Obsession of some "gamers" with visual damage in racing games

  • Thread starter Thread starter NixxxoN
  • 225 comments
  • 13,533 views
NixxxoN

NixxxoN

(Banned)
Messages
2,707
Spain
Barcelona
I see I'm a die hard fan of GT series, maybe probably because I like the taste of PD/Yamauchi on how they do the game. Its serious in it's own way, elegant and they don't focus on the nasty things of racing.

The most repeated thing from lots of GT "haters" or other kind of people not fond of GT, is: GT has not DAMAGE!!

And I'm asking, why would you want realistic visual damage in a game like that?? You would not finish most of the online races, and lots of online noobs would ruin your races everytime and you would need to theorically spend lots and lots of money to repair the cars, or directly buy a new one.
It's not reasonable at all to put damage in a game where the online mode is almost inevitable to have one or several crashes, even with decent players.

Why would you want realistic damage in general? To crash your car into a wall at 250 mph? To see if it explodes?? Do you guys really like driving/racing games? Or just like destroying cars? I wonder.

There are other games with this purpose. Try burnout. Or GTA. Or try Carmageddon, which is old but still fun.
 
Last edited:
I would like realistic dmg but I would want realistic AI first. Online races are something you'd have to police your self and it would be nice if GT added those tools later.

But yeah I would like realistic dmg but they need to do a lot of work before hand.


Having a car that's not performing at 100% because of some mistake you or someone else made and having the game force you to work harder creates some great racing IMO
 
Well, some will argue that it adds to realism. But as I see GT is all about the driving realism and not about the crashing per se; I would be far happier when they spend their time on other stuff that need more attention than damage: sounds, career mode AI and 'premiumising' every car, for instance.

I agree that those desperately crying for damage are not the audience that PD is aiming at and that there are enough alternatives for those.
 
Also, you need to take into account that manufacturers frown upon the appearance of damage to their products. Even Kaz himself, is not keen on implementing visual damage-having nearly been killed in a high-speed accident a long tine ago...
 
Its like Burnout Paradise, the first few times you crash it looks great, the next few times it gets boring and the times after that it is just annoying and you wish you could just skip it.
 
phil_75
Its like Burnout Paradise, the first few times you crash it looks great, the next few times it gets boring and the times after that it is just annoying and you wish you could just skip it.
Click to expand...

Nobody said crashes have to be in slow motion.
 
Damage should be the last thing on the list. The fact is that the reasonably skilled players and upwards would rarely have a need to see the damage. GT is about promoting good drivers. It makes no sense for them to put in a massive amount of effort for the purpose of the bad drivers who because they are bad drivers are unlikely to play the game for very long anyways. A campaign to teach bad drivers how not to crash would be more beneficial. Maybe after you crash a dozen times in game, you are forced into a driver rehabilitation series of missions before you can move on through the game or play online again. ;)
 
I think they do have a point though. Implementing better crash detailing (car structures being crumpled and more calculations in terms of energy dissipation) takes an enormous amount of effort, both in developing the game and the Playstation having to handle stuff like that in real-time.

A player who plays the game as it is designed to do so (driving around at high speed) will crash every now and then, but it is worth it to devote so much time and energy in a feature that is not one of the main goals of the game in the first place? I think not, but you may think otherwise.
 
Firedragon
I think they do have a point though. Implementing better crash detailing (car structures being crumpled and more calculations in terms of energy dissipation) takes an enormous amount of effort, both in developing the game and the Playstation having to handle stuff like that in real-time.

A player who plays the game as it is designed to do so (driving around at high speed) will crash every now and then, but it is worth it to devote so much time and energy in a feature that is not one of the main goals of the game in the first place? I think not, but you may think otherwise.
Click to expand...
I think it is worth it. The one thing that springs to mind is Senna around Monaco, one of the greatest drivers of all time racing around a track he knows better than anyone. He still crashed.. And I remember one year (can't remember from the top of my head) he was hitting the curbs so hard that if he had done anymore laps his suspension would have broken...

People argue that it's not a racing game, yet the game is mostly made up of races. Adding damage should be below other things (like I said before) but to exclude it becuse BAH IM TOO GOOD A DRIVER ONLY BAS DRIVERS CRASH is utter garbage.
 
This is starting to be more about nitpicking than actually saying something useful.

Besides that, it is all about personal preference. There is no universal 'better compromise'.
 
I saw someone the other day saying he hated GT because 'it's stupid there's no destruction'. Some people want it for the sole fact of destroying their car, or other cars. They don't deserve to play simulator games if that's all they want added to them.
 
NixxxoN
They could, but it isn't a must.
Click to expand...
How is that? I'm not saying I'm demanding it or anything like that but it's a core aspect of driving a car around a track.

Anything that adds realism to the game should be something people want in a sim...
 
hsv010
I saw someone the other day saying he hated GT because 'it's stupid there's no destruction'. Some people want it for the sole fact of destroying their car, or other cars. They don't deserve to play simulator games if that's all they want added to them.
Click to expand...
They deserve to play the game how ever they like if they have purchased it... Who are you to say otherwise?
 
iaustin7
Exactly, it's "The Real Driving Simulator". Not a "Crashing Simulator".
Click to expand...
Why are there races, prizes, money, dealerships, tuning, car wash, oil change, body rigidity repair, painting, coffee breaks, login bonus, career, weather, day/night? Or is your argument only valid for the stuff that PD didn't implement for whatever reasons?

