KY/PD aiming to high wanting to include damage in GT5?

[Cobra_UK]

As I've posted on the GT5 Predictions thread those are some things we may look forward to in the next GT. https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=70294&page=3

- damage visible and simulated (probably limited but certainly better than anything to date)

I do believe that damage, I mean realistic damage with realistic physics is a huge task considering the amount of cars that are already in GT4. I believe that it may be too much and it may delay GT5 to 2 or even 3 years after the release of PS3. I think that will be a bad idea considering the PS3 needs all the support possible in it's battle with the XBOX 360. I would rather have a GT5 without damage but all the other features at the release of PS3 or within 6 months than wait for a GT5 with damage until 2007-2008.

What do you guys think? Please discuss.

 

[Dave A]

I think that if they go about it the right way from the start then it's not as much of a task as many may think. Codemasters have been doing it since the PS1, games like Race driver 3 look like setting enw standards in these areas. Including damage is not going to make GT4 lack in other areas, thats the first thing to get clear. Having damage does not mean PD have to model and re-model each car in varying stages of wreak. They simply have to model the cars in parts, this was done in GT4 even though there was no damage, you can see thatin action when the doors open on some models or the automatic spoilers ect. The cars arn't a single block of polygons. What PD need is a physics engine that can cope with poly deformation and a poly deformation engine that can handle tears, buckles and complete breaks. Afterthat it's just a case of making sure the physics and properties for the car parts are all correct and upto standard.

I would rather GT5 have more real physics and better DFP support than GT4 and damage than anything else barring online which it will more likely have either way.

 

[Jedi2016]

Yep. The number of cars has very little to do with it, because PD isn't doing damage modeling like every other racing game out there (this is why they haven't had damage in the series yet). Doing it all in real-time with poly deformation is actually quite easy, it simply requires system power.

 

[Cobra_UK]

In reply to post #2

I'm not sure I can agree with that. Modelling automatic spoilers and doors is nowhere near like modelling all the parts that may break in the event of a car crash. I don't think there is any proof that PD have modelled the cars in parts either. It's an educated guess, I'd be so happy if you were right but at the moment it's just a guess. If you check the TVR in the used cars section that has the soft top always up it proves that that particular car was modelled with the top up and no interior was modelled, since it's never visible. Yes some doors do open but only on a few cars and they're more like gimmicks. Modelling a car's interior, mechanical parts, even engine components (in the event the bonnet comes off) is a truly mammoth task. PGR3 has just the cars and their interiors modelled and still they had to go under 100 cars to make the developing time realistic.

Race Driver 3 looks good and I can't say anymore until it's release and I get to play it but the damage in the previous Race Driver games was far, far from realistic. It was good, it's a start and it's better than nothing. If KY/PD include damage for their next GT it'll have to be much better than that to be take seriously. Remember, a lot of people look at this game as the ultimate driving/racing game...

 

[Dave A]

And power is something the PS3 has in abundance.

Modelling a cars components isn't a mamoth task, do need to run through the number of games that already do it. As for the doors opening only on a few cars, thats true, but it does prove one thing, that the technique used to model the cars was one that allows a model to be made up of smaller models. Were not talking rocket science here, modelling the engines for rach car is only a mater or manpower and time. If PD don't have the time, it'snothing to them to up the manpower, they had over 80 guys working on GT4 so they arn't exactley short of that.

As for PGR having to have under 100 cars, who says that has anything to do with the time it takes to model them all, sure theres an element of that in ANY game, but the biggest factor is licenses. No game has ever tried to getas many cars in it as a GT game has barring Forza, but even that didn't try to get as many as GT4, the reason wasn't that they couldn't, but they didn't want to.

People who see GT as the ultimate racing game are well off the mark, GT4 is not theultimate anything other than having the most cars in it. It's a superb game, but a game like GTR is far better in terms of realism and imo enjoyment.

 

[Cobra_UK]

Which the PS3 has in abundance.

I don't doubt that at all the PS3 would handle KY's vision for GT5 with damage or not. But it's the developing time I'm worried about.

