The Myth Of Car Damage

[JohnBM01]

If the PS2 could handle car damage and GT4 had car damage for all 650+ cars (even Special Cars), would GT4 be better, worse, or indifferent? Would this be enough to convince fans to get into Gran Turismo games?

I think the online play issue is a broken record, so I'm not getting into that. Perhaps it's been PD's intent to include some car damage all along. I don't know if car companies get overprotective of their cars in a game like the Gran Turismo series, but you can likely ask this. If it's okay to have machines in Forza Motorsport and Project Gotham Racing 2 to have crash models (much less the exotics), why not GT? To be honest with you, I never wished for car damage in almost any game. Am I saying it's bad? Did I MENTION it was? My thing is, I don't care about car damage, and it makes no difference to me. I'm a completely casual gamer and don't ask for much in games. All I ask is that a game is interesting, fun, at a sizable challenge, and have just enough to have me replay the game sometime soon or in the future. I don't ask for everything in the world for GT like most of you. Then, if it did have remarkable car damage, I'd feel indifferent.

In the past, I've said that I didn't care if the game had the bigtime Euro exotics. I didn't care if it didn't have online play. When I state these things, I'm not suggesting that people should stop complaining about it. I just have different tastes. Part of a challenge of appealing to many tastes is that you sometimes can't assume what you want is what you hope to get. If one person hates seeing cars lower than 100hp, chances are, many others won't mind them. Appealing to as many people as possible with as many features as possible and making the game completely fun makes GT what it is today.

 

[lenox147]

Well this is a very hard topic to discuss, GT4 is already selective realism, i mean there is more error margin invovled in gt4 than real life. Certain things are left out like getting stuck in gravel traps, and the way your car handles on grass etc.

But as for damage, well it has to be 'like' real life but dulled down a bit. I really like the damage in V8 Racedriver 2, you can get away with the odd wall tap, and i mean tap not hit. But excessive wall hits and rought treatment warrent damage, you dont want real life damage as it will become too hard, you need a comprimise. Something V8 Racedriver did well imho.

Realism is good yes, but more real = more harder and also harder to master. It is after all a game and not a car sim that teaches racers (like flight sims teach pilots). Gt4 with V8 Racedriver 2 damage is a very good balance of realism and user friendly-not-pulling-hair-out.

I agree, there has to be a limit to realism. Imagine blowing your engine in a championship because you miss a shift or scraping the wall at 150 miles per hour which I might add would probably finish your day at the track. Or even as we have seen in other threads (dealing with penalties) being rear ended by an AI driver who braked too late.. Some realism is good but having your race ended by factors we can't control would really bite. I know that's the way it is in real life racing but as much as I love this game it isn't real life..

 

[JohnBM01]

Well, I can recall the much better Codemasters racing game, "TOCA Race Driver 2." Your car can take quite a beating until you really screw up. Once, I smashed up a Jaguar XKE in the vintage racing series, ended up having enough damage to render my car undrivable. Had to either retire or restart. I don't think PD would overemphasize crashes like the Burnout series, so I don't think we'll see completely dramatic crashes. I say for starters, add some rollovers. One of the coolest arcade-type racing games I've played was "Need for Speed 2: SE." I believe EA still sells that 5-pack of Need for Speed games (NFS2:SE, NFS3, NFS:HS, NFS: Porsche Unleashed, and NFS2: Hot Pursuit.), so if you get a chance, get that package of games. NFS2: Special Edition didn't have car damage, but it was so fun because You can get into dramatic crashes, heavy rollovers, flying off the track... it was so fun. The rollovers and such weren't completely realistic, but added to the fun of the game.

Personally, I'd hate having an undrivable car in a race. In TOCA Race Driver 2 and GT4, I rarely seen the AI cause me to lose the race. That's why I'm not all upset about GT4's AI. If it doesn't be the factor to me losing races, I'm not concerned.

 

[enuttage]

I agree, there has to be a limit to realism. Imagine blowing your engine in a championship because you miss a shift or scraping the wall at 150 miles per hour which I might add would probably finish your day at the track. Or even as we have seen in other threads (dealing with penalties) being rear ended by an AI driver who braked too late.. Some realism is good but having your race ended by factors we can't control would really bite. I know that's the way it is in real life racing but as much as I love this game it isn't real life..

Toggle, toggle, toggle, toggle, toggle.

Does no one listen, or does no one agree?

