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

[Simple SIM]

You do have to use a little logic in discussing this subject too, not saying that anyone has been goofy necessarily, just maybe not as well thought out as could be.

Okay, so we're getting damage in at least certain cars. This has to be comprehensive within certain ranges of the car list, and it has to make sense and be acceptable to a big number of the damage fiends. So, let's say hypothetically that we have all race cars set up for damage. This is almost a no-brainer because the cost for covering just the race car list is relatively small compared to the street cars. As Scaff and others have pointed out, this is the realm of demons and dragons, and long fought negotiations with many car companies. Okay, so suppose Kazunori goes after tuners, and Amuse is fine with total damage, and so is Ford, but Opera is only willing to go to Forza's 30% give or take, and Nismo will only discuss Ferrari Challenge's minimalist 20% or less. And worse, suppose MOPAR doesn't want any damage? Do you think Kazunori say, "Okay, we'll code damage to each tuner's specs and leave it at that"? Would anyone be happy with one make tuner races, due to each level of damage in the lists?

No, Kaz would be forced to scrap either damage or MOPAR licensing, and I know there are a few MOPAR fans here who are looking forward to some Viper and Challenger action. as well as NASCAR.

Take this premise to the dozens of street car makers, and you can see why leaving damage off of sports cars entirely is perhaps the only way to go. Meanwhile, all race cars are likely to get damage, while tuners are up in the air. Maybe the only tuners which can be damaged are the GT Concept tuners, but who knows.

We should have a pretty good idea in a little over a week though.

The problem is that you don't have any evidence to back up your claims or theories.

You try to make it sound as though it's this impossible task to get manufacturers to agree on damage.

But then I look over at Forza and I see every single car with equal damage modeling and they've manged to do this since their first game YEARS ago.

And where does this Forza = 30% damage number come from?

While I have seen more visually destructive damage done to cars in games, I have yet to see a more accurate model for the mechanical damage and the performance impact this damage causes.

Maybe you are right. Maybe Polyphony simply can't get manufacturers to agree. But that only proves that Microsoft has succeeded where Polyphony has failed.

 

[MonkeySkater]

The problem is that you don't have any evidence to back up your claims or theories.

You try to make it sound as though it's this impossible task to get manufacturers to agree on damage.

But then I look over at Forza and I see every single car with equal damage modeling and they've manged to do this since their first game YEARS ago.

And where does this Forza = 30% damage number come from?

While I have seen more visually destructive damage done to cars in games, I have yet to see a more accurate model for the mechanical damage and the performance impact this damage causes.

Maybe you are right. Maybe Polyphony simply can't get manufacturers to agree. But that only proves that Microsoft has succeeded where Polyphony has failed.

Dan's just phoned, he said after you finish lickin Che's rim could you shoot over an polish his helmet?

 

[Zer0]

Maybe you are right. Maybe Polyphony simply can't get manufacturers to agree. But that only proves that Microsoft has succeeded where Polyphony has failed.

That proves nothing.

Why is too hard to understand?

The damage itself is not the problem.
The level of that damage it is.

The day Forza's damage shows non race cars loosing doors you will be right.

Overall worst or better only the fact that a door can be lost is a level up in that damage scale at the eyes manufacturer, and that is a restriction that will make a lot of cars or brands get out of that visual damage in the game.

Also the damage restrictions are nothing new, the subject has surfaced before in a lot of game interviews: licensed cars=a lot of problems, race cars=less problems and more damage.

 

[Simple SIM]

That proves nothing.

Why is too hard to understand?

The damage itself is not the problem.
The level of that damage it is.

The day Forza's damage shows non race cars loosing doors you will be right.

Overall worst or better only the fact that a door can be lost is a level up in that damage scale at the eyes manufacturer, and that is a restriction that will make a lot of cars or brands get out of that visual damage in the game.

Also the damage restrictions are nothing new, the subject has surfaced before in a lot of game interviews: licensed cars=a lot of problems, race cars=less problems and more damage.

So having the doors flapping about does it for you huh?

At Gamescom I saw the impreza drive for kilometers with it's hood up. It didn't fall back down when the car slowed down, it didn't fly off as the car speed up.... it just stayed there.

