Poll: What's more important in GT6, mechanical or visual damage?

[TomBrady]

I vote for mechanical damage because it effects the gameplay, and in my opinion is crucial for having good online racing. I don't consider dirty racing fun in any way. I consider it unfair, lame and just frustrating. There's a lot of it in GT5.

After experiencing iracing, I've come to believe that the absolute best kind of virtual racing, is when everyone races as if the cars are real. I think the biggest reason for that is if they crash, it will instantly affect them.

I've noticed that even with clean drivers in GT5, if mechanical damage is off or even set to light, they will take risks they would never take if heavy damage was on, or if they were racing in real life because they can still continue the race as if nothing happened. If heavy damage was on, they would be careful because they don't want to make any pit stops, so hitting another car, would never benefit them.

Visual damage can be fun to look at but it really doesn't matter if it doesn't affect the gameplay. I think it would be nice to see the visual and mechanical damage go hand in hand, like losing a wing would cause a loss in downforce, but I still believe mechanical damage is more important.

 

[Tornado]

Mechanical damage. GT6 can have the exact same melty plastic visual damage for all I care, so long as it actually does something to the car (preferably aerodynamic damage too).

 

[Johnnypenso]

I didn't vote. I avoid heavy damage rooms and series like the plague and could care less about visual damage, crash physics etc.

 

[TokoTurismo]

Never liked visual damage, but I gladly have mechanical damage.

 

[TomBrady]

Mechanical damage. GT6 can have the exact same melty plastic visual damage for all I care, so long as it actually does something to the car (preferably aerodynamic damage too).

That's what I would like added as well, aerodynamic damage. More so than that however, I would like to see the ability to cause critical damage to the cars. I think totalling cars would be another good way for people to learn how to race properly.

I'd really like to see at least the medium to harder difficult A Spec races to have heavy damage on permanently. The racing online would be so much better if everyone was used to racing realistically, instead of the way it is now where people will just push you out of the way, or use your car as a brake to make a turn.

I don't understand how people can think that's okay or fun. Maybe it's because they've never experienced realistic racing in GT5. I hope things are improved in GT6.

I'm hoping that the whole club racing idea they have in GT6 will help clean racers find eachother much more easily instead of us having to search through a sea of dirty drivers.

I didn't vote. I avoid heavy damage rooms and series like the plague and could care less about visual damage, crash physics etc.

why? I've raced with you, you race clean, so what's the problem? If it's other drivers hitting you, I think you need to realize that if heavy damage was always on, that would only happen very rarely and if anyone hits the wall on their own, they SHOULD suffer the consequences.

In the races I've done with you, there were definitely clean drivers but at the same time, sometimes they would take risks that they would never take if heavy damage was on, myself included simply because they won't suffer the consequences until after the race. When there aren't instant consequences, people naturally do things they know they shouldn't even try to do. Even the cleanest drivers can be guilty of this.

However, I should point out that it doesn't even apply to the poll.

The poll doesn't say heavy damage has to be on all the time, it only asks if you think mechanical damage is more important to have in GT6. It's pretty black and white. I could have made it more complicated but didn't.

 

[Sage Ages]

Mechanical, specifically to other parts to the car then engine. You can pretty much do whatever to your car without anything happening to the clutch or transmission, and every car seems to have a indestructible motor.

 

[Grand Prix]

I want to see wheels fly off like they did in GPL.

 

[scrambles175]

I didn't vote. I'm a silver lining kind of guy that views car body damage as a possibility to add down force or to create a golf ball effect to go faster on the straightaways. I will venture to say that both possibilities are far too complex for Gran Turismo to even entertain the thought.

 

[HBR-Roadhog]

Mechanical damage for sure,

 

[RandomCarGuy17]

I don't care for damage, but I would still say that mechanical is more important since it effects how the car drives and it would give the people that do care for damage a better sim experience.

 

[Feldynn]

I'd say "mechanical damage" generally there comes a point when you do need some visual cues to accompany certain types of damage. And do a degree we already have some of those in GT5, if you've ever had some serious wheel damage did you ever notice the car shake and rock around like you've actually broken somethingl?

While I would love to see the level of full damage that things like iRacing, Race 07 and other sims offer (i.e. wheels flying off and wotnot) in a GT game I'm still relatively happy with the combination of mechanical / visual elements we have right now. With any luck the new "unPremium" cars in GT6 will be updated enough that they don't suffer from the old melted plastic effects of the "Standard" cars in GT5.

 

[FLASH48]

Mechanical damage.

 

[Imari]

Mechanical, although it needs to be a little more complex than GT5s. Things just wobble in GT5, they don't bend (which is funny given how damage LOOKS most of the time).

Bend suspension, smash a wheel, damage aero, etc. And damage to gearbox/engine for mistreating them. Over-revving the engine should have a consequence, as should grinding gears if you're playing with a clutch.

It'd be nice if there were graphical effects to complement these, but a diagnostic graphic on the side would suffice if not.

 

[Khyber]

Both, I want a decent visual damage model and mechanical damage.

I need to feel like the fact that my wheels are screwed up is because I hit the wall and I can see that or the fact that I slammed the car in front of me and now the engine is messed up and the front end of my car looks like a mess. I guess I'm describing forza4?

