The Myth Of Car Damage

  • Thread starter Kent
  • 260 comments
  • 13,691 views
AI would probably need to be sorted out first. Absolute weakest link in the game.

I'd rather cut out some cars and possibly some trackside objects to improve the AI model/engine. (Or however they would do it).

If theres enough space for damage modelling, then I agree with others that it'll have to be an on/off thing for each item (engine overheat, tyre damage, suspension, body/aero damage, etc.) - Given that they can get it working properly. I rather at least some basic damage apply to enhance gameplay, and teach the player a thing or 2 about car sympathy.

Reliability per car would probably be out of the question. Perhaps some sort of slider bar for net/lan play.

I would like the option of having manually adjusted presets. For lanplay now, I'm sure people have setup their own ladder system and things like off-track excursion options and set damage items would enhance play.

I'd personally prefer clean racing as opposed to bumper cars. It would probably make overtaking more difficult.

Bottomline for me would be:
1. Sort out AI
2. A "Race Sim" option, with itemised basic race-type rules (jump start, pit lane speeding, chicane cutting, overtaking under yellow, drive through/stop-go, black flag, bumper-car penalty) and simple/limited damage modelling, each slightly configurable and on/off-able, and can be manually put into presets (eg. lan/net play, short, long, enduro, etc.)
 
pit lane speeding would be a nice one. imagine if u were now given a button for activating the speed limiter (select, L3). activating it too late means you definitely would have sped in the pit lane = stop-go or drive through penalty.
 
Woow, that would be fun!!
NOT!!!! Seeing you're race ****ed up this little things(damage after 23 hours 59 minutes and 59 seconds, drive through and stop en go)
 
Okay as I see it damage isn't going to happen whether we want it to or not becuase how the people who make GT get such good physics is spending much time with the real cars. There not going to smash up many real cars especially stuff like a delorian. I like the way "damage" is at the moment.

The only thing I think they could do if they wanted to would be make an extra mode for a select few cheap cars that was a demo derby. Like buy a whole lot of old cars that are currently cheap and smash them up. But I doubt they would do that anyway.
 
My view on damage is that visual damage would be good, but if the car makers will not allow it, so be it, let's not get hung up on it.

Mechanical damage is IMO essential if GT want to up their game. Hitting a wall hard should damage your front/rear suspension (I mean it is a SIM, right ? ) and they should write this type of thing into their programming. I have Lotus Challenge, old PS2 game , poor graphics, but it had a damage engine, and your ability to drive and control your car was effected by hitting objects. ie the car's handling characterics changed markedly after hitting objects.

But as many on here say, get the AI right first, we have all been bulldozed off the track by the AI cars.

IMO, the GT series will be overtaken by something else if they do not address these two areas, and/or it will be reduced to arcade racer status.


Steven
 
Visual Damage is one thing and that would be very hard to do and hard on the PS2 and it isn't necessary.
A Damage Meter could tell you all you need to know without requiring massive graphical power to render some fancy busted bodywork.

I'd like the cars to get busted up and loose Aerodynamics, Power, steering, suspension, etc, depending on the incident.
Then you'd have to pay to get those damages fixed.
James2097 has some good ideas there about that & insurance too!


The 5 second penalty isn't a bad start but the AI is pathetic.

gran turismo has never had damage and hopefully never will
GT2 had damages where your steering would go bad after some heavy contact. There were no visuals, only a little on-screen indicator in with your tyre status.
I liked it.



I also think that that any damages implemented should not be optional.
Is the 5 second penalty optional in the current GT mode?
One game for everyone and if there could be such major differences it wouldn't be helpful for the likes of online racing and comparing times etc..
 
Aot of people underestimate the power of the PS2, when GT3 came, evryone sai": this is the max, and what happened? so belive me the PS2 is capable of it.

Mechanical damage is already partial and good(so that it won't **** your 24 hr race up, cause we aren't professional race drivers, with years of training,a nd we don';t have adreal;ine warning us for danger behind a tv)
Look at the refresh options, the hitting of walls, also upsets my car i noticed. I say leave it on this level: its perfect!!!
 
neilX
Visual Damage is one thing and that would be very hard to do and hard on the PS2 and it isn't necessary.
A Damage Meter could tell you all you need to know without requiring massive graphical power to render some fancy busted bodywork.

