The Damage Thread - Best Buy Demo, Now Thats More Like It!

[No46_TheDoctor]

Have been looing online for some footage of Forza 3's damage and can't see any, have they shown any damage yet?

 

[MonkeySkater]

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showpost.php?p=3488746&postcount=1165

Its more denting than damage tbh

 

[Bogie 19th]

Sucks that they didn't have the full damage simulation turned on for that video .

 

[Simple SIM]

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showpost.php?p=3488746&postcount=1165

Its more denting than damage tbh

I wish GT 5's damage was as good as Forza's.

 

[MonkeySkater]

To me, they are both highly unrealistic and show the kind of damage other developers were doing last gen. As long as there are mechanical consiquences i guess i'll be happy. That said GT5 still has a chance to wow me on the damage front at TGS.

 

[Zer0]

I wish GT 5's damage was as good as Forza's.

Well by now we know that F3 damage will be more limited than GT5 in some aspects(less hanging or missing pieces, less physics on that pieces, etc) but we don't know how much damageable will be in the final game to speak if its worst or better than the full Forza damage.

If they opted for damage only in the racing cars is because they can apply more damage than ordinary games, so is expectable an higher level of damage.

 

[Simple SIM]

Well by now we know that F3 damage will be more limited than GT5 in some aspects(less hanging or missing pieces, less physics on that pieces, etc) but we don't know how much damageable will be in the final game to speak if its worst or better than the full Forza damage.

If they opted for damage only in the racing cars is because they can apply more damage than ordinary games, so is expectable an higher level of damage.

Why are you trying to spin this into pretending GT 5's damage model is even in the same league as Forzas?

What GT 5 damage model did you see? Because the one I saw was a complete disappointment. Infact ever since Gamescom I've been subjected to article after article about said damage model with words like "disappointing" and "lacks impact" in the titles.

Hoods flying up and doors opening? I don't even consider that to BE damage. What I saw was infact comical. I saw that Impreza drive for literally kilometers with it's hood stuck in the upright position. It didn't go down when the car slowed down and it didn't fly off as the car sped up.

And MAYBE it's at least plausible that a street car would have hoods poping up and doors opening after a collision but this is the damage model for the RACE cars. When they design these cars they make sure that such things are next to impossible but what we saw at gamerscom was every single door and hood flapping out. I thought I was watching GTA IV. Completely unrealistic.

Add to all that, a damage model that is only applied to a small fraction of the cars and atleast at gamescom only ONE car on the track could even BE damaged.

And we've only just covered the cosmetic damage.

I read an article where they stated that they ran that Impreza Multiple times at high speed head on into a wall and what was the result? The top speed was now limited to "merely" 140km/h.

You clearly haven't played Forza or haven't played it in a LONG time.

Forza tracks, IIRC, 21 different parts of the car for it's damage model and keeps track of how damaged those parts are and reflects that damage in performance to a FAR greater degree of realism than anything we've seen so far out of GT 5.

What would be the result of crashing head on into a wall at high speed even ONE time in Forza? A car that is beltching smoke, may or may not be able to shift gears anymore with a top speed of 10, maybe 15km/h. The race is OVER.

I'm sorry for the rant but while I have been VERY impressed by almost every aspect of GT 5 so far, it's damage model ( or lack there of it ) has been BY FAR the most disappointing thing witnessed.

GT 5's damage model is going to have to improve by several orders of magnitude before it can even MATCH Forzas.

 

[Punknoodle]

Why are you trying to spin this into pretending GT 5's damage model is even in the same league as Forzas?

What GT 5 damage model did you see? Because the one I saw was a complete disappointment. Infact ever since Gamescom I've been subjected to article after article about said damage model with words like "disappointing" and "lacks impact" in the titles.

Hoods flying up and doors opening? I don't even consider that to BE damage. What I saw was infact comical. I saw that Impreza drive for literally kilometers with it's hood stuck in the upright position. It didn't go down when the car slowed down and it didn't fly off as the car sped up.

And MAYBE it's at least plausible that a street car would have hoods poping up and doors opening after a collision but this is the damage model for the RACE cars. When they design these cars they make sure that such things are next to impossible but what we saw at gamerscom was every single door and hood flapping out. I thought I was watching GTA IV. Completely unrealistic.

