What would your reaction be if GT5 is released without damage?
- Thread starter skingg
- 243 comments
- 17,029 views
- 10,373
- Manchester
- Ardius_
Having read all the "for" comments about damage in GT5, I feel I actually care about not having damage now - as in I care if they did have it in, I would be upset because it either:
-Won't be done realistically, as has been said, manufacturers demand certain things and we will never see cars rolling over or exploding or anything like that. The reason? Bad publicity, even if its just a game, people will still think that perhaps these cars are very easy to flip over or whatever and car companies fear this more than anything else. They also hate to think that several thousand people are intentionally smashing their cars up on purpose, virtually or not.
-Will cause the game to be massively delayed, as we know, Polyphony are a bit insane with their levels of detail and I can imagine this taking a huge amount of time.
-The penalty is not really all its made out to be, and I think in the vast majority of cases it would actually frustrate more than enhance the experience, especially for the more causal gamers - which is the whole point, yes Gran Turismo isn't your average Flight Simulator...because it appeals to a far larger market and it has to cater for them too. This can be solved with a simple option to turn damage off, but I can imagine many online always having it switched on and hence chaos ensues.
Offline, using F1:CE as an example, its not really fair on the player at all, as the AI can really screw you over at times and take you out regardless of how clean your driving was, meaning that a damage feature would be pointless unless you wanted to be frustrated at the AI more.
-Of all the things that make racing games/driving games more fun for me I'd definitely say damage isn't one, it enhances the experience but its not necessary for fun to happen. And like others have said, I'd rather have a game with changable weather, more customisation, etc.
However, like I said before, mechanical damage is perfectly fine and a lot easier to implement, especially now we have the ability to use clutches and have better wheels for force feedback, etc. Being able to blow the engine is far more important for me, it would make endurance racing many times more challenging and interesting than it currently is.
-Won't be done realistically, as has been said, manufacturers demand certain things and we will never see cars rolling over or exploding or anything like that. The reason? Bad publicity, even if its just a game, people will still think that perhaps these cars are very easy to flip over or whatever and car companies fear this more than anything else. They also hate to think that several thousand people are intentionally smashing their cars up on purpose, virtually or not.
-Will cause the game to be massively delayed, as we know, Polyphony are a bit insane with their levels of detail and I can imagine this taking a huge amount of time.
-The penalty is not really all its made out to be, and I think in the vast majority of cases it would actually frustrate more than enhance the experience, especially for the more causal gamers - which is the whole point, yes Gran Turismo isn't your average Flight Simulator...because it appeals to a far larger market and it has to cater for them too. This can be solved with a simple option to turn damage off, but I can imagine many online always having it switched on and hence chaos ensues.
Offline, using F1:CE as an example, its not really fair on the player at all, as the AI can really screw you over at times and take you out regardless of how clean your driving was, meaning that a damage feature would be pointless unless you wanted to be frustrated at the AI more.
-Of all the things that make racing games/driving games more fun for me I'd definitely say damage isn't one, it enhances the experience but its not necessary for fun to happen. And like others have said, I'd rather have a game with changable weather, more customisation, etc.
However, like I said before, mechanical damage is perfectly fine and a lot easier to implement, especially now we have the ability to use clutches and have better wheels for force feedback, etc. Being able to blow the engine is far more important for me, it would make endurance racing many times more challenging and interesting than it currently is.
- 627
- Lomma
- GTP_M00ndancer
On the other hand, I just spent my afternoon, 100 minutes in race battling it out with 7 humans and 20 AI. We were at Sebring, simulating the 12H @ 5x speed. We had a mixed field combining two mods (rFactor) with lmp and GT cars. We started in daylight and raced into the dark night. I had a disaster of a race, getting tangled with the AI, misjudging a pass on a GT, trying to get back all that lost time and clipping a wall or two. I did 3 pitstops instead of one repairing aeroparts, punctures, refueling and chancing tires.