In reply to post #3

That may be an option mate but in that case there will more than likely hardly any, if none at all, parts coming of the cars in the event of a crash. Otherwise what's underneath them becomes visible and has to be modelled. Still, maybe you're right and KY sees a limited damage system for GT5 and since the car manufacturers are watching closely perhaps he can't get away with anymore than that anyway.

 

[Dave A]

Why do you doubt so much, I know it's not that hard to model a car from the subframe to the bodywork seperately, for a professional it's simply a matter of doing it to detail. If you can't do it in xx months with xx guys, increase the number of guys doing it. It's really that simple, the task itself is not a tough one.

 

[Swift]

It's all about finding the proper engine for modeling damage. Who knows, there might be one out there right now that they could simply "plugin" to GT5 and there you have it! Or they could have to start from scratch(the day after the finished GT4). Either way, damage isn't really a big deal to me. Realism is great, but I like a video game to be a videogame sometimes. And being able to mess up, smash your car into the wall and keep on driving is nice when playing a game. Just my opinion.

 

[Cobra_UK]

In reply to #5

I may be wrong but I'm guessing, you've never used a modelling program? I've modelled quite a bit in college and it's not as easy as you think. 3D modelling gets big, big dollar. That's not because it's easy mate... There are techniques today that use laser scanning 3D technology that speed up things significantly but otherwise it does take a long time. And the famous manpower of PD that you're referring to took more than 4 years to bring out GT4. Yes if PD went out of their way to employ specifically modelling people and increased their staff if could take less development time but we're talking about a firm, PD, who from the very first GT have not felt the need to pay Ferrari, Porsche, Lamborghini or Maserati for their licences. So I'm not sure they'd make an investment in an add-on modelling team just to bring out GT5 sooner.

PGR3 have stated quite clearly that due to the highly increased detail possible with the XBOX 360 and their target development time they have dropped the number of cars available. Please check Bizzare Studios in their forums and you'll understand.

That being said I've never doubted that PD has the skill and talent to achieve what they've set out to do. I'm more worried about the time aspect, as I've stated in my first post.

 

[Dave A]

I've used several 3d modelling programs, I also have a friend who designs 3d buildings. And I know how easy it is to make a 3d model made of many components. As I said, from a professionals view, it's justmodelling the objects in detail that matters and the modellers at PD are pretty damn good at that.

Your starting to bring other issues in here, like PD not feeling the need to pay for Ferrari, Porsche and Lamborghini. PD wanted Ferrari, Porsche and Lamborghini, however the liceses have never been available. PD's entire team did not spend 4 years working their tits off on GT4. As for PGR3, maybe your right, but PGR3 is set to be an early realse for the XB360 so the launch date is far more important inthis case. It's not as big a eal if GT5 slips 6 months. You say that because PD haven't spent money on Ferrari and Lambo (not that it's up to them anyway) they wouldn't spend money on increasing their team, so answer this, why has PD gone from less than 20 people to over 100 since GT1?

 

[Nattefrost]

Why would you rather have GT5 without damage so soon in stead of waiting for damage? This is next-gen we're talking about. It should be as realistic as possible. Right now, there's nothing stopping you from crashing into your opponents while they're braking for a corner, there's no penalty for going head on into a wall at 300 km/h (unless you count the five seconds penalty from special conditions hall and driving mission, which is a ridiculous alternative). After four games, I'm tired of this, it's time for some serious evolution (if not revolution).

Decent damage would add a fear aspect to the game, you'll want to do clean laps to preserve your car, and in the end, you'll be a lot more satisfied if you win a clean race. But they would need a decent recovery system, or endurance races would be too frustrating. An automatic recovery checkpoint each time you pitstop would be a nice solution.

Personally, I don't want GT5 to be another GT game with better graphics, more cars, more tracks and nothing else. We've been playing the same game four times over. Damage could change the way we play, and I feel any change (for the best of course) would be welcome. It wouldn't even be unforgiving with the checkpoint system I mentioned, so the game wouldn't nessicarally get more frustrating. As I see it, it would be more involving and exciting, and that's a good thing. I'm prepared to wait for this until 2008 if that's what it takes.

