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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robin
  • 3,122 comments
  • 345,370 views
You have to be kidding me, First, there was bitching about no damage, then there was bitching about having a damage model(but it was not good enough) And now theres bitching about a damage system that has real time deformation, hit points, and is altogether, quite frankly impressive, but of course there is some type of fatal flaw with it, in this case, does not have(realistic properties)as you say...Are you serious,Are you happy? no, you complain, you complain about anything and everything no matter how small the detail, and yet you wonder why the game takes to long...Alot of self contradicting going on here..

Agreed.
 
You have to be kidding me, First, there was bitching about no damage, then there was bitching about having a damage model(but it was not good enough) And now theres bitching about a damage system that has real time deformation, hit points, and is altogether, quite frankly impressive, but of course there is some type of fatal flaw with it, in this case, does not have(realistic properties)as you say...Are you serious,Are you happy? no, you complain, you complain about anything and everything no matter how small the detail, and yet you wonder why the game takes to long...Alot of self contradicting going on here..

QIA

The complaints about this game are starting to get ridiculous.
 
You have to be kidding me, First, there was bitching about no damage, then there was bitching about having a damage model(but it was not good enough) And now theres bitching about a damage system that has real time deformation, hit points, and is altogether, quite frankly impressive, but of course there is some type of fatal flaw with it, in this case, does not have(realistic properties)as you say...Are you serious,Are you happy? no, you complain, you complain about anything and everything no matter how small the detail, and yet you wonder why the game takes to long...Alot of self contradicting going on here..

This is called being a Human... For me "Best Buy" damage is ok.
 
Is current damage impressive? Yes!
Could it be further improved? Yes!

That's my stance on it. Although it does look great, it's still far from being perfect.
Some people should stop treating GT as if it was a Gift from the Gods and be more critical rather than accept whatever is shown as "pure perfection". Of course, the same applies to those who criticize the game no matter what and just for the sake of it, without valid arguments or realistic comparisons with competing games.
 
I think the damage looks fantastic. My standard for good damage in a racing game is GRID, and it looks like GT5 has met that standard for me which is just fantastic. The extent of body deformation is just excellent, and combined with the ability to lose doors/bonnets/boots/bumpers is awesome 👍

Still though, just like the majority of people who play racing games, I'll be turning mechanical damage off instantly.
 
I klnow, its much better than shift and forza, and 200 cars can be damaged like this..How many cars does shift and forza have?

Invisable walls are my biggest gripe though, especially on the TG test track, it means you can enter the 2nd to last corner at full speed and youll be bounced into the correct direction isntead of spearing dozens of metres from the track
 
I klnow, its much better than shift and forza, and 200 cars can be damaged like this..How many cars does shift and forza have?

Invisable walls are my biggest gripe though, especially on the TG test track, it means you can enter the 2nd to last corner at full speed and youll be bounced into the correct direction isntead of spearing dozens of metres from the track

Are there invisible walls on the Top Gear Test Track?! Oh...
 
You have to be kidding me, First, there was bitching about no damage, then there was bitching about having a damage model(but it was not good enough) And now theres bitching about a damage system that has real time deformation, hit points, and is altogether, quite frankly impressive, but of course there is some type of fatal flaw with it, in this case, does not have(realistic properties)as you say...Are you serious,Are you happy? no, you complain, you complain about anything and everything no matter how small the detail, and yet you wonder why the game takes to long...Alot of self contradicting going on here..

It's because people don't know themselves, what do they really want in game.
I'm pretty confident in Yamauchi's vision of how decent damage model should be implemented and how should it look.
It looks great and very promising in its nowadays state, and I'm pretty happy with that.
The same goes to the rest of GT5 features.
 
I don't think anyone will ever stop complaning. Even when every pixel is the size of an atom, and every detail is true to life. If you give people another 20-30 years or so, I believe we will see a lot less complaining about the physics and graphical aspects of the game and more about things like loading times or how easy or difficult it is to make money. Simple things
 
Last edited:
You have to be kidding me, First, there was bitching about no damage, then there was bitching about having a damage model(but it was not good enough) And now theres bitching about a damage system that has real time deformation, hit points, and is altogether, quite frankly impressive, but of course there is some type of fatal flaw with it, in this case, does not have(realistic properties)as you say...Are you serious,Are you happy? no, you complain, you complain about anything and everything no matter how small the detail, and yet you wonder why the game takes to long...Alot of self contradicting going on here..

Well most people like me want to have realistic stuff just like on GP's in real life there's usually a crash and the damage reduces the car's performance like the aerodynamics and in Formula 1 if the front or back wing comes off or even a tire if the suspension stays they replace it at the pits.

So if thats the way its going to be atleast if its a 20 lap race and the 1st guy has a huge lead against other people then he crashes and loses something then he'd have to go to the pits not just for fuel or oil but for a bit longer of a pit.