I'd like the cars to get busted up and loose Aerodynamics, Power, steering, suspension, etc, depending on the incident.
Then you'd have to pay to get those damages fixed.
James2097 has some good ideas there about that & insurance too!


The 5 second penalty isn't a bad start but the AI is pathetic.

gran turismo has never had damage and hopefully never will
GT2 had damages where your steering would go bad after some heavy contact. There were no visuals, only a little on-screen indicator in with your tyre status.
I liked it.



I also think that that any damages implemented should not be optional.
Is the 5 second penalty optional in the current GT mode?
One game for everyone and if there could be such major differences it wouldn't be helpful for the likes of online racing and comparing times etc..
Click to expand...
You think insurance for a racing car is realistic?? ahhaah, no insurance company would ever ever do it. So leave it out or it won't be 100% realistic(boehoe)
On games we can leave real life disadvantages out, and what do we do? we put them in.
it won't be 100% realistic until we die from a crash in the game.
 
Wow, I can see here that some of you guys want to make the game really boring. Watch your favorite racing series and you can tell that only the slightest constant gets “unpunished”. Other than that and you’ll loose control, spin out, or get a flat. Not very likely those guys will win a race in those conditions (not talking about endurance racing where everybody gets is fair share of damage). The only way will be for you to have a far better car but then again I thought we wanted closer competition? Sand traps that actually trap you? Totally disagree here it will mean reset the ps2 and start again.

Selectable damage will be an option but how many gamers will actually leave it on? Probably it’s just to much work to please a few.

Don’t get me wrong I like the challenge but I’m not a “pro-driver” like most of the GT4 buying population. I think that’s one of the reason the real simulators are made for PC.
 
Wow. It's amazing how many here think realistic damage (assuming it can be implemented), will 'ruin' the game.

As others have mentioned, the game calls itself a 'Real Life Driving Simulator'. PD might think a BIT highly of themselves in this regard, I believe.

If they want to actually participate in truth-in-advertising, there's no question in my mind that damage is part of said 'Real Life'. Again though, how hard can it be to toggle it? Those worried about ruining a 24-hour race with damage...can simply toggle it off for those races.

I'll reiterate that true sports fans in other genres have demanded realism from their games for some time now, and manufacturers are finally coming around to it. For true fans, it is neither fun, nor realistic, to score 90 points in every football game (as Madden used to allow - no more). It wears out quickly to be able to hit 3-5 homeruns every game, and EA finally addressed this in their baseball games. Games like OOTP (baseball), Madden (American football), Championship Manager/Football Manager (football/soccer) have it figured out.

PD will either eventually come around to this realization, or someone else will first. I know several local/regional racers that don't play the GT series because it simply isn't realistic enough. They stick to several other PC-based games that stay truer to physics and damage.

When will the market combine a beautiful and huge game like GT with a realistic simulator? Who knows. It'd be nice to have them (PD) do it, since they've got an incredible foundation to work with.

But for anyone who says damage shouldn't be included because it's 'still a game', I disagree with completely. Part of the fun is being able to REALISTICALLY drive cars and courses that most of us will never even SEE, much less drive.

-E
 
enuttage
Wow. It's amazing how many here think realistic damage (assuming it can be implemented), will 'ruin' the game.

As others have mentioned, the game calls itself a 'Real Life Driving Simulator'. PD might think a BIT highly of themselves in this regard, I believe.

If they want to actually participate in truth-in-advertising, there's no question in my mind that damage is part of said 'Real Life'. Again though, how hard can it be to toggle it? Those worried about ruining a 24-hour race with damage...can simply toggle it off for those races.

I'll reiterate that true sports fans in other genres have demanded realism from their games for some time now, and manufacturers are finally coming around to it. For true fans, it is neither fun, nor realistic, to score 90 points in every football game (as Madden used to allow - no more). It wears out quickly to be able to hit 3-5 homeruns every game, and EA finally addressed this in their baseball games. Games like OOTP (baseball), Madden (American football), Championship Manager/Football Manager (football/soccer) have it figured out.

PD will either eventually come around to this realization, or someone else will first. I know several local/regional racers that don't play the GT series because it simply isn't realistic enough. They stick to several other PC-based games that stay truer to physics and damage.

When will the market combine a beautiful and huge game like GT with a realistic simulator? Who knows. It'd be nice to have them (PD) do it, since they've got an incredible foundation to work with.

