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

[ChangeOfSeasons]

And I'll write once again that once the first steps into making something realistic (damage in this case) are performed, stopping halfway is going to displease many people. What we have currently looks great (and in some aspects better than any other game), but I guess it's now at or close to the bottom of the uncanny valley. Ok, maybe the term is not really applicable here, but you should get what I mean.

Well they can only do what car manufacturers allow.There's bound to be glitches with real time deformation so they can always improve on that.Plus they can always work on mechanical damage.

 

[hardvibes]

Perhaps I'm being a bit hasty, it could just the shape of the panels. They are different, but you can see the same shape in both cars and that seems like a big coincidence if the damage is "procedural". I guess it could also be the model damaging around set constraints.

It is the shape of the panels 👍

 

[wajdi1977]

it's obvious that the damage won't be perfect guy's,it is the first experience for PD and it well be fine in GT6!So please stop claiming about it!
@Asane,what's about mechanical damage,did you feel the car the same after a little crash?

 

[Rattlehead]

What we have currently looks great (and in some aspects better than any other game), but I guess it's now at or close to the bottom of the uncanny valley. Ok, maybe the term is not really applicable here, but you should get what I mean.

I agree, but you have to understand that it's just impossible (even for Polyphony Digital) to jump from the point with "no damage" right to the point with "100% realistic damage" (with surface properties and stuff).
Right now it looks quite fluid and at least more interesting that the usual pre-defined deformation. It has some "uncanny valley" to it, but on the next step we can expect much less of it.

 

[alucard0712]

I agree, but you have to understand that it's just impossible (even for Polyphony Digital) to jump from the point with "no damage" right to the point with "100% realistic damage" (with surface properties and stuff).
Right now it looks quite fluid and at least more interesting that the usual pre-defined deformation. It has some "uncanny valley" to it, but on the next step we can expect much less of it.

Agree on that!Imagine GT6.

To me that damage is more than enough. (I'm a clean driver)

 

[gtone339]

Its from around E3 and before gamescom.

Okay thanks.

 

[Vincent Viceroy]

i agree, but you have to understand that it's just impossible (even for polyphony digital) to jump from the point with "no damage" right to the point with "100% realistic damage" (with surface properties and stuff).
Right now it looks quite fluid and at least more interesting that the usual pre-defined deformation. It has some "uncanny valley" to it, but on the next step we can expect much less of it.

bingo!

 

[Mr Frappy]

And I'll write once again that once the first steps into making something realistic (damage in this case) are performed, stopping halfway is going to displease many people. What we have currently looks great (and in some aspects better than any other game), but I guess it's now at or close to the bottom of the uncanny valley. Ok, maybe the term is not really applicable here, but you should get what I mean.

Well, Uncanny Valley is a term I used as well, and it is absolutely applicable here. The damage on Forza is what it is - minor dents, scuffs and scratches to give the impression that you have at least done something to your car. Regardless of what the devs say, it is unrealistic, but at least has a defined, consistent boundary across all cars.

PD come along and try to do something better, and while on the face of it things do look a heck of a lot more complex, I would not say it is necessarily better (different, more extensive, but not better). Maybe it's a combination of the low quality, static images, but the majority of the fronts of damaged cars I've seen look plain weird, like they would make great Halloween pumpkin lantern face designs.

The closer they try to model reality, the more obvious the flaws become when they don't get it right, and from what I have seen so far in limited formats and scope, GT5 is suffering from that right now. Maybe in motion up close it looks a lot more convincing, I guess time will soon tell.

 

[Bram Turismo]

In terms of damage GT has leapfrogged everyone...but it's not good enough.

It really is quite pathetic.

Then go crash your own car in real life if you are so exited about car damage.

It's a freaking game, and it's 2010. Games will never replace real-life.

At this point Kaz would probably slap you and shout "What do you want from me?!" at you...

 

[Vincent Viceroy]

Then go crash your own car in real life if you are so exited about car damage.