-E

 

[James2097]

Toggling is an easy solution. A bit of a cop out cause I'd rather PD just incorporate a really good AI and damage system so that there is no need for a toggle, which I feel would just bring attention to the fact the game design was flawed.
I say do damage well and give everyone a consistent challenge. Toggling is like admitting that you can't balance the game properly. Ultimately we would all want damage if it were incorporated really well, so why shoot for plan B (a toggle) when we don't know plan A (awesome realistic damage system that is super fun, that doesn't frustrate, where its all your own fault if the car gets buggered etc..) can't be achieved? I would shoot for the stars initially at least.

 

[Atrere]

I want GT5 to have it so that if I screw up big, my car will be nothing more than a crumpled piece of tinfoil. But only if repair costs have a cap.

 

[FLK]

I think it's better to ask will it really add significantly to the game or not, with a grid so small it's not worth putting it in unless that changes in GT5. Personally I'd rather see a larger field of cars on the grid along with a much improved AI than see PD spending time implementing a damage model.

 

[skicrush]

Toggle is not the solution, because for damage to be worth all the time and effort put into it, PD needs to figure out how many of us will appreciate it, or rather, how many it will totally piss off to NOT have any damage. Of course, it will help a LOT if they decide they need to the set the bar high with the first edition of Gran Turismo for PS3 to showcase the new system's abilities. Plus, Live4Speed says Kaz said it was gonna be in (ie, he wanted it in), so we can only wait and see if they actually make it work.

But more than that, I don't think it will be worth switching it on and off. I mean, the early races are what, 5 laps at most? And that's on the REALLY short courses. Plus, most of the early races are easy anyway. Even novices should be able to make it around the track two or three times without rendering their car completely undrivable. I guess they could create a few different difficulty levels, or damage levels. Light, Moderate, Heavy, Super Heavy, Tin foil body, and RL. You could choose what to fix in the pit, maybe having your pit boss give an estimate for how long it would take (and probably cost, too) to fix certain things. You could choose between taping in the pit or replacing the broken panels, and just replacing selected gears, instead of the whole tranny to get back out faster. I guess you can see why adding damage without the management of fixing it would have been lame. And why it still might not make it in.

 

[enuttage]

Toggle is not the solution, because for damage to be worth all the time and effort put into it, PD needs to figure out how many of us will appreciate it, or rather, how many it will totally piss off to NOT have any damage.

What does that have to do with a per-race basis toggle? Keep it on for a 5 lap. Turn it off for a 200-mile enduro.

I don't see the problem, difficulty, etc., in this solution.

-E

 

[dolande]

There is a saying: “You can please most of the people but not all of them”. I guess that Sony needs to figure out what do most of the people want. Not easy task since in this GT fan forum there is no quorum

 

[skicrush]

I guess I was attacking it from a "Do you want it/is it worth it" point of view. Making damage optional to attract both market demographics may not be worth it. They won't get hardly any return (extra games sold) for the extra time and effort they spend on making damage happen--no vale la pena. Adding a toggle to it (or level difficulty selector) as a convenience is a different story all together once they make the commitment to doing it. I guess I was thinking of a damage selector that you can access at any time (like switching between MT and AT), not just at the beginning and lock it in like in most RPGs.

 

[jaxx751]

GT4 is on a dual layer DVD, check it on your PC, it's 9GB. But thats not important, if a game won't fit onto a DVD for the PS3 it will go onto a blue ray disk which can have upto and potentially more than 30GB capacity.

hehe... I have a new modding idea... thanks for the info.

the OPTION to toggle isn't a good idea... some people would start to hate the game and players who turn it off, claiming "cheating"

the only time it would make sense is if they had damage as difficulty levels... beginner hall-none, advanced hall - some, limit on "insert thing here" etc etc...

 

[skicrush]

If they're gonna do it, I think you should be able to select the damage level at any time, right under your tranny (AT, MT). Off, light, med, heavy, real. I don't want to race the beginner section with no damage--I want to do the whole thing on real. It would be as easy to make it one way as the other.

 

[TurboLexus]

I am actually in the middle when in comes to car damage and repairs to cars like oil leaks and tranny problems and damage car modeling.

I think the game is hard enough and then add that element, I think it would be a lot more frustrating.

Although, the one thing thats not a factor in todays game is reliability.
I like the idea because I think the Toyota's and Lexus's of todays game would have another factor to help.

TeamLexus won the 2002 Grand-American Cup with their IS300. The owner said that they weren't the fastest car out there, but what really helped them was the extreme reliability of the car. The car ran near-flawlessly all year.