I had the best time in over a month. Not because I won, but because of the trill of driving a LMP beast with the power to throw me off at any given moment. The damage was really real. At one time I caught the wall. Just a small kiss, but it was enough to blow the rear left tire. I had almost a physical scare when the car turned around. This is what I want my GT5 to be. I agree with SUPER NUMBBER, the fear was there all the time while racing on the very bumpy Sebring track.
I had the best time in over a month. Not because I won, but because of the trill of driving a LMP beast with the power to throw me off at any given moment. The damage was really real. At one time I caught the wall. Just a small kiss, but it was enough to blow the rear left tire. I had almost a physical scare when the car turned around. This is what I want my GT5 to be. I agree with SUPER NUMBBER, the fear was there all the time while racing on the very bumpy Sebring track.
Last edited:
- 1,230
In a general sense, it's easier for a car to survive a crash than a plane surviving major damage. But I don't need to get into that subject too deeply. My point still stands: flight simulators are more realistic in general than GT when it comes to replicating the experience they portray.
I know you damage junkies feel like you're beating your heads against a huge wall. Damage does add something invigorating to a racing game, when it's done right, but you have to keep a few things in perspective.
- Gran Turismo has never had real damage. GT2 had some basic non-visible stuff, but it was very minor. When it failed to appear in GT3, hardly anyone cared. A few more cared when it wasn't included in GT4, but you guys remain a very vocal minority.
- Racing games which include street cars have a huge hurdle to overcome, in that some makers won't allow any damage at all. Someone posted the tribulations of Dan Greenawald, head of Forza's Turn 10, and how different makers wouldn't allow certain things. This actually resulted in certain cars in Forza taking more damage than others. Add this to the fact that damage is only one third to one quarter what a car would actually suffer, and this is why Forza's damage modelling is held in contempt by many.
- Damage is incredibly difficult to implement realistically. It's much harder to make a crash simulation than a racing simulation. Forza 2 has to hesitate for a tenth of a second when a collision happens to figure out what to do with it. Toca's damage system is okay, but cars crumple like cardboard boxes. Great damage modeling just isn't that common because it's a freaking headache to implement.
- We want to see GT5 this decade.
Besides, what are you going to do, not buy it? Buy Forza 2 or 3 instead? After the bad times spent wrestling with the bugs and flaws in Forza 2, the thrill was gone, and my bro is playing it now. And I don't have great expectations for Forza 3. After getting back into GT5 Prologue this weekend, damage would be nice, but frankly, I just want GT5, whatever form it takes.
I dont know about being a vocal "minority", but I do know Yamauchi has heard our gripe. Not from one or two sources, but several. Take a look at all the polls done on this site on this very issue (yes, there have been more than one), almost always this issue splits more or less 50/50 of the GT userbase. Not to mention that GT4 has sold far less than it's predecessor, despite having several more cars. Obviously some people are not happy with superficial changes to the GT formula.
I know some manufacturers are not warm about damage modeling. But I think most of the major manufacturers also understand how important GT is. I don't expect companies like Ferrari to be flexible about this, but like I mentioned before, more cars does not equal better driving games. GT doesn't need the griping manufacturers. Forza's damage, albeit not perfect, is actually one of the things the game has over GT, which has an even worse damage modeling (none). And let's get one thing straight: Forza's damage may not be dead accurate, but until they perfect it, works fine. This notion that collision damage has to be PERFECT from the get go is just wrong. Having something to show won't do anything but enhance the game.
If you want GT5 within the next 5 years tell Yamauchi we don't need every single Skyline/Lancer ever made...