It's a freaking game, and it's 2010. Games will never replace real-life.

At this point Kaz would probably slap you and shout "What do you want from me?!" at you...

I'm talking about the 'complainers', not myself. I'm absolutely chuffed with it.

 

[stig's helmet]

Then go crash your own car in real life if you are so exited about car damage.

It's a freaking game, and it's 2010. Games will never replace real-life.

At this point Kaz would probably slap you and shout "What do you want from me?!" at you...

agreed, i don't knwo what more kaz can do...

 

[Mr Frappy]

agreed, i don't knwo what more kaz can do...

He'd best stop at GT5 then eh if that's the best they can do?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not dissing the game as such, but I'm not going to praise something that (based on what I have seen) looks weak, just because it's a GT game by Kaz.

 

[shirakawaa]

I agree, but you have to understand that it's just impossible (even for Polyphony Digital) to jump from the point with "no damage" right to the point with "100% realistic damage" (with surface properties and stuff).
Right now it looks quite fluid and at least more interesting that the usual pre-defined deformation. It has some "uncanny valley" to it, but on the next step we can expect much less of it.

Personally, more than 100% realistic damage with surface properties (I know it's impossible for a game console to have that now) I would be expecting more severe crumple zone deformation, and dislocation of parts including wheels. In short, more damage rather than more detailed (it would be more realistic as a consequence, however), regardless of the damage sensitivity set up (in this demo it was low as from what I understand to obtain the damage we've seen multiple high speed crashes were required).

The main "problem" as I mentioned previously, however, is that PD now reached a point where damage might look realistic at a quick glance, but that by paying just a bit more attention you can tell that it's definitely got something wrong. This is the realism dilemma I mentioned in another (unfortunately misquoted) post, and it's what often makes developers to choose to not develop at all certain features (in short, while most of the time something is better than nothing, a little bit more than something might turn out to be worse than nothing).

Anyway, it's also true that this is a demo of an older build and that manufacturers prevent developers from making their cars look unsafe (but PD could simply model car damage on the best performing car in official crash tests like EuroNCAP - in this way everybody would be happy and damage would remain realistic). There might be improvements after all. We'll see at TGS.

Well, Uncanny Valley is a term I used as well, and it is absolutely applicable here. The damage on Forza is what it is - minor dents, scuffs and scratches to give the impression that you have at least done something to your car. Regardless of what the devs say, it is unrealistic, but at least has a defined, consistent boundary across all cars.

PD come along and try to do something better, and while on the face of it things do look a heck of a lot more complex, I would not say it is necessarily better (different, more extensive, but not better). Maybe it's a combination of the low quality, static images, but the majority of the fronts of damaged cars I've seen look plain weird, like they would make great Halloween pumpkin lantern face designs.

The closer they try to model reality, the more obvious the flaws become when they don't get it right, and from what I have seen so far in limited formats and scope, GT5 is suffering from that right now. Maybe in motion up close it looks a lot more convincing, I guess time will soon tell.

You made exactly my points (while I was writing this message).
Again, we'll see at TGS if things will be better.

 

[Bram Turismo]

I'm talking about the 'complainers', not myself. I'm absolutely chuffed with it.

Then you have my apologies 👍

What I'm trying to get at is that in the past people have been complaining about how GT4 always lacked damage and realism in the physics.

First we received the new physics engine which most of us were happy with. Then we saw the first footage of the damaged Subaru which made everyone go insane. Then when we first received gameplay with damage. Then there were the complaints of bodyparts not coming of, and how it only remained with scratches and dents. Now PD gives us an update to show we can actually smash the entire car, yet people still refuse to give in to PD's efforts and say how it does not comply to real-life. I'd like to ask these people to name even one game that has got what GT5 has right now. You won't get far.