Add to all that, a damage model that is only applied to a small fraction of the cars and atleast at gamescom only ONE car on the track could even BE damaged.

And we've only just covered the cosmetic damage.

I read an article where they stated that they ran that Impreza Multiple times at high speed head on into a wall and what was the result? The top speed was now limited to "merely" 140km/h.

You clearly haven't played Forza or haven't played it in a LONG time.

Forza tracks, IIRC, 21 different parts of the car for it's damage model and keeps track of how damaged those parts are and reflects that damage in performance to a FAR greater degree of realism than anything we've seen so far out of GT 5.

What would be the result of crashing head on into a wall at high speed even ONE time in Forza? A car that is beltching smoke, may or may not be able to shift gears anymore with a top speed of 10, maybe 15km/h. The race is OVER.

I'm sorry for the rant but while I have been VERY impressed by almost every aspect of GT 5 so far, it's damage model ( or lack there of it ) has been BY FAR the most disappointing thing witnessed.

GT 5's damage model is going to have to improve by several orders of magnitude before it can even MATCH Forzas.

Well said. Having never played Forza myself, I wouldn't know, but I agree with you on the damage modeling (yes, I do love my GT, no I'm not a fanboy ) it did look underwhelming. While I do hope it is improved in the final build, I can't see why PD would demo this level of damage if it wasn't close to the level of damage in the final build.

 

[Zer0]

Why are you trying to spin this into pretending GT 5's damage model is even in the same league as Forzas?

What GT 5 damage model did you see? Because the one I saw was a complete disappointment.

Well first I'm not the one that bring Forza damage here pretending is worst of better than GT, in fact I never will put as an good example of damage, there are games with a much better implementation and I hope that GT5 will look close to them than Forza.

Second we have seen a glimpse of the full damage of GT5 and that's because I reply you, to point some details. You havent read the interviews?

Also I have seen a very comical damage in the Forza3 demo, even no mechanical damage after a big frontal crash, we can think that Forza3 damage will be that bad in the full game?... according to your logic yes.

 

[Leadfoot53]

Well said. Having never played Forza myself, I wouldn't know, but I agree with you on the damage modeling (yes, I do love my GT, no I'm not a fanboy ) it did look underwhelming. While I do hope it is improved in the final build, I can't see why PD would demo this level of damage if it wasn't close to the level of damage in the final build.

I can see them putting in an unfinished damage build in the game. They are most likely telling us "Hey! We have got damage in game and this is just a nibble of what you are gettin!

 

[regnar]

How serious are other games about damage, Both Grid & Fora 3 offer a rewind feature, that simply undoes the whole purpose of damage. Damage is something to avoid if possible & have to work through it if it happens.

Would hope that in GT5, if the car is damaged would at least have to pit in to fix it or if it's too much damage then your race is done..

 

[RACECAR]

It had purpose first few times but afterwards, I found the rewind feature only useful when you crash on purpose and want to laugh at something uncontrollably.

 

[Devedander]

Have you changed your mind?

http://forums.slickdeals.net/showpost.php?p=20368091&postcount=20

No, I haven't, if you look at everything I say it points out that I like the features that Forza has at least tried to introduce (damage specifically) and that's what I want in GT... I have said here that GT is a large part pokemon racing games and still say it is and I am indeed paying more attention to GT than Forza. As I said, I prefer forza for being realistic, but I also like aspects of GT, but until they fix some very unsimlike missing features (note the ones I keep bringing up that I keep getting told to shut up about at least until the game comes out) I think the ultimate driving simulator is not an accurate monicker.

And if you look at it in context, I said I am more interested in GT5 is because I have a 360 and getting F3 is more or less a no brainer for me, but GT5 will require me to get a PS3 just to play it, so a more significant investment gets more of my attention. You know the line you conveniently left out where I say:

I already have a 360 so getting FM3 is no biggie for me and so I am not as concered/interested in it as there is less on the line for me there.

Sure I come across a Forza thread occasionally considering the game forums I am in and might respond, but this IS a case where I haven't played either so my comments are based on my epxerience with previous Forzas. Actually it's probably a poor thread because I have been paying so much attention to GT5 and my thoughts about what's going on with it were factored into my post, but I have paid almost no attention to F3 release so it might be completely innacurate... for all I know F3 will dropped damage entirely and went pokemon style (ok I am not that out of it, but pretty close). Neither post negates the other, they are just saying things in general in response to totally different questions and situations.