- 2,044
- GTP_DaddyVDUB
- R U Kidding
At the 1st corners caos and mayhem is one thing... but with damage would be the apocalipse
Play F1CE online with 9 or 10 of your buds and you will hope that GT5 will not have damage. Personally I think damage in GAMES and that is what all these are, they are NOT simulators. Or like Ardius said play F1CE offline with just the AI cars and you will see a whole level of frustration, to be taken out by a stupid AI car after leading for 30 mins . Or start on pole in online only to be taken out at T1. I know that happens in real racing but when I have time to PLAY a GAME I dont really need or want that much frustration. And GT games appeal to a much wider range of people than real simulators these folks would simply stop playing because of frustration,given the online history of GT. I DO however think Mechanical damage such as way over revving leading to engine faliure,or brake faliure due to over heating and tire wear/failure. That would make it my fault not some 9 year old online.
Zer0
(Banned)
- 1,624
By my experience: Minority= NA people/Forza fans, not always but on a high %. Different tastes may be?
Look at the numbers:
Also first GTs by generation always sell more, GT4 sold more than GT2.December 2008
This forum didnt represent the real userbase of the game, all here are more hardcore oriented and that represent a low userbase of the total. Also since two years the forum is having a lot of new registered users pertaining to the Forza2 userbase, these people wants that GT5 becomes a clone of it and they always want to shout more loud than anybody.
- 9,473
- QLD, Down Under
- GTP_Paulie
- Paulie LDP
My first reaction would be:
Oh noes where are all the old school Aussie cars?????
Then:
Oh bugger, where's the Bathurst at?
Then a couple weeks later after seeing someone on here complaining about there not being damage:
I never even realised or cared.
Oh noes where are all the old school Aussie cars?????
Then:
Oh bugger, where's the Bathurst at?
Then a couple weeks later after seeing someone on here complaining about there not being damage:
I never even realised or cared.
- 627
- Lomma
- GTP_M00ndancer
The easiest way to do it like some other game developers do it. Make it an option that you can turn on and off. I even settle for damage only on the race cars and not the standard cars. Reason, you probably wont race a standard car to the absolute limit like you do with race cars. Just my take on the subject.
My only problem is that I'll buy it anyway.
But I wont enjoy it as much. The same goes for GT4, I do take it out of the box and do a few laps around the ring, but it gets stale after a while and I got back to my PC and race all the other good games/sims. Even Burnout Paradise is more immersive, with it's pseudo damage and toy handling.
And now have 360 owners a potentially good sim on their hands, Race Pro. What do we have? Ferrari Challenge? I want the immersion from the old Lemans 24 Hours game on PS2/PC with the graphical damage from Burnout and the physical damage model from rFactor. Maybe a pipe dream, but is what I want "The real driving simulator".
My only problem is that I'll buy it anyway.
But I wont enjoy it as much. The same goes for GT4, I do take it out of the box and do a few laps around the ring, but it gets stale after a while and I got back to my PC and race all the other good games/sims. Even Burnout Paradise is more immersive, with it's pseudo damage and toy handling.
And now have 360 owners a potentially good sim on their hands, Race Pro. What do we have? Ferrari Challenge? I want the immersion from the old Lemans 24 Hours game on PS2/PC with the graphical damage from Burnout and the physical damage model from rFactor. Maybe a pipe dream, but is what I want "The real driving simulator".
- 5,768
- Anoka, MN
The only thing I would look forward to are mechanical damage and better collision physics...I could care less about rolling over and visual damage.
Exactly. Damage adds more fear factor.
Especially if you really had to PAY for wrong actions you did.
I think PD should do LIGHT BODY damage, and HEAVY damage for internal parts.
So if you crash a car, you either would have to pay for new body and engine plus transmission, Or buy a new car. That way it will add some FEAR factor for going the track bit too aggressively.
Only time this MONEY penalty should be off is when you are doing ARCADE racing, some ONLINE modes, and practice in Career mode. Other then that I would love that.
There should be a Garage FIX icon. There you can fix anything you need. And you never need to fix the car 100%
I like damage in racing games, but Most games force you to pay for damage you did right away after race you won. And you still end up with a lot of money from winnings. It's really pointless and you never care how much you damage your car during a race. Going to a SHOP would be nice and tedious, but you will learn to respect your ride.
