GT5 damage modeling.

Tenacious D
Dude, you really have trouble paying attention and comprehending what you're reading. ADD?

I've said on more than one occasion, and at LEAST once in this thread, that GTR is a fabulous game. I've NEVER said that GTR is boring. I've NEVER said that GTR has lousy physics. Like you GTR fanboys to about Gran Turismo. I HAVE said that I don't relish the idea that a WRECKED car means RACE OVER. Is this plain enough for you, or do you only speak l33t
Click to expand...
it wouldnt be so bad if you knew what you were on about - but we have you in this thread rubbishing GTR with "ramming" AI & then you praise GT4 ? i mean wtf dude do you even play GT4 ? you cannot get the AI to avoid you if they are on "their" line

you rubbish detailed physics that allow real life behaviour like burnouts & drifts & say there is more to life than racing - yet praise GT4 with its simplified "physics-only-working-at-speed" , & THEN you said there more to the game than just racing , WTF ! , do YOU even realise what your rubbishing GTR for is even worse in GT4 ?

do YOU even realise what your praising about GT4 is even better in GTR ?

because im LMAO at you & your dodging & backtracking Tenacious D !

if you are'nt even sure of what your on about why post ? , if you dont even know the 2 games properly , why post ? sometimes when in it deep the best thing to do is just STFU !
 
I know why you're being so cranky.

*hands you a cookie*

There, now pester your mom. And do your homework. You write like a six year old.
 
Tenacious D
I know why you're being so cranky.

*hands you a cookie*

There, now pester your mom. And do your homework. You write like a six year old.
Click to expand...
thats right , ignore totally your lack of being able to follow a point thru & make a character assumption instead - such a winning argument

now when you actually know what it is your talking about , come back with your opinion

my money is on 75% AI being able to whip you let alone pscyho setting , i wouldnt be here if you posted the truth about both games - but the entire time in this thread you have been talking out of your behind

if you want to rubbish somebody over their opinion , then at least get to know the game they are talking about - because no-one but a fanboy says anything like what you have posted
 
My mommie told me not to talk to people who can't even write at a grade school level.
 
Stop being an ass.

You know what he says is true. You can't make up your mind and when you knew I was right, you tried to change the subject to a "Bash McLaren" topic even though you had no proof. You're doing that now with him.
I'm starting to doubt if you've even raced a car, let alone driven one.
 
Tenacious D
I know why you're being so cranky.

*hands you a cookie*

There, now pester your mom. And do your homework. You write like a six year old.
Click to expand...
Grow up.
 
Tenacious D...

Please try and keep your posts mature, and on topic... There is never a good reason to bash another member... This is most definitely a warning... Anymore of this type of posting, and we'll have to show you the door...

McLaren...

Don't allow yourself to be bated by such posts... Let one of the mods know about it, and leave it at that...

Back on topic everyone...





;)
 
TOCA 3 is coming out later this month, I believe Feb. 21 or so. It features damage modeling and includes things such as overheating radiators that must be cleared, parts breaking down and blown tires.

If it TOCA 3 has poor sales, I do not think GT will worry too much about damage modeling. If gamers do not buy something it is a failed product regardless of how realistic or who endorses it. The bottomline will always be in the driverseat. It will be interesting to watch what happens to it.
 
Cracker Jack
TOCA 3 is coming out later this month, I believe Feb. 21 or so. It features damage modeling and includes things such as overheating radiators that must be cleared, parts breaking down and blown tires.

If it TOCA 3 has poor sales, I do not think GT will worry too much about damage modeling. If gamers do not buy something it is a failed product regardless of how realistic or who endorses it. The bottomline will always be in the driverseat. It will be interesting to watch what happens to it.
Click to expand...

I don't see why TOCA3's sales would influence the possible damage feature in GT5 in any way? PD likes to do its own thing, and if they want damage, they'll do it, even if every other game with damage fails. By the way, I expect that PD has been working on a damage model already, you think they'd just throw it away?

GT with damage is a seller no matter what.
 
Nattefrost
I don't see why TOCA3's sales would influence the possible damage feature in GT5 in any way? PD likes to do its own thing, and if they want damage, they'll do it, even if every other game with damage fails. By the way, I expect that PD has been working on a damage model already, you think they'd just throw it away?
Click to expand...

Yes they would throw it away or put it on the back burner for many reasons.
Every press release and review I have seen in regards to TOCA mentions their damage modelling. It is one of their biggest selling points. What happens if it doesn't sell? Would damage modelling still be important to have from a business standpoint?

Software companies have limited resources and time. They start with a laundry list of items and then start chiselling down anticipated features as time pressures mount.

Do you want a smarter AI or do you want damage modelling? Do you want more cars to race against or stick with six maximum? Do you mind if the game has a few extra bugs because the the development team was working more on damage modeling? What if damage modelling causes lag in online play? Which items would you want to keep?

The chief software architect and the marketing staff get together and decide what tradeoffs should be made. I am using examples to make my point but that is how it's done.

Nattefrost
GT with damage is a seller no matter what.
Click to expand...

