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

[Bogie 19th]

But there is a problem with this kind of damage, carbonfibre doesn't bend it breaks/cracks.

No problem there really. The important part is that they get the physics right after the damage happens. Reduced aerodynamics, cornering and top end affected, in the case of a damaged from bumper

 

[GT5_Veyron]

GT5_Veyron, that is a horrific crash where people were burned very badly. Maybe you think the flames look sweet, but it's not cool at all to post it here imo. And by the way, GT will never have crashes like that.

Sorry if i affended you What about this one were the driver isnt hurt?

 

[Slurm]

I actually think it's a shame that games are now attempting to recreate reality perfectly, and that people just expect it so ruthlessly.

 

[Devedander]

I actually think it's a shame that games are now attempting to recreate reality perfectly, and that people just expect it so ruthlessly.

Please explain? Is it differnet than movies like Hurt Locker?

 

[MonkeySkater]

Did you know........

That the most expensive and accurate aircraft simulators do not have cosmetic damage.

Shocking

 

[Tenacious D]

No problem there really. The important part is that they get the physics right after the damage happens. Reduced aerodynamics, cornering and top end affected, in the case of a damaged from bumper

This is something Bogie and I can agree on. Yeah, carbon fiber, fiberglass and aluminum all show damage differently, but hey, this should be good enough.

 

[Devedander]

Did you know........

That the most expensive and accurate aircraft simulators do not have cosmetic damage.

Shocking

Well then there are certainly areas that they are not the most accurate in then aren't there

 

[MonkeySkater]

Only Aesthetically. The simulator tells you exactly what went wrong mechanically. eg. Engine fail, Cabin decompression, Wing damage etc. Then simulates the problem accurately.

 

[Devedander]

Only Aesthetically. The simulator tells you exactly what went wrong mechanically. eg. Engine fail, Cabin decompression, Wing damage etc. Then simulates the problem accurately.

So let's say I lose a wing and am flying knife edge to try and stay up... but my wing appears to still be there... does that mean someone else will see a wing that isn't there and then respond accodingly (and thus inacurately)?

What about if I suffer an elevator jam, the system tells me what's wrong but I can't look to see if it's actually broken off or if maybe just a small bird is stuck in it?

But seriusly, the actual effects of damage are what's most important... it's still important to see damage on others so you can recognize whether they might act erradically due to damage, but FAR less important than how it effects you.

 

[MonkeySkater]

Besides the fact your not goin to be able to fly a one winged plane knife edge or not, there would not be another plane close enough to you unless your military and the speed and trajectory of the stricken plane is enough of an indicator to stear clear not that you would have much of a chance.

Im sorry i know nothing of elevator simulators.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

Besides the fact your not goin to be able to fly a one winged plane knife edge or not, there would not be another plane close enough to you unless your military and the speed and trajectory of the stricken plane is enough of an indicator to stear clear not that you would have much of a chance.

Well, if you're flying when you lose your wing, you're still airborne for a few moments. What happens then, does the plane just disappear in mid air?

And what if an engine blows up? You can successfully land a plane in real life, but will a plane sim show damage?

 

[MonkeySkater]

You get this screen....

 

[Custer85]

IL2-Sturmovic does. It shows damage when the plane is hit by bullets and when the plane lands to hard (the landing gear will brake). The plane will even brake appart, when the forces applied to the wings are to much to handle for the plane.
You can blow up the engine two, black smoke will appear, and the engine will just stop running, but you can still land the plane safely, if you manage to keep up the speed and dont force it into a stall.

But i dont see any sense in dicussing damage of flight sims in the GT5 section...

 

[MonkeySkater]

True

 

[Devedander]

Besides the fact your not goin to be able to fly a one winged plane knife edge or not, there would not be another plane close enough to you unless your military and the speed and trajectory of the stricken plane is enough of an indicator to stear clear not that you would have much of a chance.

Im sorry i know nothing of elevator simulators.

Certainly there are some planes that could fly with only one wing... and in close quarters you might not be able to see the plane had only one wing (ie belly to belly) 💡

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

But i dont see any sense in dicussing damage of flight sims in the GT5 section...

Well, someone said that "because flight sims don't show damage, GT5 doesn't need damage". I know, it doesn't make sense to me either.

 

[Exorcet]

I have a few sims, LOMAC --> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QE9aN_51dtU

being the one I play most. It shows damage and provides the appropriate effect. I think that damage should be visually respresented, but it does not have to be extensively simulated visually. The effect should be as accurate as possible.

BTW, one wing planes have flown http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVkB7V-JybY

 

[sumbrownkid]

^Doesn't a plane have to maintain a certain high enough speed to fly with a wing partially missing?

 

[Devedander]

^Doesn't a plane have to maintain a certain high enough speed to fly with a wing partially missing?

Yeah it all comes down to horsepower vs weight.

 

[MonkeySkater]

Well, someone said that "because flight sims don't show damage, GT5 doesn't need damage". I know, it doesn't make sense to me either.

Show me where anyone has said that. Youve just made that up. Your trying to say i justified PD's methods when i was just offering a little bit of obscure knowledge to this circular thread.

I have a few sims, LOMAC --> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QE9aN_51dtU

being the one I play most. It shows damage and provides the appropriate effect. I think that damage should be visually respresented, but it does not have to be extensively simulated visually. The effect should be as accurate as possible.

BTW, one wing planes have flown http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVkB7V-JybY

I said the most accurate of simulators do not display visual damage. With all due respect your not gonna get your sim hours training on that.

Yeah it all comes down to horsepower vs weight.