I'm just preparing to go completely bonkers when a game will be released with the most stunning graphics yet to be released. With variable weather conditions. With over 700 cars, of which a certain amount have a gorgeous interior and damage model. We have bigger AI fields. Even more LMP cars and day-night circulations.

What PD basically has done in their development time since GT4 is that they have given us everything we ever cried for since the release of the very first game. I therefore also am upset that there are still a number of people criticizing a game that has given everything their fans wanted for so many years. If realism is what you want, then take your car to a local racetrack. But as far as gaming experience goes, GT5 will be the closest you'll get for a long time. At least until the next generation of consoles will arrive.

Please continue to not appreciate PD's efforts, I am already watching around me where I can make place for a new HD TV on which I can hook up my new PS3. I haven't even got a PS3, but I'm betting GT5 will be so good, I will have to get a PS3 just for that one game.

 

[Gejost]

Some people will never be happy, that's just how it is. I feel sorry for them.

 

[DestinyDanny]

Then you have my apologies 👍

What I'm trying to get at is that in the past people have been complaining about how GT4 always lacked damage and realism in the physics.

First we received the new physics engine which most of us were happy with. Then we saw the first footage of the damaged Subaru which made everyone go insane. Then when we first received gameplay with damage. Then there were the complaints of bodyparts not coming of, and how it only remained with scratches and dents. Now PD gives us an update to show we can actually smash the entire car, yet people still refuse to give in to PD's efforts and say how it does not comply to real-life. I'd like to ask these people to name even one game that has got what GT5 has right now. You won't get far.

I'm just preparing to go completely bonkers when a game will be released with the most stunning graphics yet to be released. With variable weather conditions. With over 700 cars, of which a certain amount have a gorgeous interior and damage model. We have bigger AI fields. Even more LMP cars and day-night circulations.

What PD basically has done in their development time since GT4 is that they have given us everything we ever cried for since the release of the very first game. I therefore also am upset that there are still a number of people criticizing a game that has given everything their fans wanted for so many years. If realism is what you want, then take your car to a local racetrack. But as far as gaming experience go, GT5 will be the closest you'll get for a long time. At least until the next generation of consoles will arrive.

Please continue to not appreciate PD's efforts, I am already watching around me where I can make place for a new HD TV on which I can hook up my new PS3. I haven't even got a PS3, but I'm betting GT5 will be so good, I will have to get a PS3 just for that one game.

Post of the year!

 

[patriotzero]

Some people will never be happy, that's just how it is. I feel sorry for them.

They always fail in racing games. They are not gamer .They prefer blabla than playing. They are reviewer . They dont know how to drive a car in Sim racing. They want GT fail. I dont care them.

 

[Rattlehead]

The main "problem" as I mentioned previously, however, is that PD now reached a point where damage might look realistic at a quick glance, but that by paying just a bit more attention you can tell that it's definitely got something wrong. This is the realism dilemma I mentioned in another (unfortunately misquoted) post, and it's what often makes developers to choose to not develop at all certain features (in short, while most of the time something is better than nothing, a little bit more than something might turn out to be worse than nothing).

Again, I can clearly see your point.
But someone has to try and push the limits, even if the results at first may look questionable. Then, with some sufficient effort, it may actually come to the ultimate goal.
If everybody was thinking like "well, you can't fully simulate driving a car, we better don't do it at all", we would never see any simulator, nor the damage model of any kind.
It's better that someone try to do a bit more, one time it might be faulty, next time it might be perfect.
I really appreciate that Yamauchi-san and PD choose to go on and on.

 

[Mr Frappy]

Please continue to not appreciate PD's efforts, I am already watching around me where I can make place for a new HD TV on which I can hook up my new PS3. I haven't even got a PS3, but I'm betting GT5 will be so good, I will have to get a PS3 just for that one game.

Please don't go making a fool out of yourself by assuming that just because people are making constructive negative comments about the damage in GT5 that they do not appreciate the game as a whole, or Kaz's efforts.