I know damage modelling is high on your priority list but it isn't on mine. I'd want it but only if done correctly, you may feel differently. I would have it as one of the last things on my list of things to do. Others would rank it as number one. Do you want the best damage modeling possible or would you be happy with something like GTA's, which is basically the same models used again and again?

Let's put you in the driver's seat of the company. You want to remain known as the best driving game available. You do not want to have people return the game because it is a buggy pile of dung. Is it worth the risk of not making a profit or in delaying the project? If you left damage modeling out would that lose more business? It's tough to know the answers but TOCA could be a very good indicator. Chances are you would look to it and use it's sale figures / reviews when you go through what your team will work on, I would.
 
Kaz litterally said the next GT will have Damage modelling, I don't think he would say something like that before TOCA3 comes out if they were gonna base their decision on TOCA3's sales;)
 
I don´t seriously think GT series and TRD series are compareable in salesfigures. GT wins a landslide vistory there, so I don´t think PD will assume anything from the sales of another Playstation based game. It´s more likely they will compare sales with Forza 2, whenever that is released. But considering GT5 is due for 2007, and with delays, possibly even early 2008, I think Forza 2 will have hit the market by then. TRD3 is a PS2 game too, and gamephysics as they are will be just a fainted memory when the PS3 comes along.
 
GT-driver
Kaz litterally said the next GT will have Damage modelling, I don't think he would say something like that before TOCA3 comes out if they were gonna base their decision on TOCA3's sales;)
Click to expand...

It's definitely not a sure thing. Re-read Yoda's posting; here are two excerpts.

"peaking at a recent Japanese event, Polyphony Digital head-honcho Kazunori Yamauchi-san confirmed that he expects to see real-time damage in the next instalment of Gran Turismo (GT5) on the PlayStation 3."

"Yamauchi and his team are maintaining that they will only include realistic car damage when they can create realistic car physics/handling that reflects the damage of the vehicle. "

The question is what he meant in his second comment. Personally, I will not be buying a game where a car rams me on the next to the last lap after an hour of racing causing me to lose the race. That's "realistic" but it is not something I want. If TOCA 3 or GT5 is like that it will not be getting my money. You may feel differently.
 
the development of GT5 would have started before GT4 went gold

so thats over a year of programming already

i seriously doubt any date for its release later than 2007
 
Badsight
the development of GT5 would have started before GT4 went gold

so thats over a year of programming already

i seriously doubt any date for its release later than 2007
Click to expand...
This is damage modeling, not it's release date.......
 
I think GT5 will have DM and i think i know why...
You've already seen Vision GT video, right?
In video appears text that says "From Partial Reality" (previous GT games) than "To COMPLETE Reality" (next GT game) :dopey: :dopey:
I think i prove my point...

btw. sorry on my bad English...
 
If they leave the damage on the car that would be cool. Then you can photograph the damage you had in the race in PhotoMode. :D
 
I don't really want damage, as it would be a pain in the arse most of the time. It would initially be fun, smashing up cars to see the physics, but then in the middle of a long enduro if you had a big a.i. caused smash, your time would have been wasted. I think polyphony should first get the driving physics, the sounds and the graphics perfect.
 
I hadn't really thought of that. Damage in an endurance race... yuckola. Just imagine HOW MANY TIMES you'd have to do it because either I or B-Spec Bob got tired on a lap and slid off of a corner into a wall. :ouch:

If they don't give us the option of disabling damage on an Endurance Race, they'd have to change the title to Torture Test.
 
identti
I don't really want damage, as it would be a pain in the arse most of the time. It would initially be fun, smashing up cars to see the physics, but then in the middle of a long enduro if you had a big a.i. caused smash, your time would have been wasted. I think polyphony should first get the driving physics, the sounds and the graphics perfect.
Click to expand...

Pitsaves, some sort of checkpoint recovery system, in-race damage repairs,... Options to avoid wasting half an endurance race are endless, so this isn't much of an issue. But I agree, there are more important things like driving physics and AI (then again, driving physics and collision physics/damage are closely related).
 
I rarely run a race less than 45 mins long in GTR, and I never end up quitting the race due to damaging the car, sure you can total your car, but you have to be stupid or deliberate to do that. Damage is a huge plus for me, as would be in car cameras showing the interior of the car.
 
just have an option to save when pitting during an endurance race, and, once every 4hrs or so, so that it would still be an endurance, yet not so hard. so that you don't get tired and kill yourself on the last lap.
 
Damage modeling will be a good addition, but the cockpit view will be an even better one. If they could somehow add a focus to it, you know like how your eyes can shift focus while you are driving depending on where you are focusing your vision. Like how when you are focused on the road, you can see quite a lot, but should you look toward the dash, the road view is slightly diminished, but you never feel cooped up in your car. In video games the view is static, the focal point never changes, and you get this cramped feeling in the car, where you see too much of the car interrior and not enough road. Anyone know what I'm talking about? If they can emulate what your eyes do while driving, that will be freaking AWESOME.
 

Latest Posts

Back