Dont make me laugh. You make it sound so simple. Please dont spout your uneducated opinion as a fact.👎

Now the most advanced (which is what i stated originally) of flight simulators belong to NASA, BAE amongst others, and they are commercial jets (A320,380,747,etc) These fly at high altitudes at high speeds under immense stress. You lose a wing on one of them at 25,000 feet ( or any high altitude for that matter) by the time your plane reaches the floor it will be in 1000 different parts. Guaranteed. But, as stated, you will not see this, the reason being, 99.99999% your dead, simulation over (infact you would not in a million years be trained for the 0.000001% chance of a lost wing) You will, however, be trained not to lose your wings in the first place (high speed pitch/bank/roll will be enough to lose enough of one wing to be considered a big problem)Thus failing you from the simulation test.

At the end of the day these machines have been built by people WAY smarter than anybody here (and are PROVEN to be the best), built to simulate real flight with real day to day problems your most likely to encounter (engine failure,pressure loss,frozen landing gear, etc) not to scare the **** out of new pilots i presume. Because thats all a lost wing will do, confirm the fact that your all going to die.

I could go on but i dont see the point. If anyone has any further problems with that please take it up with the Flight simulator designers and tell them why there multi-million $ machine, what you will most likely never get to fly, sucks.
The next time you board a plane remember this. Your pilot has most likely been trained on a less powerful, less realistic simulator than the one in question. With rigid pre-determined rulesets and no room for dynamics. Fair to say a simulation only has to take you so far.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

Show me where anyone has said that. Youve just made that up. Your trying to say i justified PD's methods when i was just offering a little bit of obscure knowledge to this circular thread.

I never said you did. Someone HAS said it before (I believe it is this same thread a couple of months ago), and that's what I said happened.

 

[sumbrownkid]

Show me where anyone has said that. Youve just made that up. Your trying to say i justified PD's methods when i was just offering a little bit of obscure knowledge to this circular thread.


I said the most accurate of simulators do not display visual damage. With all due respect your not gonna get your sim hours training on that.




Dont make me laugh. You make it sound so simple. Please dont spout your uneducated opinion as a fact.👎

Now the most advanced (which is what i stated originally) of flight simulators belong to NASA, BAE amongst others, and they are commercial jets (A320,380,747,etc) These fly at high altitudes at high speeds under immense stress. You lose a wing on one of them at 25,000 feet ( or any high altitude for that matter) by the time your plane reaches the floor it will be in 1000 different parts. Guaranteed. But, as stated, you will not see this, the reason being, 99.99999% your dead, simulation over (infact you would not in a million years be trained for the 0.000001% chance of a lost wing) You will, however, be trained not to lose your wings in the first place (high speed pitch/bank/roll will be enough to lose enough of one wing to be considered a big problem)Thus failing you from the simulation test.

At the end of the day these machines have been built by people WAY smarter than anybody here (and are PROVEN to be the best), built to simulate real flight with real day to day problems your most likely to encounter (engine failure,pressure loss,frozen landing gear, etc) not to scare the **** out of new pilots i presume. Because thats all a lost wing will do, confirm the fact that your all going to die.

I could go on but i dont see the point. If anyone has any further problems with that please take it up with the Flight simulator designers and tell them why there multi-million $ machine, what you will most likely never get to fly, sucks.
The next time you board a plane remember this. Your pilot has most likely been trained on a less powerful, less realistic simulator than the one in question. With rigid pre-determined rulesets and no room for dynamics. Fair to say a simulation only has to take you so far.

Aren't commercial airliners different to fighter planes in regards to damage? Yeah an airliner is supposed to only take so much before going down (such as a wing getting blown off), but aren't fighter planes and the like are designed to take big hits but can still fly, albeit greatly hampered?

I'm sorry for continuing this off-topic argument by the way.

 

[YonnyMestampo]

I like damage, but until PD makes real car damage, a very hardcore damage system, well I don't need it, 1st of all, I want to drive only inside the track, If I crash I want to see a very realistic damage, or not to see anything like what they show in Games Com.

 

[Tenacious D]

I insist that there be an F22 Raptor in the game or I'll be highly nonplussed.

 

[sumbrownkid]

^And the Eurofighter as well.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

I insist that there be an F22 Raptor in the game or I'll be highly nonplussed.

Slow down there, Webster....

 

[Devedander]

Dont make me laugh. You make it sound so simple. Please dont spout your uneducated opinion as a fact.👎

Really? I am pretty sure with enough horespower (and structural integrity) there are some planes that can overcome the loss of lift from one wing... you just have to drive your remaining wing through the air WAY faster.

BTW hellicopters are planes with no classic (ie lift giving) "wings". If you could get a prop to go fast enough you could probably fly it knife edge or even just nose up like a pseudo chopper. That's a big if, but still...

I could go on but i dont see the point. If anyone has any further problems with that please take it up with the Flight simulator designers and tell them why there multi-million $ machine, what you will most likely never get to fly, sucks.

Who was saying they sucked? I just said that if they didn't have damage, then they lacked accuracy in some areas... I mean you could loose an engine on a jet due to a large bird or something... that's damage, are you telling me that would end a simulation? Because I know jumbo jets can recover from that.

And again I will ask: Are you sure there are no planes that can fly (albeit somewhat hampered) with only one wing?

 

[Dijital Majik]

Really? I am pretty sure with enough horespower (and structural integrity) there are some planes that can overcome the loss of lift from one wing... you just have to drive your remaining wing through the air WAY faster.

Yup:

 

[RACECAR]

There is also the story of a F-15 pilot who managed to land the plane despite the fact that it lost a wing.

 

[MonkeySkater]

I was going to continue with this but i cant be assed if you cant/wont understand what im saying. I could go on all day but something tells me you will just ignore the valid points and pick up on the tiny things. Like all pedantic never been out the basement types do.

I'll just say your right and im totally wrong. Infact i have known nothing about nothing ever. There happy now?

👍