But for anyone who says damage shouldn't be included because it's 'still a game', I disagree with completely. Part of the fun is being able to REALISTICALLY drive cars and courses that most of us will never even SEE, much less drive.

-E
Click to expand...
How would you feel if they make a real driving simulator????? you would be pissed.











You crash very hard on the nurburgring. because its a real driving simulator, the bell rings and someone of PD kills you so its realistic. :)
 
dolande
Wow, I can see here that some of you guys want to make the game really boring. Watch your favorite racing series and you can tell that only the slightest constant gets “unpunished”. Other than that and you’ll loose control, spin out, or get a flat. Not very likely those guys will win a race in those conditions (not talking about endurance racing where everybody gets is fair share of damage). The only way will be for you to have a far better car but then again I thought we wanted closer competition? Sand traps that actually trap you? Totally disagree here it will mean reset the ps2 and start again.

Selectable damage will be an option but how many gamers will actually leave it on? Probably it’s just to much work to please a few.

Don’t get me wrong I like the challenge but I’m not a “pro-driver” like most of the GT4 buying population. I think that’s one of the reason the real simulators are made for PC.
Click to expand...
Yes, i mean if we would be so good, why wouldn't we be driving the F2005/Audi R8 ect.


We ain't professional drivers, and maybe some here are, but even they can't handle f1 and LMP.
I hardly belive Michael Schumacher or Jan Lammers is between us GTPlanet members.
 
dolande
Wow, I can see here that some of you guys want to make the game really boring. Selectable damage will be an option but how many gamers will actually leave it on? Probably it’s just to much work to please a few.

Don’t get me wrong I like the challenge but I’m not a “pro-driver” like most of the GT4 buying population. I think that’s one of the reason the real simulators are made for PC.
Click to expand...

Boring for you maybe.... That's why there should be a choice for a damage simulation and a standard simulation like it is now. Pro Race Driver 2 has this option. It's not a big deal to implement options like this in a game. Kind of like driver assists traction control and ASM. Some people hate using it and some can't live without it. The point is, they are optional... 👍
 
Damage is a tricky area and difficult to get the balance right between reality and game.

Personally I would favour semi-realistic damage: I.e. engines blowing up because the idiot revved the cars nuts off, tyres which go flat (But not 'overly sensitive'), bodywork that gets semi mangled (Probably similar to Race Driver 2s, but better), performance and steering get affected by said damage etc... But not that it was so realistic that as you crash your car at 100mph into a wall, u die. I also think the gamer should have to foot the bill for the damage. It would be nice to actually take some care of your virtual car I think, rather then just bung it back in the garage with your other 999 cars ;)

However whether GT5 has damage or not (I doubt it will have, I mean come on they haven't even fixed the fundamental flaws even in GT4), they need to sort the crashing physics because they are cack and have been since GT1. Sorry but as nice as the blurry affects are, they don't compensate enough.

I'd also like to see car wear, which I had hoped would be included in GT4 (No chassis refresh doesn't really count). Similar to that of Sega GT 2002/Online would be great but a little more realistic would be nice.

However obviously leave the option for no damage or toned down damage.
 
"Damage on / off" option is deeply against all principles of the GT series and GT Mode as a pinnacle of the game.

Only propper way would be to implement the damage in advanced leagues, with "progress - preparations" during the gameplay itself - as some damage, visual, should be there from the start, and then step-by-step moving towards full-mechanical-damage of any kind to the very Extreme League, or whatever Advanced League.

Also, some kind of "Advanced Licences" should go with it, alowing you to participate in "Full Damage" league only after you sucessfully pass trough high precentage of the game, then unlock "Final Licences" and pass them.

Of course, it would mean that you have to cope with Full Damage in order to pass the game in 100%, but it is logical from all previous GT Mode structure.

Also, only in "Advanced Leagues" with high lap-count, full mech-damage would make races intense, allowing you to catch-up lost time in order to finish races in propper positions. Same goes to Endurances, where low-lap Enduros should go without, as all high-count Enduros would come with damage.

As for "AI and damage" issue - in GT5 AI will become very irrelevant thing. As online racing will become imperativ for all us racers around the world, GT mode will serve just as a way to collect cars and spend your time in time-trialing in order to make a propper set-up for online races. You will not drive any more agains AI, but against humans, and making AI "more realistic" will become unnecasarry.

