn't sustain massive damage in such a crash, it's just that in the video it seemed like the car was made out of glass. It just simply shattered. :scared:

But to be fair, I suppose I've never seen what a car looks like after a 200 mph crash in real life either! :nervous:
 
Either GT5 gets 100% realistic or no damage imo. No sense implementing mediocore annoyances like the things in Forza 2 and GTR2. I don't like how some people who clamour for damage in every thread claiming to want to be punished turn around and say they don't want full damage since that'll be too punishing.

There is either the option to turn damage on, or off, no silly middle grounds please.
 
This reminds me of when I used to blow myself up with rifle grenades in Medal of Honor, just to see how high I could fly.

If GT5 had damage like that, that would be awesome. With over 500 cars to not just drive, but destroy in a million different ways, it would be impossible to get bored with the game, LOL. We'd see youtube videos of crashes that are so insane even fans of the game "Grand Prix Legends" would hurl. And that game had wicked crash physics.
 
I'd love to see damage like that - but the framerate would get munted if there were heaps of cars in shot while a crash is going on - even is only one car is crashing.

As people have said, the physics here are unrealistic. What about then it hits the tree? Usually it would slam down on the ground and never move again, but here it bounces and then rolls for a bit(?!)
 
VERY impressive stuff. It would be a mistake for PD to implement something that realistic though, one mistake and the race would be over. I would personally love to see it, but it's not very practical...unless you could turn it on or off I guess.
 
Although it's tempting, I see no real addition to gameplay with damage like that.

You know, debris can have an effect in the drivability of a track. And seeing such crashes adds to the immersion as well.

Yes the OP's video has slightly exaggerated damage, but it's more realistic than what GT has, that's for sure...
 
You know, debris can have an effect in the drivability of a track. And seeing such crashes adds to the immersion as well.

Yes the OP's video has slightly exaggerated damage, but it's more realistic than what GT has, that's for sure...

I agree with you on the first part. Hitting debris can potentially cause damage to your car, and many drivers steer around debris, which affects their times and speed.

But the second bit: what exactly does GT have right now, though? :D
 
If the factor of debris on track is accounted for, I guess PD should also add that other realistic aspect to racing which is pausing the race when there is debris on the track.

To me, damage adds nothing to the game, save for the possibility of losing a 24 hour race on the 23rd hour.
 
For those saying damage doesn't add anything to the game... Wasn't damage supposed to replace those annoying penalties? But then again... If someone else slams into you, you're dead meat :indiff:
 
The end result doesn't look bad, but the way it happens in the video just doesn't feel real. The car lacks weight and parts of it just fly around for no reason just because the car is in the air or gets hit somewhere else.

But yes this is the level of destruction needed for GT5, not just loosing your bumper after a 200km/h head on crash as in many other games or even sims. I think we all understand this level of damage will be very difficult to make it into GT5 though.
 
Last edited:
Can't we just settle on realistic crash physics and rollovers and leave it at that? Why do we need one trillion parts flying off of cars when it serves no other purpose than to hog up system resources and create a huge spectacle. It would be nice, but get other more important things like dynamic weather and day night cycle stuff in there first I say.
 
When you look at GRID and Forza etc then damage/deformation is standard but I'd like laser scanned tracks, more polys on road surface bumps and different feel of tarmac from london street to daytona. Tyre profile movement and weight-shifting with cars switching on the tyres and losing the back end and cars lifting off the track plus high detailed weather added. The driving physics need more depth, movement and resistance/feedback in my opinion.

People expect damage to be standard so if its not included then it may impact sales as lack of damage gets talked about a lot on the general gaming forums.

Like amar said. If its realistic then the internet would be plastered with Ferrari's smashed to bits and I'm not sure manufactures want the road cars to be shown this way in this hugely popular game tagged as a real driving sim.
 
To me, damage adds nothing to the game, save for the possibility of losing a 24 hour race on the 23rd hour.

A I supposed to feel sympathy for drivers who can't drive for 24 hrs without crashing? Isn't that the point of enduro races?

First off, if you're so afraid of damage, you're not leading the race at any point period.

Second, if you're the leader by the 23rd hour and lose on a crash, that's downright shameful.
 
Honestly while GRiD is a terrible game for GT fans it did have some really good crash effects. The physics were off but hell they were closer than anyone else had come at the time. So in my opinion something between GRiD and Forza but hopefully better than NFS Pro Street and Forza. Although the thing with damage is I do not think they are going to be able to implement realistic damage, have 16 cars on the track at once, keep the frame rate at a reasonable level and have the graphics stay the same. The PS3 is powerful but that is asking a lot. To this date no racing game has had the holy grail combination of: Great graphics, physics, damage, weather, large car/track variety, and many cars on the field at once. Personally I think after GT5 PD needs to work on a full on all out PC title that would be the be all, end all, include all racing game to but all other racing games ever made to shame. Here is to dreaming.

Here is a video to give you an idea of what GRiD was like.

 
What a great video! If in game damage was like that with the option of replaying in slow-mo I would never do any racing!
 