I love the damage in FM4. One grave mistake and my race is over. Makes GT look like Outrun on my PC AT in 1987.
 
If they are going to buy a simulator, and lobby for an ultimate destruction tool just to troll online lobbies, then they do not deserve to play that game. It's not the purpose of the game, and some of them only want it to make other's lives worse online. It's not right, or fair, for anybody else.
 
I would love for there to be a real damage model in GT. Not because I want to "drive my car at 250mph into a wall" but because I watch races and I see actual damage to cars happen all the time. Of course I'd want it to be something that could be switched off or on for those who wished to not have to deal with realistic damage but it would be an amazing addition to the game.
 
hsv010
If they are going to buy a simulator, and lobby for an ultimate destruction tool just to troll online lobbies, then they do not deserve to play that game. It's not the purpose of the game, and some of them only want it to make other's lives worse online. It's not right, or fair, for anybody else.
Click to expand...

If your incapable of managing a lobby/server that's on you.
Like I said there are other things they would need to work on before having realistic damage but simply saying 'but people would just crash into me and ruin it' is idiotic to say the least, as that's what motor racing is.
 
baldgye
They deserve to play the game how ever they like if they have purchased it... Who are you to say otherwise?
Click to expand...

A fair point, but I don't go out and buy a Batman game and then complain when I can't turn Batman evil and rule over Gotham City with an iron fist. And before you say that those two concepts are completely different, if I've purchased that game, shouldn't I be able to play that game however I want? The answer is no, I have to play the game however the development team envisaged it.
 
NixxxoN
I see I'm a die hard fan of GT series, maybe probably because I like the taste of PD/Yamauchi on how they do the game. Its serious in their own way, elegant and they don't focus on the nasty things of racing.

The most repeated thing from lots of GT "haters" or other kind of people not fond of GT, is: GT has not DAMAGE!!

And I'm asking, why would you want realistic visual damage in a game like that?? You would not finish most of the online races, and lots of online noobs would ruin your races everytime and you would need to theorically spend lots and lots of money to repair the cars, or directly buy a new one.
It's not reasonable at all to put damage in a game where the online mode is almost inevitable to have one or several crashes, even with decent players.

Why would you want realistic damage in general? To crash your car into a wall at 250 mph? To see if it explodes?? Do you guys really like driving/racing games? Or just like destroying cars? I wonder.

There are other games with this purpose. Try burnout. Or GTA. Or try Carmageddon, which is old but still fun.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more with you NixxxoN, and you forgot to mention "Destruction Derby".

I personally couldn't care less about damage. Offline, the new aggressive GT6 A.I. would be an issue, online, the lag would be a terrible issue, and even in the absence of lag, people do touch each other, even unintentionally. My good friend, alpacaflip, is one of the best racers I've ever met, and we still have the occasional contact here and there. Which is only natural, considering that most racing categories in real life have cars' contacts going on all the time, including karts and stockcars. Formula-1 is the exception, as the drivers really try to avoid contact, it's the top category after all, and when it happens, it's not like most of the other categories in which we can see it is/was just "a little-tiny push" here and there, they are often nasty accidents.

A real car lover, and I do not include myself much in this, wouldn't want to see the object of their passion destroyed, much like parents wouldn't like to see their child being shot and bleed out of hemorrhage. And I wouldn't like to be constantly reminded of some of the saddest moments this sport provided me in the past, or of the loss of people I care about, through the realistic carnage of a driving sim, thank you very much.

baldgye
I think it is worth it. The one thing that springs to mind is Senna around Monaco, one of the greatest drivers of all time racing around a track he knows better than anyone. He still crashed.. And I remember one year (can't remember from the top of my head) he was hitting the curbs so hard that if he had done anymore laps his suspension would have broken...
Click to expand...

Couldn't be more wrong, as Ayrton and Jenson are often remembered as the drivers who are masters in conserving their equipment. And having read a lot of biographies on him, from several different authors of several different parts of the globe (thus with different opinions and the use of different languages), there's not a single one that mentions Ayrton's suspension brackets and arms almost being broken at a Monaco Grand Prix.

He did crash at the 1988 Monaco Grand Prix, and he said that turn which leads to the tunnel took that one victory away from him but gave him five more victories (1989-1993).
 
Last edited:
iRacing proves how annoying realistic damage can be. I lead a race at Laguna Seca for 9 out of the 15 (I think) laps it was, ran a little wide on the left after the corkscrew and hit the little drain on the exit of the curbing and bam, suspension damage out of race.

It's frustrating in that it would be more frustrating in Gran Turismo.
 
I am fine with actual racing damage, I like it as a feature. I just don't want idiots taking advantage of it and ruining other people's time online.

And @enog that's exactly what I was getting at.
 
Look at this way, would you rather PD gave us over 1200 cars and 100 track layouts, or would you rather they said they would give us 200 cars and 20 tracks, but you could have a full modelled damage simulation?
 
I personaly always turn off damage if i can. I dont like seeing my Million dollar Pagani Huayra getting damaged! I dont even like all the dirt and dust that the cars pick up. I also think that the damage in GT6 is quite good looking. Its much better than GT5 atleast!
 
Back