Of course, it is logical to presume that next GT game will deliver improved AI, but from the basic point of view, AI will become thing of the past.

GT games were never about AI, even from the first game, and finally, online option will make AI to be forgoten once for all, thank God.

I guess we can even expect some most-special car models to be unlocked only in online mode, but probably not before GT6 game, as it would be too radical movement for all those players who will not be "high-bandwith enabled" in 2007.

As GT6 game would probably be out during 2009., then we can expect very drastic changes in game structure and gameplay with more focus on online aspects of the game, since 4 years from now high-bandwith should become worldwide standard.
 
"You crash very hard on the nurburgring. because its a real driving simulator, the bell rings and someone of PD kills you so its realistic."

Well that's going a bit far. But a bit of driver damage would certainly add realism and aid concentration, so what about force feedback just breaking your thumbs?
 
maybe we wont see bodywork damage in the gran turismo series but what would be a good idea would be to have mechanicla damage to things like engine and gearbox, and suspension too. if thats breaks it should alter the way your car handles on the game
 
If you bang the wall too much in GT4 your chassis will get worser sooner, so you're car will get suckier. I have done 24 hrs races and i can tell you its suparealistic, and it's very difficult to drive the car after a couple of hours.
 
Here's another thought.......


Forza has damage in it. If anything that could be a good gauge to determine if damage would be good for a racing sim.

So when Forza comes out we can just sit back and watch to see if it takes off and people love it.....

or......

If it frustrates hard core players and/or casual gamers alike because it makes it harder to win races and progress.

I mean there have been plenty of racing games with damage. Some with ludricrous levels of damage that are intentionally part of the gameplay and some with "realistic" levels of damage. Yet these games, for one reason or another, are not as popular as Gran Turismo and maybe this is one of the reasons.
 
Darts
If you bang the wall too much in GT4 your chassis will get worser sooner, so you're car will get suckier. I have done 24 hrs races and i can tell you its suparealistic, and it's very difficult to drive the car after a couple of hours.
Click to expand...

Suparealistic...

Yeah the other day I took my car round Lemans and rammed about 50 barriers and after that it slowed down by about 10MPH...

The Rover garage down the road was well impressed with my cars build quality!!

C.
 
Darts
How would you feel if they make a real driving simulator????? you would be pissed.
Click to expand...

No. I wouldn't be pissed. I'd be thrilled. That was my whole point.

amar212
"Damage on / off" option is deeply against all principles of the GT series and GT Mode as a pinnacle of the game.
Click to expand...

amar,

Can you expound on this statement? How is a damage toggle any different than a TCS/ASM toggle, or better yet, the ability to use a 1000hp car against 100hp cars in the game as it stands now?

Bottom line is that it's up to the user to determine what level of realism s/he wants to adhere to.

A damage toggle would be no different.

-E
 
If there are cahnging wheater then definatlety no damage, caus ethen i would be "Gran Turismo 5: Survival of the slowest.
 
Darts
If there are cahnging wheater then definatlety no damage, caus ethen i would be "Gran Turismo 5: Survival of the slowest.
Click to expand...

lol well what i meant was if the weather changed mid race so liked if it rained (which i know it already does) your set up originally would be useless
 
Hasn't Kaz said damage WILL be a big part of GT5? I remember reading that in an interview.

Logically (going by licencing issues etc) the damage will be about as realistic as other games that have many licenced cars (PGR2, Forza, Race Driver 2) in its affect on your race. ie pretty much just cosmetic, perhaps with some simple mechanical damage that you have to pay to get fixed. It'll probably just get fixed automatically and the repair cost may be free, just to deal with crap gamers/unfair AI. The only thing that will be different about how PD do damage compared to other games, is that it will LOOK amazing. Knowing PD they will take a softly softly approach and just do the bare minimum so that fans that really want some form of damage will be happy. Kaz has never said GT is all about the damage, its about the driving, taking good lines etc. I feel Kaz would rather there be no damage and just have sexy looking cars in pristine condition. He wants his game to be "more beautiful than real life". Smashed up cars don't fit into this picture Kaz has painted. However the gamers have demanded this 'must have' feature of car damage, so PD has to (finally) comply. They need to put "realistic damage" on the back of the box to make the mainstream game journos happy whilst actually changing their game as little as possible to accomodate it. PD doesn't make big moves. They will incorporate some simple (but amazing looking) damage modelling, almost begrudgingly I reckon. Then it will play the same, but the fickle game journos (that complained about GT1,2,3,4 not having their sacred damage modelling) will love it.