There is even footage of every door hood and hatch all flopping about simultaneously. It just looks comical and completely unrealistic.

On a street car it's atleast plausible that a door could swing open but as far as race cars go, they design them so occurrences such as those are next to impossible.

An impact is more likely to jam the frame and make sure that door never opens again rather than flap around for the rest of the race.

 

[Zer0]

So having the doors flapping about does it for you huh?

You don't understand, it's no me or you is about the developer choice and what the manufacturer dictate about the level of damage you want to put.

The possibility of loosing doors, hood, etc likes it or not is a level more of complexity than no loosing them. I will make my opinion about how realistic it is or not when I see how is implemented in the final game.

 

[Smoke&Slide]

Going off topic a bit, in WRC4 you could damage the gearbox, transmission, brakes ( don't work at all when damaged, just squeaking brake pads ), exhaust, radiator, engine, lose tires, suspension, electrical system, lights, glass & so on.But deterioration wasn't part of it sadly enough & can't be completely destroyed, although i noticed huge dents in the body.I hope PD implement this, and we see vast improvements in the damage model.

 

[Simple SIM]

You don't understand, it's no me or you is about the developer choice and what the manufacturer dictate about the level of damage you want to put.

The possibility of loosing doors, hood, etc likes it or not is a level more of complexity than no loosing them. I will make my opinion about how realistic it is or not when I see how is implemented in the final game.

Well we don't have the final game to see how it's implemented. We only have what was showcased at Gamescom. And the best word to describe it is "comical", not "realistic."

And that's just the cosmetic damage. The mechanical damage ( the most important part ) was almost non existent.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

The hood not coming back down in the GCom expo is more of a programming issue, so I'm not worried about that; they can iron that out by the final game. Now if they can manage to do this level of damage for all cars, then I'll be happy.

 

[Devedander]

I am curious, where have we gone from the knowledge that manufactures licensing requirements MAY hamper damage modeling to just taking it as fact that anything that hampers damage modeling IS due to licensing?

It seems like a possibility has turned into a fact because it's so convenient when writing off why damage might not be what we want.

 

[aspect8]

One thing that annoys me about the damage. A frontal hit hard enough to knock loose the bonnet and dislodge the bumper leaves the headlights pristine and undamaged. Hope they fix that inconsistency. Especially if they have night races! Whoever mentioned WRC damage is dead on, rally games always have the best damage, both visual and mechanical. They don't have to do deal with licensed road cars though.

 

[hardvibes]

One thing that annoys me about the damage. A frontal hit hard enough to knock loose the bonnet and dislodge the bumper leaves the headlights pristine and undamaged. Hope they fix that inconsistency. Especially if they have night races! Whoever mentioned WRC damage is dead on, rally games always have the best damage, both visual and mechanical. They don't have to do deal with licensed road cars though.

I suppose you haven't read that yet: https://www.gtplanet.net/gran-turismo-5s-damage-a-first-step/

His other comments are significant, claiming the Gran Turismo 5 demo shown at GamesCom “marks only the first step of what we want to achieve for damage.” He goes on to ask for feedback, stating that “we’re interested to know how far the players want to go.”

 

[Tenacious D]

At Gamescom I saw the impreza drive for kilometers with it's hood up. It didn't fall back down when the car slowed down, it didn't fly off as the car speed up.... it just stayed there.

I've seen the same thing in a Shift video or two. I invite you to begin ranting about it now.

 

[aspect8]

I suppose you haven't read that yet: https://www.gtplanet.net/gran-turismo-5s-damage-a-first-step/

Yeah, I've read that. That's why I said "I hope they fix that inconsistency" and not "lollllers!!! GT has teh werst damaage!". See the difference there?

 

[hardvibes]

Yeah, I've read that. That's why I said "I hope they fix that inconsistency" and not "lollllers!!! GT has teh werst damaage!". See the difference there?

I thought you were talking about updates after the game's release.

 

[Simple SIM]

I suppose you haven't read that yet: https://www.gtplanet.net/gran-turismo-5s-damage-a-first-step/

I don't think that means what you think it means.

 

[aspect8]

You could said that thinking about updates after the game's release.