 

[Exorcet]

Mechanical for realism. I don't think it has much to do with driver skills though. GT5 visual damage would be fine with me.

 

[eight6er]

I voted for visual damage, I'd like to see it removed or made look realistic. The melted car type damage now is rubbish.

 

[dr_slump]

No love for the acoustic damage?

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

Just like with other simulation racing games we should have an option between cosmetic and realistic damage. You should not be able to go from 6th gear to 1st gear without destroying something.

 

[o9lifted]

Visual damage is cool when it looks good. Mechanical damage is good as it makes you avoid that incoming wall Makes for better online experience too I guess. Voting for Mechanical damage.

 

[Tired Tyres]

Mechanical damage only more of it as in going from 6th to 1st too fast. Bang. We are done for the day.

 

[tinram]

Visual would be nice but mechanical is a must.

 

[Samus]

To me there is no 'or', they go hand in hand if you want a realistic experience. If I have a huge shunt it's no good telling me my front end is ruined and making the car handle poorly if the car looks fine, it ruins the immersion.

 

[Nurburgthing.]

To me there is no 'or', they go hand in hand if you want a realistic experience. If I have a huge shunt it's no good telling me my front end is ruined and making the car handle poorly if the car looks fine, it ruins the immersion.

Agreed. All or nothing.

 

[glassjaw]

Mechanical, but that doesn't mean visual should be ignored. The visual damage in GT5 is some of the strangest I have seen in any game that has destructible objects. It's almost like the bodywork is made of plastic and bends but never breaks.

 

[Fogerty_Jr]

Well, I think that accurate collision physics would be more important than both visual and mechanical damages

 

[Khyber]

Well, I think that accurate collision physics would be more important than both visual and mechanical damages

but at same time we should be able to see what that collision left us with and feel it!

 

[Johnnypenso]

why? I've raced with you, you race clean, so what's the problem? If it's other drivers hitting you, I think you need to realize that if heavy damage was always on, that would only happen very rarely and if anyone hits the wall on their own, they SHOULD suffer the consequences.

In the races I've done with you, there were definitely clean drivers but at the same time, sometimes they would take risks that they would never take if heavy damage was on, myself included simply because they won't suffer the consequences until after the race. When there aren't instant consequences, people naturally do things they know they shouldn't even try to do. Even the cleanest drivers can be guilty of this.

I will gladly take any damage that I cause to myself. It's damage from other drivers who don't have control of their cars I'm not willing to take. In a well regulated series with a field of drivers I trust I'd give it a spin, but I'd still rather race with no damage at all and leave the race marshaling up to the RD and replays, as opposed to PD's iffy damage modelling.

 

[HBR-Roadhog]

I really think damage should be forced on in A-Spec single player mode. It would make the game more challenging and it would help to train new drivers not to slam into the car ahead of them to get past or use them as brakes for the corners. If you hit a car from behind at say 40mph greater speed than the car ahead your race should be over due to severe damage at that point. Not that it would totally disable the car but should make it incapable of winning unless it is a long race and you go into the pits for repairs. A busted radiator will do you in pretty quick as will a fender scrubbing on a tire.

On another note. I've saw a lot of posts where people talk about the melted plastic look then a few days ago I was watching some real life race footage where a car had been bent up a bit in the front and it kinda looked like melted plastic on the real car. I forget which race it was but am thinking it was Road America.

 

[brycepunk]

I would prefer full mechanical damage over visual, but a bit of visual is needed to see what is actually smashed. If the car is pulling to right because a tire is missing, but there is no visual indication of this, or the engine stops working because you hit a wall but the paint isn't scratched.. that's no good.

Give us a mix with focus on mechanical. Otherwise they'll get too caught up in the polygons and not enough in the actual effects.

 

[Exorcet]

I really think damage should be forced on in A-Spec single player mode.

Optional would be good. Forcing things is pretty silly, especially in offline mode where someone is playing alone.

It would make the game more challenging and it would help to train new drivers not to slam into the car ahead of them to get past or use them as brakes for the corners.

If damage is on, the AI can be damaged. Also if someone wants to ram, it's fine.

If you hit a car from behind at say 40mph greater speed than the car ahead your race should be over due to severe damage at that point. Not that it would totally disable the car but should make it incapable of winning unless it is a long race and you go into the pits for repairs. A busted radiator will do you in pretty quick as will a fender scrubbing on a tire.

The damage should be calculated individually on every instance. If you're in the 1 in a million position to survive a crash going twice as fast as the other guy with no damage, that's what should happen.

GT is supposedly a sim, so I think realism should go ahead of balance or whatever else. If you want a more game like damage that overly punishes for damage, then that could be an option too.

I would prefer full mechanical damage over visual, but a bit of visual is needed to see what is actually smashed. If the car is pulling to right because a tire is missing, but there is no visual indication of this, or the engine stops working because you hit a wall but the paint isn't scratched.. that's no good.

Give us a mix with focus on mechanical. Otherwise they'll get too caught up in the polygons and not enough in the actual effects.

Well they could also just provide a car schematic to show damage. Some of it you won't see anyway, even if you're not in the cockpit.

I'd like to see damage that would be visible represented, but the impact on car performance I think is much more important.