And let me just clarify, you decide to stalk me down at some other forum to find one post from me to make me look bad? Really? That's creepy... Have you tried looking at the forza forums... I don't think I have even been there lately...

You guys really are like a witch hunt...

You are doing it another time, insulting the whole forum is not a good idea.

About calling others "fanboys" I can assure that you has used the word more than anyone ever since that forum exists, if that means something for you..

I know I shouldn't, but I just have to reply to this one:

Because it's true. If you criticize GT5 for something you don't know for sure, it's nonsense. For instance: saying "GT is known for having poor sounds" is ok. Write "GT5 has crappy sounds" (or even "will probably have crappy sounds") is just plain stupid, since in both cases you're guessing or just being negative, with average foundations at best.


True. What's wrong about it? People are excited, since the launch is getting closer with every minute.


I don't do that, I don't see that (what about the whole thread entitled "Why GT sounds sucks compared do PGR/Forza etc." ?).


Quite true, reasons same as in the case of getting excited about the speculations.


Huh?
Why is it that almost every thread that you post in always transforms into useless "You're a troll. -No, you're a fanboy!" rant, with you trying to prove your righteousness?

No, I didn't insult the forum, I made a statement about what happens in the forum. If say that in the US at ever major politcal rally, at least one nut job shows up and makes a scene did I insult the whole US? No... did I say a particular nutjob is always there? No...

So it appears reading comprehension > you.

And as for troll vs fanboy... again, oustide the thread where I answered the mods questiona bout being a fanboy, show me more than a handful of times I have used the term directly towards somebody... go ahead.

And the double standards... you think just saying "yes they are there, they reflect how I feel, so they are ok" makes it all better? Since release is getting closer it's ok to get excited about things you would like, but it's not ok to get more worried about things you think might be wrong and time is running out to fix? And please note, this attitude didn't just start now that release is getting closer, I mean techincally release has been getting closer since day one, but this attutitude is not a recent thing.

Look at the forum title, News, rumor, and speculation about Gran Turismo 5. Maybe it should say News, rumore and POSITVE speculation about GT5?

Yes I saw the bad sound thread, it's the exception that proves the rule.

Looks like deve's actually getting exposed for the forza fanboying troll he obviously is.

good work

Your true colors show Kinetic... I think you exist here only to enjoy having people reafirm your GT/PD loyalty warm fuzzy feeling and amplify it with your desrie to hunt down people who have a different viewpoint... is that really the best thing you can do with your time?

Your exxagerating a bit AFAIK not everyone here is jumping on you. And if you look around a bit not everyone here is as brain dead as the people you're referring to.

I didn't say everyone was, I just said that of those who are, at least one seems to find there way to every opportunity to act out as I listed.

Also I have seen a very comical damage in the Forza3 demo, even no mechanical damage after a big frontal crash, we can think that Forza3 damage will be that bad in the full game?... according to your logic yes.

Actually no, the logic dictates that you would showcase your major improvements in the best light possible... For GT damage is a major improvement, for Forza damage is just a constantly improving feature.

 

[Simple SIM]

Well first I'm not the one that bring Forza damage here pretending is worst of better than GT, in fact I never will put as an good example of damage, there are games with a much better implementation and I hope that GT5 will look close to them than Forza.

Second we have seen a glimpse of the full damage of GT5 and that's because I reply you, to point some details. You havent read the interviews?

Also I have seen a very comical damage in the Forza3 demo, even no mechanical damage after a big frontal crash, we can think that Forza3 damage will be that bad in the full game?... according to your logic yes.

First off, I'm sorry for ranting at you.

It's my own fault, I built my hopes up REALLY high for Damage in GT and when I saw it, I was really disappointed.

Having said that I must disagree with you.

You seem to be implying that Polyphony have some vastly superior damage model just waiting to be revealed and actually decided to showcase a watered down version of it at gamescom so they could.....what? Get everyone disappointed and then wow everyone when they show us "the real" damage model ???

That is the very definition of wishful thinking.

Here is the only vid I could find. It's a short 15 second clip of the damage in Forza. It is the result of a head on crash into a tire wall. You can clearly see the 21 areas where damage is tracked and how damaged the parts are.