So, maybe you will have these mustangs that put out big power, but they aren't as good for reliability wise and so on.

 

[Flat-12 Aircool]

More A.I. cars is a priority, but ultimately without some sort of damage model that would just provide more opportunities for "A.I. Vehicle assisted Braking" into tricky corners you can't be bothered to brake properly for.

Racing games that have damage models force you to drive properly and prevent the race turning into a fuel injected Fairground Dodgem Car farce.

Check out the new FIA GTR racing game from SimBin to see how a decent moderated damage model can work. 👍

 

[Flat-12 Aircool]

GT4 is on a dual layer DVD, check it on your PC, it's 9GB. But thats not important, if a game won't fit onto a DVD for the PS3 it will go onto a blue ray disk which can have upto and potentially more than 30GB capacity.

Blue Ray is actually 50Gb mate.

Hd-DVD is 30Gb.

+

As for other points made about Manufacturers not allowing damage of their cars in the game, I remember seeing a interview with a programmer from that Mercedes racing game sometime ago. He indicated that the main interest for Mercedes was that the Passenger Cell was not destroyed in any crash but that other parts of the car could be damaged.

I believe this viewpoint would be shared by most other manufacturers and goes some way to explaining Ferrari's and Porsche's presence in Forza, contrary to the Myths that a damage model would exclude any possibility of them appearing in a future Gran Tourismo game.

 

[E.DIZZLE]

Me personall y i'd like to see rusty old beat up junkers like some 57' chevys and it would also be very cool if you could do body off restorations.I don't know maybe it's just the fact that I grew up in a town with old junked cars sitting around in peoples yard or just the fact that I grew in a famiy of car nuts but i'd really like to see old rusted cars in GT5.

 

[JohnBM01]

E. Dizzle, welcome to GTPlanet. It would be interesting to have a junkyard option for a GT game. I don't know what cars you're into, but I'm down to restore a beautiful mid-1960s Ford Mustang and make it a road racing king. I'd race a 1958 Corvette or restore a Chevy Bel-Air. Who knows, maybe a 1970s Pontiac GTO.

I never wanted to make a big deal out of car damage because it didn't really matter to me. You cannot assume that everyone wants (and will get) the same thing. Allow me to do some not-so-expertly scientific analysis.

In a perfect world, if Person A wants every muscle car GT4 didn't manage to get in, but then Person B wants a Veilside-modified Supra, both would make it no matter what Person A resents about Person B, or likewise. Or let's say that there are 100 people who have played at least one Gran Turismo game that have all gathered in a forum open to the public. Among them, let's say 80% wants NASCAR-style smash up damage to cars, while the remaining 20% like the cars they way they are. Let's also assume that the 80% wouldn't want NASCAR-style damage, but would prefer a damage system that doesn't result in visual catastrophe- making the damage physical, not visual. Among the 80%, let's say that about half the 80% group would want physical damage over visual and over visual-and-physical. Who does PD look to? What group will PD try to implement as best as possible? Part of the deal is that the game and console have to be able to stand up to the task. If the console can't handle the effects, then it likely won't happen. The next deal would affect licensing and trying to bring up an agreement to let the damage happen. Assuming the 20% of people in my example don't want damage at all, to keep everyone happy, the damage can be toggled.

To me, if PD makes it happen, many deals will have to be arranged. On top of that, there has to be options to disallow for those who wouldn't prefer damage. Try to cater to as many people as possible. You can't make everyone happy, but you can surely try. If you want a damage deal, play "TOCA Race Driver 2." Then imagine what the damage model would be like if "TOCA Race Driver 2's" damage physics made it into GT4 or a future game. Have to be able to analyze and think about things if you want to make something happen.

 

[Tim_Gommers]

We must remember that it's a game, not real life, and it needs to stay that way.
If you crash into a wall at 200mph I wonder if you'd survive. It'd be a really short game that way.

Cheers

 

[James2097]

Why a toggle is NO good ultimately..

Sure a toggle is a fine feauture as a training aid for a pure sim, but for a 'game' it'll just compromise the entire gameplay system, in effect creating 2 different games. The importance of consistency and balance in the gameplay cannot be taken so lightly. This is why PD didn't put the online mode in, it wasn't consistent with what they wanted the 'Gran Turismo experiece' to be.

If you have crash physics that aren't consistent throughout the game for everyone it could easily suck you out of the game 'world'. It doesn't matter if the physics in question are/n't completely realistic, if the physics are consistent it validates the 'world rules' in the game's universe so to speak. It has a tangible solidity and 'suspension of disbelief' factor for the player.