I'd asume that this guy was using a fairly high spec computer and this quote,

To make a crash scene the car was then given an initial speed, and some obstacles were placed in its way. After this to scene was simulated, a process which took about 20sec / frame. This video has a frame rate of 30 frames / sec, so that means a 3-4 second long clip took about 40 minutes to simulate. The simulation is done by the computer and you cant influence it while it's being done.

Finally all clips are rendered. 30 frames / sec gives a total of 5400 pictures that had to be rendered for this video. Rendering means "calculating" how each frame looks like. The computer does the calculating all by itself, so no one has painted each 5400 pictures in Photoshop or anything like that. The average rendering time per frame was about 10 minutes. That's a total of 54 000 minutes = about 40 days. The computer gets quite slow when rendering, so I usually put on the rendering process when I was going somewhere.

suggests that this sort of damage would be impossible to run on a PS3 in real time. Shame.

I agree with what other people have said though, looks incredible.
 
I'd asume that this guy was using a fairly high spec computer and this quote,



suggests that this sort of damage would be impossible to run on a PS3 in real time. Shame.

I agree with what other people have said though, looks incredible.

Great digging, thanks for the info. 👍
 
i want the damage to be like grid, i don't need the car to look really 🤬 up, i just want the cars peformance to be affected.

Question: when you are playing online what happens if someone splams into you, is your car gonna get damaged?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can't we just settle on realistic crash physics and rollovers and leave it at that? Why do we need one trillion parts flying off of cars when it serves no other purpose than to hog up system resources and create a huge spectacle. It would be nice, but get other more important things like dynamic weather and day night cycle stuff in there first I say.

Agree that crash physics / rollovers are more important, but as the Forza devs said, some manufacturers don't allow rollovers...
 
Dazzla: mistake to implement such realistic damage? Of course you wont see this kind of detail on ps3, but i really would like to end the race after one crash.
Like richard burns rally...
 
If GT5 had damage like that I know how i'd win online :), I would enter a race in a Hummer against people with lotus elise's, wait till they do a lap and crush them all!! :lol:
 
When you look at GRID and Forza etc then damage/deformation is standard but I'd like laser scanned tracks, more polys on road surface bumps and different feel of tarmac from london street to daytona. Tyre profile movement and weight-shifting with cars switching on the tyres and losing the back end and cars lifting off the track plus high detailed weather added. The driving physics need more depth, movement and resistance/feedback in my opinion.
For the non-bold part, I agree. 👍

For the bold part, it depends. If you remember GT3 and how much more advanced it was over GT2, the race courses were much more detailed, but at the same time quite basic. This was the first PS2 engine build, and Polyphony was squeezing everything they could into that Emotion Engine, based on the knowledge base they had of it at the time. Along comes GT4, and the tracks are much more detailed, to the extent they could push the limited 4megs of VRam anyway, and is probably the pinnacle of racing GT style on the PS2.

The PS3 is a far, far different beast, but I'm seeing some similarities between Prologue and GT3. While the graphics are stunning, I can still see how tracks like Daytona, Fuji and High Speed Ring are rather basic. This is still a rather early build of the GT5 Engine, and it's hard to say how much of the Cell Broadband Engine PD is harnessing, how many SPUs, how efficient or inefficient. Who knows if Ken Kutaragi himself isn't involved. Keep in mind that each bit of detail is something the PS3 has to render and bring to life, and only has so much power. Simpler tracks, more basic damage and weather effects etc, all allow Kaz and the lads to devote more resources where we want them, into the racing experience. Maybe we can have those 20 car races Kazunori-dono was speculating in an interview some time ago.

The PS3 is less than two and a half years old. Hoping for a GT5 which is like GT4 rather than GT3 is probably unrealistic, given as how complex the PS3 is. It took five years experience with the PS2 to bring us GT4. But I expect that down the road, in the third, fourth and fifth years as happened with PS2 games, the PS3 is going to astound us. If Gran Turismo 6 is released for the PS3, I can hardly imagine what it's going to throw at us. And if it's on PS4... well, the sky's the limit.

Another thing about the car models. I know some have said that these are too refined, and a more basic model wouldn't eat up as many resources, which is true. But I suspect they chose such a level of detail so that these models would be good for future games.
 
A I supposed to feel sympathy for drivers who can't drive for 24 hrs without crashing? Isn't that the point of enduro races?

First off, if you're so afraid of damage, you're not leading the race at any point period.

Second, if you're the leader by the 23rd hour and lose on a crash, that's downright shameful.
I don't know about you, but I'd prefer it if the game didn't punish me like in real life. It's a simulation, good, just let me drive and be done with it. If you want the game to punish you just like in real life, why don't you just go and enter into a real endurance and get the full package then, you'll even feel G-forces then.

Frankly, I realyl couldn't careless if some random guy somewhere doesn't feel sympathy for me. XD
 
Last edited:
I don't know about you, but I'd prefer it if the game didn't punish me like in real life. It's a simulation, good, just let me drive and be done with it. If you want the game to punish you just like in real life, why don't you just go and enter into a real endurance and get the full package then, yo'll even feel G-forces then.
lol... I would if I got the chance... :P
 

Latest Posts

Back