He then tries to drive away after the crash but.....we'll you can see for yourself. That to me is a good example of damage affecting performance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNZjC60s8WI

It had purpose first few times but afterwards, I found the rewind feature only useful when you crash on purpose and want to laugh at something uncontrollably.

I don't think I'll bother using it except for trying it out a few times for the novelty of it. That'll wear off quick.

I can however think of one good use for it. It's too bad I didn't have that ability when I was learning to drift. I'm already a competent drifter but for those just learning how to drift this will be an invaluable tool.....I think.

When I first started learning how to drift I would just drive around a track trying to drift around corner number 1 then corner 2 and so on. But it sure would have been nice to be able to quickly practice drifting around the same corner over and over again in succession.

I haven't tried it so I could be wrong but I think that will be the fastest way to learn how to drift.

Crash, crash , crash..... OK let's try it a little slower.....crash, crash,crash, alright a little faster....crash crash crash, let's try a clutch kick rather than the e-brake to initiate drift ect.

You could try drifting around the same corner 100 times in a row untill you've mastered it, then more on to the next one.

 

[Devedander]

The drifting thing does sound like a good way to use the rewind feature.

I found in my experience with the rewind button I didn't use it to avoid damage, I used it when, at the very end of a long race, I got messed up really bad at the last few minutes... I might decide to use rewind to undo that.

I do look at it as a kind of cheating, but after a long, grueling race where the options are take the mulligan or restart and do that whole thing again... I feel it's acceptable to rewind a bit.

That brings me to what I have always said about rewind, having a rewind button doesn't make you use a rewind button, being the kind of person to use a rewind button is what makes you use the rewind button.

Some people will probably think it's so dirty they would rather race an enduro 50 times and get spun on the last corner until they really get a "pure" win. Somme will probably rewind every piece of damage so they can always get perfect races, and many will be some kind of middle ground.

The great thing is that it's how you think and what kind of personality you have that will control how rewind effects your game. It's all your choice, so rewind doens't nullify damage, your willingness to use rewind to nullify damage might nullify damage though. It's all up to you...

 

[No46_TheDoctor]

To me, they are both highly unrealistic and show the kind of damage other developers were doing last gen. As long as there are mechanical consiquences i guess i'll be happy. That said GT5 still has a chance to wow me on the damage front at TGS.

Which games have realistic damage in your opinion?

 

[MonkeySkater]

Which games have realistic damage in your opinion?

None.

 

[Devedander]

Which games have realistic damage in your opinion?

I am not sure you could call them realistic but I think at least in Toca 2/3 and Rallisport1/2 you could loose wheels...

 

[Simple SIM]

None.

Define Realistic damage.

 

[MonkeySkater]

 

[Kinetic]

that slide onto the post = R.I.P haha

 

[Zer0]

You seem to be implying that Polyphony have some vastly superior damage model just waiting to be revealed and actually decided to showcase a watered down version of it at gamescom so they could.....what? Get everyone disappointed and then wow everyone when they show us "the real" damage model ???

That is the very definition of wishful thinking.

Have you read this?..

Gran Turismo 5's damage modelling is currently unfinished, according to Polyphony Digital head Kazunori Yamauchi.

Yesterday we brought you some new Gran Turismo 5 gameplay footage straight from GamesCom in Cologne, Germany. The game's new damage modelling was on show, though we must admit it looked a tad limited.

There's reason for this. Yamauchi-san explains in an interview with GamesBlog that the GT5 code brought to GamesCom "marks only the first step of what we want to achieve for damage."

It's also interesting to hear that Polyphony might be testing the damage out on gamers, since Yamauchi-san adds "we’re interested to know how far the players want to go."

Moreover, as previously predicted, the damage will not affect all car models in the game (of which there'll be a massive 1000):

"The damage already has repercussions on the steering but beware, it should not affect all vehicles in the game," Yamauchi-san adds.

http://www.gameblog.fr/news_10868_gran-turismo-itv-kazunori-yamauchi-en-video

Here is the only vid I could find. It's a short 15 second clip of the damage in Forza.

That's Forza2 final game, I was speaking about the F3 demo and its featured damage, the point is that you can't judge a full game feature with an unfinished and limited demo.