For instance WipEout 2097 has a wonderfully consistent physics model which really sucks you in. If Psygnosis had implemented an 'easy wall crash' toggle it would've completely ruined the challenge and appeal of the game. Its kind of like if you (hypothetically) added a mode alongside the main mode in Super Mario 3 where the player has say, 50 lives initially and double as high a jump. Although it WOULD be up to the player's discretion whether they played in this mode, it would nevertheless COMPLETELY UNDERMINE the challenge of the game and its underlying gameplay. I feel a toggle for damage could easily have this effect in GT5. Many players WOULD just play without damage if it were easier to win, undermining the point of including damage in the first place, or the point of PD balancing the game for damage.

A game world should have solid rules that the developer sets that they feel best provides the challenge and overall 'experience' they feel like creating for you. That is the basis of what a well balanced game is. Now I know that PD cares a lot about the consistency of the experience and would be keen to offer 1 'superlative' Gran Turismo experience instead of 2 inconsistent, wildly different, unbalanced, and ultimately compromised experiences, which IS what a toggle for the damage could easily do. Especially as damage is to play a significant part (according to Kaz) of the gameplay.

A toggle would make you aware that the physics of the game world are up for debate, certainly not the best idea for a Gran Turismo game, the series whose historical strengths have been the physics consistency, solidity and feel of how the game plays.

PD shouldn't make the GT series bend and contort at the whim of every minority group that may wish to play it. You would then end up with something like the bland Pro Race Driver Series. Jack of all trades, master of none. They should just concentrate on creating the experience THEY want to give us. Trust me it'll be a far better balanced, superior game for it. Even if they decide to not have damage at all, or full damage etc.

I know I'm going a bit over the top to just talk about the damage toggle idea, but I know no one was really thinking through the ramifications of adding such supposedly small additions. When you don't have a balanced damage system to begin with and then think you can make it a brilliant game with a cheap, fix all, wonder menu that says "toggle damage: ON/OFF" is simply the sign of a fundamentally broken game. It would be like a band-aid on a broken bone. The very idea of needing a toggle means that the gameplay isn't fun, isn't balanced and isn't any good. Until PD can successfully put damage in there and remain confident enough in their game to NOT put a toggle in, then they should not include damage.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, ALL or NONE. Keep it balanced and fun.

 

[enuttage]

I COMPLETELY disagree with this.

Why in the world would this compromise the 'spirit' of the game any more than TCS, ASM, using a 1000hp+ car against 100hp cars, or using nitrous, etc., etc., etc.?

To me, there is abolutely no logic in the idea that a damage toggle skews the game's design principles any more than any of the above mentioned.

Just me, I guess.

 

[Flat-12 Aircool]

I COMPLETELY disagree with this.

Why in the world would this compromise the 'spirit' of the game any more than TCS, ASM, using a 1000hp+ car against 100hp cars, or using nitrous, etc., etc., etc.?

To me, there is abolutely no logic in the idea that a damage toggle skews the game's design principles any more than any of the above mentioned.

Just me, I guess.

I don't want to speak in the place of James2097, but I think he might have been talking about having a "No Damage Toggle switch" in the main Gran Tourismo career Mode, which I would agree with.

However I see no problem being able to toggle damage in Arcade mode or 2 Player battle mode for example.

 

[Dave A]

I think prehaps when you start the game and create your profile you could select low damage, high damage or simulation damage and then it's sticks like that all the time in the career mode, but to be able to turn it of at any point in the career mode would undermine the balance of the game, your struggling in a race, you turn off damage and run the AI off the road, you need to be forced to work to achieve certain goals in a game, if you don't have to work at it, whats the point. As for arcade mode, toggle all you like, thats just a quick blast anyway and doesn't effect the rest of the game.

 

[_kamikazefly_]

I think prehaps when you start the game and create your profile you could select low damage, high damage or simulation damage and then it's sticks like that all the time in the career mode, but to be able to turn it of at any point in the career mode would undermine the balance of the game, your struggling in a race, you turn off damage and run the AI off the road, you need to be forced to work to achieve certain goals in a game, if you don't have to work at it, whats the point. As for arcade mode, toggle all you like, thats just a quick blast anyway and doesn't effect the rest of the game.

niiiiice. that would an excellent option.

anyone remember the damage option in GT2?