Last edited:
- 345
Well said, Nox. Video games are about as close to becoming a real racing driver as I will ever be able to afford, and the Gran Turismo series is (at the moment), the best I am capable of playing without dropping $3000 on a gaming rig. I remember Need for Speed: High Stakes had a feature where you would have to pay for damage right after the race and it worked fine - you needed to improve as a driver in order to progress, you couldn't simply smash the lead car off the road on the final turn because you were behind, you couldn't wall ride around the last two corners of Rome Circuit so you could win, and (for NFSHS in particular), the threat of having to do another season in a Corvette because the damage bills you were racking up cost you too much you couldn't afford to then buy a 550 or a Diablo was much more realistic.
I would be highly disappointed if GT5 was released without damage in some form. I understand entirely when it comes to licenses, Ford won't allow this but Audi will, BMW says rollovers are alright but they don't want the windscreen to be able to be broken, etc. That's fine, but steps can certainly be made in that direction, and as far as I'm concerned, anyone that genuinely does not want damage in GT5 solely because they don't want to have to learn to drive better/don't want to have to pay repair bills (like you would in real life, which is the whole point of the game) has no business even playing the game. It's very hard to take such ludicrous mindsets seriously.
I would be highly disappointed if GT5 was released without damage in some form. I understand entirely when it comes to licenses, Ford won't allow this but Audi will, BMW says rollovers are alright but they don't want the windscreen to be able to be broken, etc. That's fine, but steps can certainly be made in that direction, and as far as I'm concerned, anyone that genuinely does not want damage in GT5 solely because they don't want to have to learn to drive better/don't want to have to pay repair bills (like you would in real life, which is the whole point of the game) has no business even playing the game. It's very hard to take such ludicrous mindsets seriously.
- 973
- Gadbury / GTP_Gadbury
This would be a great implementation.
That is why PD needs to go to these companies and say "All tho we have realistic Driving Experience, we wish to not include realistic damage." That way damage would be all the same for each car, except for part costs, like Ford would be cheap and car like Ferrari would be more expensive to fix some parts. Then all car companies would allow it. That way I won't complain.
- 173
- Chattanooga, TN, USA
- blinky77
- BLiNKy78
I'd also love it if, there is damage, that it is possible to suffer terminal damage and take a DNF. It's no fun running in Forza 2 online with an engine that's only running on one cylinder and pouring smoke out of the rear. If I've taken enough damage I'd like to restart, or at least make the drive back to the garage so I can park my damaged vehicle and start over. To be fair it should also be possible for AI cars to DNF from part failure or crashing too.
- 1,230
- 7,830
- U S A
- Tetsumura
- Nigel Fox
Well, not to belabor this too much, but the number of people participating in those polls are a small fraction of the membership. While that might imply that half of those playing Gran Turismo want damage, it's also likely that a minority absolutely want damage, a similar minority dislike damage, and the vast majority just don't care. And by the way, I'm not saying "Nah nah, GT5 probly won't have damage!" But I would say that if it's going to delay GT5 a year or more, just code around it properly so damage can be patched in when it's ready. I don't want GT5 delayed any more than necessary, and that goes for weather too. I like it, but I need GT5 more.
GT3 sold about 14 million to date, while GT4 sold about 10. GT3 was also out 3 years longer. Plus, as someone else mentioned, the Gran Turismos usually sell less on their second arrival on a new Playstation. GT2 was far superior to GT1, except graphically, but it sold less too. However, GT4 was SONY's biggest selling game of the first six months of it's release. Make of that what you will.
Wow... that's a pretty thin argument, and hardly anyone would agree that fewer cars make a better racing game. Part of the appeal of Gran Turismo is in being a playboy car collector. I have 400 cars, and I still have cars to buy and win in GT4. So what's in your garage?