Well obviously if you crash head on at 200 kmh or up then its over for you it should be because without the damage physics your taking away a big factor of the motorsport
 
I don't know. I think the simple fact that PD was allowed to damage a Ferrari that much is impressive to me. I mean, just look at the "damage" model in the Ferrari Challenge game. That was supposed to be "the most extensive damage model ever allowed by Ferrari" and all it had were a couple parts falling off. Here we see a 458 Italia pretty much totaled. And the same with the Merc. I don't know if you guys remember this, but WAY back when, in one of the NFS games the CLK-GTR was unlockable. And all the other cars had damage except the CLK and I think the McLaren. And it was simply because Mercedes didn't want their car completely destroyed.

So, to see such extensive damage to cars from manufacturers that normally don't let their cars get damaged is pretty darn impressive.
 
No seriously i've taken Berocca pills, they are lethal because they contain aspartame.That's a deadly drug, if continually taken.Will do all sorts of damage.It's an artificial sweetner in drinks.Always look out for this.
 
I'll be really satisfied if this is the final damage build and the mechanical damage match the visual effect. Of course it could be improved, of course the headlamps could shatter into million pieces but, I'm evaluating the damage by looking from an evolutionary perspective and going from 0 damage to visual destruction is pretty impressive.

To be honest, I'm surprised that Ferrari allowed this level of damage in their cars.
 
What's all the sudden hype is about? It looks to me like the same damage model as the E3 build. We could see from E3 videos that damage looks good visually, but seemed scripted and only semi-related to the collision that causes it.

So, unless there is some Best Buy video of the car deforming in real time which I've missed, then I don't get why the damage is suddenly amazing, based on these new pictures. It looks as good as it did before.

And I really hope to god those invisible walls are moved back. Usually games put these in a place that would never normally be reached. I can't understand why they need to be so close to the track.
 
My only fear is, when your car is damaged and the race is over, I hope the damage will stay. I hope not that you go back to the menu and your car is like new... that would be really dissapointing...(like in FM3) If they implement damage, then there must be an "repair" option... So if you crash your car and don´t use the car for a while, the damage must be still so... But I think we dont get this... I think you will get less money if your car is damaged and your car will be like new in the menu :(
 
That was pretty funny when celebs, spun off into the grass at the TG track.So invisible walls in my opinion need to either be replaced ( a la WRC4 ) or pushed far away from the tracks.
 

That's interesting, and a small let down.

But I already knew that persistant damage with a real time engine would not be realistically possible on the hardware; The memory wouldn't be able to handle it and saved game files would run up into the Gigabytes if people got a garage full of wrecked cars, it's not do-able. The only other way would be to have a generic damaged car in your garage.

If they were all pre-modelled, it would be possible, but not with real time.

It doesn't make it clear whether we will have to pay for repairs in GTlife though. Some other games automatically deduct the cost from your winnings after a race. Obviously it will repair your car automatically after each race, but will it charge you for it?
 
I wonder whether you have to pay for the repair after a crash race...
I hope so. Like taking away credits from your winning race to fix your car like in forza 3. And there is no "yes" or "later" option. Its just more fun that way.
Without payment and crashing your car for fun is not realistic(play burnout). The way I see it, damage has to be avoidable to drive more cautious.(like in real life). Juiced 1 (xbox) was indeed fun having to pay for damage and it carries over.
 
Not 100% related, but on Enthusia (PS2 driving sim) the more the player crashed his car against track features or cars, the more race points (not really money) were deducted at the end of the race (actually car-to-car collisions cost more points than out-of-track collisions).
If A-Spec points in GT5 will be more than just for bragging rights like in GT4 (and GT5? I haven't played it), and if crashes will result in a loss of them at the end of the race, the player will be encouraged to drive cleanly this time, even if he doesn't have to pay for damage directly.

Just thinking.
 
Not 100% related, but on Enthusia (PS2 driving sim) the more the player crashed his car against track features or cars, the more race points (not really money) were deducted at the end of the race (actually car-to-car collisions cost more points than out-of-track collisions).
If A-Spec points in GT5 will be more than just for bragging rights like in GT4 (and GT5? I haven't played it), and if crashes will result in a loss of them at the end of the race, the player will be encouraged to drive cleanly this time, even if he doesn't have to pay for damage directly.

Just thinking.

Enthu points right? I think that would be nice if they somehow did that in GT. :)
 
I wasn't that impressed with the damage fellas.Don't know why people are getting over excited tbh.

What are you talking about? It's safe to say that this is, without question or hyperbole, by far the most incredible damage system featured in any driving game to date. Name one game where one can abuse their car to anywhere near this extent.

gt5-bestbuy-damage-5.jpeg
 
Back