And no PD don't need to actually smash the cars to be able to model damage. How quaint. No game company will ever smash cars for this purpose. They will just study vids and photos of real cars that are smashed up a bit. All car companies do safety tests right, and some government road safety authorities do as well. They'll just deform each car model in the appropriate manner until it looks right for the game.

On the day that I'm wrong about this, Satan will be ice-skating to work. It is damn obvious when you use yer brain.
 
Realistic damage would ruin the game for many like me who are not good enough to get gold on all licences and 250 a spec points per race. GT2's damage was good, hit a wall and your car steers funny, but how would we learn tracks like the Nurburgring if we couldnt get past 6 or so corners without the car being ruined?
As for AI being irrelevant with online gaming, well not all of us are fortunate enough to have broadband, where I live I cant get ADSL or cable due to distance and 2 way satelitte is financially prohibitive and I'm not moving to the city to play a $100 game. So AI is a major problem that needs fixing.
 
James2097
They need to put "realistic damage" on the back of the box to make the mainstream game journos happy whilst actually changing their game as little as possible to accomodate it.
Click to expand...

By journos, I assume you mean reviewers and journalists? Not facetious here, just not sure if I'm missing a vernacular difference between myself and you.

If that's the case, I don't think they're the only ones clamoring for 'realistic damage'.

As stated above, many real racers I know don't like the LACK of realism in the 'Real Driving Simulator'.

And though I'm absolutely LOVING this game, I totally agree with them.

I autocross/gymkhana, road race and occasionally make a trip down to the drag strip, and I don't feel the same sense of vulnerability in GT that I do IRL. Obviously, autocross speeds allow for higher risk-taking, but the other two are risky business if you're being crazy, like the GT series allows.

Realistic damage modeling, where you have to pay for repairs, will give a much better sensation of caution, and even fear. THAT, to me, makes things much more realistic and intense, and therefore much more fun.

-E
 
Hey enuttage, read my first post. I am ALL for PROPER realistic car damage. However I'm cynical and was refferring to the fact that game journos will want damage (even to an irrational degree) even if its just like PGR2 style damage, and will detract major marks from GT5 if it doesn't have ANY form of damage system, even if its just cosmetic, which will likely be the case. I want proper, realistic damage. Game journos and the general public seems to really like or hate the GT series on whether it includes some form of damage and puts this feature above all else when detracting points from the game. I find it really vain (on gamer's behalf) that PD will most likely just put in some cosmetic damage and all of a sudden people will love it, even though it'll just be a graphical change with the same old GT gameplay underneath the facade.

They will just go oh yay. Damage modelling on a nice bullet point for the back of the box. Won't make a hoot of a difference to the game (it won't be realistic, licencing etc) but GT will all of a sudden be seen as a more 'advanced' sim. I just feel that it should be ALL or NOTHING in regards to damage modelling. It'll be how I predict though.

I just mentioned game reviewers/journos as they are very fickle when it comes to deciding whats next-gen or cutting edge, and whats not. This can come down to whether a new car game includes a pointless cosmetic damage system (PGR2, FORZA) and what doesn't (GT4). They are also the loudest voice when it comes to complaining about games (funnily enough).

It'll be like "tick the box.."
Watered down damage system? "Yes sir!"
The game won't be any better in REAL terms however.

Oh yeah of course proper real/sim-racers want awesome damage! I'm one of them, albeit just a sim-racer.

Edit: sorry I re-read my post and it sounds angry, I'm not. I'm just repeating myself too much... very tired.
 

Similar threads

J
Damage in GT7
Replies
17
Views
3K
syntex123
syntex123
Famine
The Most Ludicrous Video Game Tie-In Car is For Sale: Carmageddon’s “EVILC10” Truck
Replies
5
Views
1K
Famine
Famine
chitox9
Is there a mod to buy unbuyable cars on GT4?
Replies
1
Views
1K
wolop953
W
Apocalypse211
Is there a way to force AI choose tyres in QF session?
Replies
3
Views
4K
Fumblefap
F
B
Making Gt7 more realistic
Replies
23
Views
8K
Darla Starch
Darla Starch

Latest Posts

Back