Maybe I was! Maybe Kaz was when he said this is the first step. Who knows? Hopefully they'll fix it before release. If not, it will keep looking odd until they do fix it.

Tenacious: I am about to start playing Shift... I'll be ranting about that soon enough...

 

[G.T.Ace]

“we’re interested to know how far the players want to go.”

So realistic as possible please, thanks.

 

[Simple SIM]

I've seen the same thing in a Shift video or two. I invite you to begin ranting about it now.

I haven't and I own the game.

SHIFT is also not a SIM. The damage looks good from a cosmetic perspective. There's "lots" of it. But from a mechanical perspective it's completely unrealistic. Infact it's pretty much non existent. I haven't specifically tried to total my car yet, but I've had some pretty hard crashes and haven't really noticed it affect the handling.

 

[hardvibes]

I don't think that means what you think it means.

keep thinking, it's your opinion:tup:

 

[Devedander]

I don't think that means what you think it means.

Inconceivable!

 

[fasj6418]

So realistic as possible please, thanks.

My opinion as well, and that's were the doubts started to appear, because to change anything they would have to re-programe the game right?

Let's imagine this:

A - PD shows gamescom damage, wants to know how far gamers want to go.

B - In a move that surprised nobody (only PD) players want more from damage, not just the "transformers cars" (those little toys that you hit the wall to open the doors and hood) they've showed.

C - They change the damage aspect into something more in depth, flat tires, blown engines, busted up shocks, dents on the bumper, stuff like this.

Then the question is, and that's why so many people are skeptical: can they fix this in such a short time? How will they handle the programming side of things in three months, since the game is releasing on early december?

I'n really curious and worried about what they will show for damage at TGS. I don't think they can fundamentaly change the damage model in just a few months, but i want to be surprised by them (yet again).

 

[Devedander]

Well what can be changed with patches is determined by some rather complex rules but theoretically almost anything can be changed with a patch... however an increase in complexity of the change will often result in an exponential increase in the difficulty of desigining it and fitting it into the finished code without screwing something else up.

That said, I really feel like PD is just plain behind schedule (I don't know how considering how long it's been but perhaps KY just bit off more than he could chew for this bout) with both GTPSP and GT5 but they are having their hands forced to release alongside new hardware.

So I think what you saw at gamescom is pretty near finished and the number of damageable cars will probably be the currently expected 170 or so.

And like simple sim says, I don't think "first step" means what a lot of people think it means... I think it's more along the lines of "Forza 1 was T10s first step in damage modeling, Forza 2 was their next step and Forza 3 will be the third step" (not so much in size of improvement, but more in terms of the time frame for steps ie there may not be multiple steps in one version of the game) and so KY and PD will continue to work to perfect it, but don't expect it in GT5, or at least at the relase of GT5. I really wouldn't be surprised if we have to wait for GT6 to see any significant improvement in damage from PD.

 

[RACECAR]

Exactly how are we making these assumptions without knowing exactly whats going on right now at PD(Keyword: now)? How exactly have some of you come to the conclusion we'll have the same damage model as saw at GC when there was a good chance they might have been hard at work while that was going on and might be as we speak? I guess what I'm asking is exactly what definate, concrete answer do we actually have, period? Seems like we are just going in circles abit here all the while we are seven days from knowing it all once and for all.

 

[Kinetic]

Well what can be changed with patches is determined by some rather complex rules but theoretically almost anything can be changed with a patch... however an increase in complexity of the change will often result in an exponential increase in the difficulty of desigining it and fitting it into the finished code without screwing something else up.

That said, I really feel like PD is just plain behind schedule (I don't know how considering how long it's been but perhaps KY just bit off more than he could chew for this bout) with both GTPSP and GT5 but they are having their hands forced to release alongside new hardware.

So I think what you saw at gamescom is pretty near finished and the number of damageable cars will probably be the currently expected 170 or so.

And like simple sim says, I don't think "first step" means what a lot of people think it means... I think it's more along the lines of "Forza 1 was T10s first step in damage modeling, Forza 2 was their next step and Forza 3 will be the third step" (not so much in size of improvement, but more in terms of the time frame for steps ie there may not be multiple steps in one version of the game) and so KY and PD will continue to work to perfect it, but don't expect it in GT5, or at least at the relase of GT5. I really wouldn't be surprised if we have to wait for GT6 to see any significant improvement in damage from PD.