I have a PS3, and also bought it pretty much for GT5 really. I also already have my 55" LED LCD sat here waiting, with a nice 9.2 surround sound system. I'm as excited about playing GT5 as the majority of people on here, but that doesn't mean I have to sing the praises of every aspect regardless of how good or bad it might actually be. Also, if I do say that I think something is not particularly realistic, it does not mean I think they should not bother at all.

 

[Luminis]

Some people will never be happy, that's just how it is. I feel sorry for them.

It's all about the hype. It's not that the damage is bad or anything. It's just that people got all hyped up when PD said that GT5 will offer real-time deformation and what not (no two crashes looking alike, as another poster said it), and now you can take a look at two pictures after two different crashes and it seems like that's not what we're getting.

They always fail in racing games. They are not gamer .They prefer blabla than playing. They are reviewer . They dont know how to drive a car in Sim racing. They want GT fail. I dont care them.

So, basically, someone who dares to criticise GT5 can't drive and is an overall loser at racing games?

 

[SolidSnakex]

It's all about the hype. It's not that the damage is bad or anything. It's just that people got all hyped up when PD said that GT5 will offer real-time deformation and what not (no two crashes looking alike, as another poster said it), and now you can take a look at two pictures after two different crashes and it seems like that's not what we're getting.

Kaz said that damage would depend on the speed and angle that you hit something. And according people that have played it that's exactly what happens.

 

[Nielsen]

The series has always been great without damage. Now we have damage, not 100% realistic but it still looks really nice so every experienced GT player should be happy. This game would never see a release if it should be perfectly realistic in every possible way. Physics will most likely not be perfect either.

 

[Spagetti69]

I wonder what the majority of the cars(standard) look like with damage.

 

[Bram Turismo]

Please don't go making a fool out of yourself by assuming that just because people are making constructive negative comments about the damage in GT5 that they do not appreciate the game as a whole, or Kaz's efforts.

And yet it is exactly the impression you have given me based upon your latest posts in this thread. Even if the damage model was the same as Forza we still would have people going around complaining PD was running after Forza, and not going beyond what they did. Personally I never cared for damage anyway, since I don't race to destroy. Add to that I personally think GT3 is still the most fun racing game I've ever played. But I just got agitated at the continuous stream of negativism flowing through the GT5 section every time some of our users update Jordan with the latest news.

What's the latest now: Tires not deflating? Good god, and I thought the "2D trees" discussion was getting a bit silly.

I'm just surprised at the expectations there still are after all we've been treated with.

 

[stig's helmet]

have to admit, it's just a game guys. I was amazingly peeved at the 'standard car cockpit view, or lack of it' but i'm over it and looking forward to gt5, some people are still moaning. Sorry but i just disagree with the level of moaning i'm seeing.

 

[evilfoxhound]

All this damage talk has reminded me.

We haven't seen those "Stunt Arenas" yet. Which must be true, as they were leaked along with weather, track editor and Go-Karts. Which all ended up true.

Maybe TGS.

 

[Luminis]

Kaz said that damage would depend on the speed and angle that you hit something. And according people that have played it that's exactly what happens.

I'm just commenting on where people's disapointment comes from. And that's GT5 not living up to it's hype. Whether that's justified or not, is for everyone to decide on their own.

Personally, I think the damage's looking pretty darn good so far. But that's just me.

 

[Spagetti69]

Where's the "I don't want damage at all in GT5 crew" gone.
There being quiet on the subject.

 

[Devedander]

Where's the "I don't want damage at all in GT5 crew" gone.
There being quiet on the subject.

And the "I know KY, he and I think alike and the Master San would never do something like damage, it's just not what he wants for GT" crew...

 

[Bram Turismo]

Where's the "I don't want damage at all in GT5 crew" gone.
There being quiet on the subject.

I'm still here

I'm still amongst those who think damage is not what will make GT5 so great in itself. It's more like a side-dish that makes the entire menu a killer.