That SERIOUSLY depends, dude. Want to hear an earth shattering outcry? Take Ferrari from GT5.
May NOT be?? Cartoon level damage?? I guess some people may like pizza...
I'm sorry, but that's out of our hands. If you love Forza, have at it, there's your perfect solution.
I know you think you're being clever, but you're not. 50 Skylines probably take less time to model and code than 8 different cars. You're talking about basically five or six families of car, with similar characteristics. If you want to make a point, say
THAT, I'll agree with. Little 50hp compacts, milk carts, GMC behemoth trucks, Hummers... why does Gran Turismo need a freaking Prius?
But keep in mind, this is a
so who's to say what doesn't belong in a game based around car collecting? Someone wanted a Model T. Someone wanted the first Suzuki. Someone wanted the first actual motor carriage. This is automotive history. If your passion is racing, not cars, then Gran Turismo is definitely not the game for you.
To answer the question, I'd be indifferent. I spend most of my time in GT doing hotlaps in my favorite cars.
And I still think that most people don't know what they're asking for when they ask for damage in Gran Turismo. Real damage. When a single late-brake into a corner not only costs you the race, but 10K in repairs. I can already picture a bunch of people heading straight to the options menu to turn it off. That's how I know that, if damage is implemented, it will be optional.
And I still think that most people don't know what they're asking for when they ask for damage in Gran Turismo. Real damage. When a single late-brake into a corner not only costs you the race, but 10K in repairs. I can already picture a bunch of people heading straight to the options menu to turn it off. That's how I know that, if damage is implemented, it will be optional.
- 314
i just want collision physics...
Cap'n Jack
Premium
- 10,153
- South of the South
- GoldMineGutted
I'm not too fussed about physical damage, if it's there it's there if it's not, then oh well. I would be a little disappointed if we didn't get any mechanical damage, but I wouldn't play the game any less than if it did.
If we do get damage, then I hope PD don't force us to win every race in a championship event (it should be like real life where only the points matter), like they have in previous games. If that's not the case, it'll get very annoying doing events over again just to finish one or two races.
If we do get damage, then I hope PD don't force us to win every race in a championship event (it should be like real life where only the points matter), like they have in previous games. If that's not the case, it'll get very annoying doing events over again just to finish one or two races.
- 7,830
- U S A
- Tetsumura
- Nigel Fox
One more stick to add to the fire. I can't imagine GT5 with just non-visual damage. If Kaz and the lads implement damage, it has to be the whole enchilada, visuals and all, or it will just seem bizarre.
Zer0
(Banned)
- 1,624
That quote was about the polls on the forum not about you.
I highly doubt that the damage option on Forza2 will learn to anyone how to be a better driver, may be more cautious if he plays a la Mad Max but not better.Hyst
You want "The Real Car Owner Simulator" and the whole point of GT isn't this.
- 17
I did get better driving with the damage in forza 2, you see, i had a goal for myself to not make a single crash on the track while going all out on the Nürb-ring without any aids, and then when i managed to complete that i raced the clock and got faster
08.14.894 Porsche 997 T (original no tunings "free ride mode" or what it was called) also the time was taken from the first lap as in the second lap you'll get more speed from the straight
hope this makes any sense >,<
ofc i could've done this without the damage aswell but i dont think i would restart the game everytime my car didnt get damaged.
Thought damage wouldnt be a big deal for me if it wasnt included, but it would for the media and lots of other people this may also effect the marketing, people might not buy it because of no damage, ye small reasons like that they will just think of it as another GT4. the more copies sold the better ;D really hope they will continue to make GT after the 5th..
Last edited:
- 1,499
- GTP_FLASH48
Having damage does not matter to me one way or the other. Think about this though, you think we had or still have problems with punters. What do you think punters are going to do, with real car damage? And don't say they will quit, after they damage there car, most would be happy to how much damage they could do to someone else!! Just my two cents worth.
Similar threads