 

[Cobra_UK]

I've used several 3D modelling programs, I also have a friend who designs 3D buildings. And I know how easy it is to make a 3D model made of many components. As I said, from a professionals view, it's just modelling the objects in detail that matters and the modellers at PD are pretty damn good at that.

I'm sorry but I don't believe you nor your statements or knowledge of 3D modelling. You seem to have a lot of conviction and are interested in arguing your points, but there's no need.

These of course are my just personal beliefs. I'm entitled to them and so are you live4speed. I could go further but I won't as I'm not interested in this developing into some kind of flame war.

 

[Dave A]

You feel the need to believe what you want, making a 3d model from many components itself is not a difficult task. We nkow how much detail the modellers at PD can do, so why would it be so hard for them to make a 3d model of a car from seperate parts? I've used programmes from Bryce 3D to 3d Max, briefely at collegei doing construction design and for my personal use. I'm not in the same league as my friend who I met at college in the same course, but I do understand the process. I can make a model of a house using a 3d prgram, I can make every tile on the roof a seperate model, the doors,the windo frames even. DOing them seperate isn't hard, it's the detail thats hard and we don't need to look hard to see if PD's guys have the talent to get that or not. As for this turning into a flame war theres little chance of that (unless CobraGT joins in). I like a debate lets put it that way, but theres nothing that wrong in my last post, you may dissagree on the difficulty of a task but thats down to personal judgment, so we can both be right and have a different opinion in that area.

 

[Cobra_UK]

In reply to #11

I agree with you on the aspect that GT series have not gone very far since the original. I would be nice, well it will be fantastic, to see realistic damage in the GT games.

The reason why I'd want a GT5 without damage on the PS3 in the next 6 months to a year is because like a lot of others I'm disappointed with some of the things GT4 is lacking. I'd rather see a quick release of GT5 with the features we desperately want (bar damage) like online, multiplayer replays, multipayer drag racing, improved physics, sound and AI and 20+ grids etc. That way we could play that for 3 years or however long it takes PD to make a GT that breaks the mould with the best vehicle damage seen in a driving game. I'm just explaining why I'd like it but of course it's just my preference.

 

[Cobra_UK]

...so we can both be right and have a different opinion in that area.

Good man.

 

[Dave A]

 

[Robin]

If GT5 does not have damage in some shape or form this is where me and the series will part and I will not buy the next one......GT4 seemed to give a very limited amount of new stuff and I need more features to make me want to buy it and there will be people that need alot more convincing to go out and buy it......I do like the fact it is a simluator but I would like abit of the NFSU side of it now and again......good example - make it like forza.....but without all the rubbsih bits.....

Besides.....the PS3 is super powerful...why would you not have damage!

 

[Jedi2016]

If GT5 does not have damage in some shape or form this is where me and the series will part and I will not buy the next one..

That sort of thing makes absolutely no sense to me. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the idea NOT to crash? Ideally, if the game is played properly, you'd never even see the damage system, even if it was there. For that reason, I don't understand how that could possibly be a selling point.

 

[Swift]

That sort of thing makes absolutely no sense to me. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the idea NOT to crash? Ideally, if the game is played properly, you'd never even see the damage system, even if it was there. For that reason, I don't understand how that could possibly be a selling point.

I was thinking the same thing. If it's there great, if not, it's not going to STOP me from buying it.

 

[Dave A]

You see damage regularly in motorsport, it's part of the package. Even if YOU don't crash, you will still see crashes in a race that may not involve you, you be caught up in the after effects of it all. Damage is a step forward, not backwards and not on staying on the same step. Take GTR for example, I love that game, it has damage in it, even if I don't see any damage in a race, it still has a huge effect on the race. It changes how you percive manouvers, how hard you want to push ect. It changes a lot of things about the race and the I don't give a crap attitude of driving in GT needs to be looked at.

 

[Swift]

You see damage regularly in motorsport, it's part of the package. Even if YOU don't crash, you will still see crashes in a race that may not involve you, you be caught up in the after effects of it all. Damage is a step forward, not backwards and not on staying on the same step. Take GTR for example, I love that game, it has damage in it, even if I don't see any damage in a race, it still has a huge effect on the race. It changes how you percive manouvers, how hard you want to push ect. It changes a lot of things about the race and the I don't give a crap attitude of driving in GT needs to be looked at.