 

[Devedander]

Have you read this?..

That statement from KY still sounds dangerously close to me like PD is not finsihed devloping damage... not necessarly GT5 is not finished... when KY says it's the first step of what "we" want to accomplish, it seems entirely possible that "we" is PD and not so much "PD working on GT5".

I have laid it out before, but suffice it to say that the GC demo was asfully close enough (in terms of dev time) to the expected release date that to only be the first step sounds like there is more work to be done than can be done before release.

This is all made worse by KY's constantly vague wording so of course it could go either way, but the explanation that PD is still working on damage doesn't give me a real feeling of confidence.

 

[regnar]

I know a lot of the discussion here has centered around visual damage to the 170 plus cars, but wonder about the possibility of non visual damage to the other 830 cars. Less important to me personally is whether the damage is visual, but how the vehicle affected by the it.

 

[newnikita]

...Less important to me personally is whether the damage is visual, but how the vehicle affected by the it...

And don't forget the car reactions after a crash. The GT saga always had the failure of allowing to take corners bouncing on the borders without losing control or speed (specially on city courses). Is time to solve that, when you touch barriers or guardails the car might slow down, scratch, lose control (more or less depending, of course, on the crash)... And the same when you "touch" another car.

The word "damage" involves so many things and Polyphony is, practically, beginning with them, that some of us I think will be always a little disappointed, no matter how much they do on GT5

 

[Tenacious D]

Less important to me personally is whether the damage is visual, but how the vehicle affected by the it.

Hrm... after this idea was kicked around here for a few months, I still don't like it. Maybe Toca and Forza have lame damage implementation, but when you have a badly wounded car, it looks like it. Personally, I'd find a GT5 car that looked perfect but handled badly to be irritating. And I really can't see this as any more appetizing to the auto companies. If we have it, I'll get used to it pretty quickly, but I just don't see the automakers going for any damage at all if they don't want either kind.

 

[Devedander]

Yeah, it would be really weird, but for the player at least if you have an overlay to show you what damage you have, it would be playable. It would be odd seeing a car that looks pristine limping and swerving around, but then I suppose that's how it was done in the days before damage modeling was possible in games (due to processor power etc)...

I would think if we see cars with no visible damage but that do have damage, it won't be because the companies licensed one way or the other, it will be because despite having the full license, PD just couldn't pull it off in time for release.

 

[Northstar]

For me at least you just can't have internal or external damage, you need both.

Also, the license argument is no longer valid as most manufacturers have been featured in other games with damage. As for the newly founded time argument, it doesn't fly either since they don't model damage for every car individually.

 

[Devedander]

For me at least you just can't have internal or external damage, you need both.

Also, the license argument is no longer valid as most manufacturers have been featured in other games with damage. As for the newly founded time argument, it doesn't fly either since they don't model damage for every car individually.

Are you sure about that? It seems what with all the different shaped panels and what not wouldn't you have to address at least most of the cars individually? I mean it would seem you would have to creat a "scratched", "not damaged", "lightly damaged", "Heavily damaged" and "mangled" version of each texture for each panel. It wouldn't be right to have a corvette shaped door falling off a WRX...

 

[Maggot666PL]

^^ It depends on the way they implement damage. I'm pretty sure that CM an R* (in GTA IV) changed their methods, and now their car models can bend more freely, without the need to model every bent (and I hate it, when there is a certain damage effect that is easily caused by some bump, and therefore visible for most of the time. That's the case with a Clio R3's hood for RBR, or Fiesta ST for that matter). I don't know about GT5 and in GC demo isn't enough to determine the route PD has taken.

MonkeySkater - very well said!

Maybe Toca and Forza have lame damage implementation, but when you have a badly wounded car, it looks like it. Personally, I'd find a GT5 car that looked perfect but handled badly to be irritating.

It would be odd seeing a car that looks pristine limping and swerving around, but then I suppose that's how it was done in the days before damage modeling was possible in games (due to processor power etc)...

Hey, but it's realistic... Have you ever seen the external damage when the wishbone is ripped from it's mount, or when the shock absorber goes busted? When steering arm gets bent you don't see anything without going under the car, but it gets undrivable.

In fact it's the other way around that irritates me. It's highly unlikely to peel almost every body panel off you car at high speed and still be able to drive, just slightly slower.