 

[Flat-12 Aircool]

I think prehaps when you start the game and create your profile you could select low damage, high damage or simulation damage and then it's sticks like that all the time in the career mode, but to be able to turn it of at any point in the career mode would undermine the balance of the game, your struggling in a race, you turn off damage and run the AI off the road, you need to be forced to work to achieve certain goals in a game, if you don't have to work at it, whats the point. As for arcade mode, toggle all you like, thats just a quick blast anyway and doesn't effect the rest of the game.

I thought of that also, on face value that seems like a good idea but...

How could different players be able to compare their progress through the game like we can now on this forum if there are 3 different levels of damage to select?

I think one of GT4's current strengths is the fact that everybody is playing on the same level. Ok, so maybe some players use more Steering assist or Traction control, but fundamentally we are all playing the same challenge. IMHO, the future "GT5 community" would be worse off without a level playing field for everbody in career mode.

 

[_kamikazefly_]

I thought of that also, on face value that seems like a good idea but...

How could different players be able to compare their progress through the game like we can now on this forum if there are 3 different levels of damage to select?

I think one of GT4's current strengths is the fact that everybody is playing on the same level. Ok, so maybe some players use more Steering assist or Traction control, but fundamentally we are all playing the same challenge. IMHO, the future "GT5 community" would be worse off without a level playing field for everbody in career mode.

true, thats a good point, it is a very hard subject to address, i think it comes down on preferences and what people want, this will probably be a reason as to why gt5 might take a while to produce!

 

[Dave A]

My concern is not with how I could compare my progress to another persons, ofcourse any online races would use one choice for everyone on any server so you wouldn't have people getting smashed up easilly by people with tougher cars.

Comparing stats is only out of interest in any GT game, anyone car rack up a 100% win ratio in GT1,2,3 or4, just use the best cars all the time, the best GT4 racers don't have 100% win ratio's, because they challenge themselves, so the numbers in your stats page don't prove how good your are, even in GT4, and in GT5 if you want to compare stats just add what level of damage your using as well, no big deal it will still have little relevance to how good you actually are. The idea is that people who don't want damage are given the option of not so much limited damage, but tougher cars or something of that nature.

Saying GT5 would be worse if they gave you that choice is stupid imo ( I know you didn't say GT5 itself, you saidf community, I'm not replying to that point here), I know for a fact that the full simulation damage I woud like to see (provied the AI is better) would not be wanted by all, at the same time not everyone wants near indistructable cars, so what do you do, balance it in the middle and please thoes that want it there, but none of the people that want realistic damage, or any of the people that don't like damage? Giving the people the choice at the start of the game caters for everyone, while not undermining the games balance at the same time.

I think the only problem with damage is balancing races online, you'd need to have a community with plenty of support for people wanting to race with limited, or full damage.

 

[Polyphony001]

It's an interesting debate, what would count as a nudge in GT games would total a car in reality. I think what really illustrates this point is when say you stack it off a cliff (Grand canyon course, anyone?), you don't just get put back on the track again. If you crash, you crash. That MUST be final. Otherwise it throws the real driving simulator out the window. I can not see any room for more than, say, two dozen cars in a game with crash damage totally accurate like this. Despite being arcade, Burnout 3 has some relatively ok, though i think we'll leave out crashbreaker ()

On the ps2, it just wouldn't be possible, not with gt4's graphics anyway. I can see it being GT6 before this idea is really tried, I wouldn't expect it in GT5.

Let's try this picture:

 

[Flat-12 Aircool]

Giving the people the choice at the start of the game caters for everyone, while not undermining the games balance at the same time.

Don't agree sorry...

Game balance will be affected because if you don't have to spend CA$H repairing your wrecked car you'll obviously accumalate money faster than those with damage switched on. Every price in the game will have to be changed to accomodate the extra earning potential.

PD have to be brave and set out their stall firmly and say this is how the Career mode is played whether you like it or not. If you don't like getting your car Totalled then learn to drive properly and not like your on a Funfair Dodgem course.

Kazunori Yamauchi wants to create the Ultimate DRIVING Simulator, not the Ultimate NOOB Simulator.

 

[Dave A]

No, just award less money, or charge more for the repairs. Thats not hard to do, thats just changing a couple or variables. PD have to be smart, and give the people what they want this time round. I think your too caught in what YOU want not what everyone else wants, and whats best for the GT series. You do realise that if you totalled your car as easilyl as in real life hardly anyone would play GT, the vast majority of GT players arn't sim freaks, they just enjoy the game.