No argument here. All I'm saying is that KY is going to do it right or not at all.

 

[Dave A]

Thats true, he has made that clear in the past. But he's never stated damage will be in GT before, yet he's already said damage will play a large part in GT5. Mind you he's not been spot on before with other aspects lke errrr online but I'd say he wouldn't be wanting to make that mistake again.

 

[Jedi2016]

You see damage regularly in motorsport, it's part of the package. Even if YOU don't crash, you will still see crashes in a race that may not involve you, you be caught up in the after effects of it all. Damage is a step forward, not backwards and not on staying on the same step. Take GTR for example, I love that game, it has damage in it, even if I don't see any damage in a race, it still has a huge effect on the race. It changes how you percive manouvers, how hard you want to push ect. It changes a lot of things about the race and the I don't give a crap attitude of driving in GT needs to be looked at.

Oh, I agree.. I'm not saying it's worthless, I'm just saying it shouldn't be a selling point.. I think it's stupid to say you're not going to buy a game over something like damage.

 

[Dave A]

No, it shouldn't be a selling point. In GT I find it's the cars that are the selling point, if I just wanted a game for racing and damage I'd buy the Toca series and GTR and I'd never look at GT. However, each game series mentioned is great in it's own way, GTR for it's sheer realism, GT for the cars and the pick up and play of a console and Toca for it's AI and battles if you find the difficulty to mach your skill.

 

[Tenacious D]

l4s, you're the only person I've seen raving about GTR. From the videos I've seen of it, I'm disappointed that the graphics are put to shame by a Polyphony game on an inferior PS2 system. I'll check it out though. I downloaded the demo and I believe I can use the DF Pro with Logitech drivers, and maybe they made the decision to emphasize the racing environment and experience over graphics.

Anyway, back to the subject. I'd put car damage last on the list of priorities for the next Gran Turismo. Give me the game as soon as you can. I can live without damage till GT6. Unless the next game is a GT4.5, then never mind. Do whatever you want for as long as you need.

 

[Dave A]

GTR kills GT4 in the racing. The cars are far more realistic to drive. The DFP works great but you may need to tweak the setting to get the FFB right. The AI can race well too :shock:.

 

[vtec_guy]

How would they go about damage testing? smash up some Zondas? lol.

I agree with CobraUK, so long as amongst other small things, PD add some kind of customisation feature and improve the AI for GT5, i'm satisfied. I play Toca Race Driver 2 fairly frequently too an that's got damage so it's not really my top priority on my GT5 wish list atm.

 

[Dave A]

No, they don't crash real cars to simulate damage, do you think Codemasters crashed Ford GT's and Aston Martins for Race driver 2. Thery create a physics engine that can handle complex deformations and parts bereaking ect and they simpley create calculatations. They give each car part various properties to represent densitry, rigidity ect and let the engine do the rest.

 

[Omnis]

Can someone please change the topic title and correct the to-too error? (ERROR, ERROR!! )

What PD NEEDS to do is create an engine where each part of the car is its own independant object, just like real life. The parts or bolted and welded together, with a set strength for each bond. If you hit something to hard or rev too high, the bonds could break, or the components themselves get damaged and need replacement.

If such an engine were possible, it would be a new revolution. that's for sure.

 

[Dave A]

How do you think the bonnets fly of the cars in Destruction derby. Each part of the car is modelled seperate and the attached, what your saying is just taking theto the next level, not impossible by any means but maybe including the actual bonds as an object with a seperate property is too much, I don't know. Thinking about it, it's only a matter of adding an extra property to an area where selected objects join, if adding a property to an area that can undergo the punisment,welds and joints in a car go through in a raceis too much for the engine then they could just model the mold as a strip, place it between the joins and make it so small you can't see it and then give the modelled strip a property. Not as advanced a technique but it would work given the techenology can handle enough extra ca,lculations. Your almost doubling them per car by doing this.