Whoa for a second i couldnt see you mention Forza in your post, then i saw it 3 times and all's well in the world again

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

So I think what you saw at gamescom is pretty near finished and the number of damageable cars will probably be the currently expected 170 or so.

And like simple sim says, I don't think "first step" means what a lot of people think it means... I think it's more along the lines of "Forza 1 was T10s first step in damage modeling, Forza 2 was their next step and Forza 3 will be the third step" (not so much in size of improvement, but more in terms of the time frame for steps ie there may not be multiple steps in one version of the game) and so KY and PD will continue to work to perfect it, but don't expect it in GT5, or at least at the relase of GT5. I really wouldn't be surprised if we have to wait for GT6 to see any significant improvement in damage from PD.

While I do agree with your definition of "first step" (as a period in evolution of the GT series and not GT5 specifically), I do think that we'll see a substantial improvement over the GCom demo, as I'm pretty sure even Yamauchi knows this level of damage is unacceptable as it is.

 

[Simple SIM]

Exactly how are we making these assumptions without knowing exactly whats going on right now at PD(Keyword: now)? How exactly have some of you come to the conclusion we'll have the same damage model as saw at GC when there was a good chance they might have been hard at work while that was going on and might be as we speak? I guess what I'm asking is exactly what definate, concrete answer do we actually have, period? Seems like we are just going in circles abit here all the while we are seven days from knowing it all once and for all.

Well we could assume that they just tricked us all by showing off a lackluster damage model at Gamescom only to WOW us a month later at TGS by showing of the "real" damage model.

But that's pretty much the definition of wishful thinking.

While I do agree with your definition of "first step" (as a period in evolution of the GT series and not GT5 specifically), I do think that we'll see a substantial improvement over the GCom demo, as I'm pretty sure even Yamauchi knows this level of damage is unacceptable as it is.

Why do you assume that?

Gran Turismo has A LOT of strengths and Polyphony has A LOT of talent.

But in the area of damage modeling ( and AI and online ) ..... I don't think they really know what they're doing.

This isn't a bash, I'm just commenting on their lack of experience in these areas.

Where other developers already had tons of experience in online and damage modeling ( for many years already infact ), Polyphony found themselves having to sit down and the drawing board and start from scratch.

 

[RedBaron]

Every other company even with arcade racer games is doing huge progress in damage or damageable surrounding, better AI with emotions and self-preservation instinct. But PD just stuck in old times, they are going to make a big show with many cars and tracks, but so empty and desperate inside...

 

[Simple SIM]

Every other company even with arcade racer games is doing huge progress in damage or damageable surrounding, better AI with emotions and self-preservation. But PD just stuck in old times, they are going to make a big show with many cars and tracks, but so empty and desperate inside...

Well the reviews of GT PSP have shown that throwing a bazillion cars into a game isn't going to cut it with Reviewers anymore.

Polyphony is going to have to release a very well rounded game and in this day and age must accept the fact that each and every one of GT 5's features is going to be compared and judged by the achievements of the features of it's competition.

It's not gonna be a game breaker, but Unless something drastic happens I don't think the reviewers are gonna have very pleasant things to say about GT 5 not having a damage model that extends to all cars.

This is gonna be something that stands out like a sore thumb. It will be very noticeable.

 

[killanite]

GT4 didn't have any damage and I enjoyed that more than any other racing game to date cause of the amount of content and replay value, I didn't care so much about damage cause like most people trying to win races, I avoid collisions.

About the reviewers thing, I couldn't give a flying **** about what they think, It's about what I think of the game, I don't need another individual with possibly having nothing incommon with me to give a good score to a game for me to play it, that's why I'll be getting GTPSP even with the poor reviews it's getting and make up my own mind on how it stacks up.
If reviewers decide to give GT5 bad scores because it's got bad damage that's not gonna affect me as I said before, what interests me are the core elements and damage has never been a core element of GT.

 

[Simple SIM]

I don't need damage because I don't crash when I play is a weak excuse. Crashing your car is FAR from the only way to damage it. This damage should be expressed in any game calling itself a SIM.