The Words of the Winds are Now all Clear

  • Thread starter Thread starter amar212
  • 3,560 comments
  • 538,281 views
Three problems? Wth? Three? What kind of statement is that? :lol:
Here is the full quote, again, so everyone can see exactly what was said in the Ars Technica article that Tenacious D quoted like 20 posts back.

I also color coded the three problems.
Yamauchi: Right now we're testing this. We will see car damage in GT5. There are three problems to solve though. Firstly, some car manufacturers don't care to see damage in their cars but others would never allow that. Some cars will be damaged and others won't, depending on the manufacturer. Secondly, the simulation. In Daytona Speedway, for instance, going slightly sideways when getting out of the banked curve and entering the straight section and hitting slightly the rear part of our car against the sides of the track will make our car become utter junk. Game over. It's a small mistake, but physics calculations tell us we'd undergo a 150 G force. That equals death. The car is literally disintegrated. We do not want that. We do not want to destroy the cars. I don't like that. That's ultrarealistic simulation, but if it happens, the game is over, you lose your car. I'm resisting to accept that kind of effect. Right now we're looking into how to make pure simulation and these kind of situations be compatible with each other. And the third problem, the fact that many driving games out there feature this kind of accidents, but I've never seen one which actually provide something positive or are perfect from a technical standpoint. I've got to think a lot about it yet, but I understand the series supporters do want damage and accidents because, for the better or worse, they're an integral part of reality.
I think the third point is extremely important here: Kazunori Yamauchi does not like what damage brings to a game, and at the end of the day if he feels it takes away from what he sees GT as being he may very well pull it out.
 
if some cars will be damaged and others wont, wouldn't that just be weird

Yes it would but weird, however it wouldn't just be weird, it would simply not work, at least Online anyway. Our good punter friends would be even more annoying, chosing a car which cannot be damaged and then hitting everything in sight, possibly to the extent of other people's cars becoming complete wrecks. There is no way they can implement damage this way, it will have to be damage for EVERY car or no damage at all.
 
if some cars will be damaged and others wont, wouldn't that just be weird

I guess it will be like Forza 2. Ferraris dont take as much damage as Audis do for example (visually).
I think there is going to be damage for all cars equally, or no damage at all. Yamauchi would never release a game with a feature that feels rushed, or incomplete. At least i hope so.
 
I guess it will be like Forza 2. Ferraris dont take as much damage as Audis do for example (visually).
I think there is going to be damage for all cars equally, or no damage at all. Yamauchi would never release a game with a feature that feels rushed, or incomplete. At least i hope so.


*cough* poor/non-existent AI in GT1/2/3/4? ;)
 
Do not go there please, you will only get yourself a prefix you do not want for any future discussions.

Damn I was hoping for another riddle with some more clues when I saw you had posted.
 
Here is the full quote, again, so everyone can see exactly what was said in the Ars Technica article that Tenacious D quoted like 20 posts back.

I also color coded the three problems.

I think the third point is extremely important here: Kazunori Yamauchi does not like what damage brings to a game, and at the end of the day if he feels it takes away from what he sees GT as being he may very well pull it out.

Thanks man! I already knew it though,

By the way, your nickname fits perfectly to your posts, which is something very unique. ;)
 
Thanks man! I already knew it though,
It wasn't really directed at you. Your post just made me realize that without the entire context no one will take the possibility of no damage for a legitimate reason seriously.

By the way, your nickname fits perfectly to your posts, which is something very unique. ;)
I do my best.
 
Yamauchi really disapointed me with his second problem. Dont look like he want to do it realistic. And how is crashing in daytona in probably 300 kmh a small mistake? Well atleast he want damage..
 
Theres always the average gamer.... but i hope damage will be adjustable, just like physics.

There should be adjustable damage in several stages from none to realistic.. Like richard burns rally, if you drive on realistic there you certenly dont want to hit a tree :lol:
 
So, what if they do not solve the three problems?

That's up to KY to decide if they don't but I believe that they will as a progress of evolution in the game. :)

The 2nd point is the iffy point for me, as I wasn't thinking 150G's would be generated from a love tap on the rear end at Daytona....a lot of the accidents on Oval tracks would point to a different scenario if the rear slapped the wall like rear suspension failure, panel damage, things like that.....not instant death. :eek:

But regardless, it would've stopped the millions of comments in EVERY thread on GT5 debating is there going to be damage, and the pros & cons of it. ;)

Now......back to before. Amar, are you able to answer my question earlier regarding the "nests" or is it a case of can't say nothing? :)
 
The 2nd point is the iffy point for me, as I wasn't thinking 150G's would be generated from a love tap on the rear end at Daytona....a lot of the accidents on Oval tracks would point to a different scenario if the rear slapped the wall like rear suspension failure, panel damage, things like that.....not instant death. :eek:
Race cars are much different machines that are built to survive those kinds of accidents and drivers are wearing devices to support them in G forces like that. In GT we have more street cars than race cars.

I should also remind everyone of Dale Earnhardt if you want to know what a slight tap on the rear at just the wrong time on Daytona can do.

But regardless, it would've stopped the millions of comments in EVERY thread on GT5 debating is there going to be damage, and the pros & cons of it. ;)
No, it wouldn't. Yamauchi couldn't show up at E3 and say that we will have damage, show a display video of it, and still people would say they'll believe it when they see it. If he said there won't be any people will begin debating whether he is trying to hide it or not.
 
In Daytona Speedway, for instance, going slightly sideways when getting out of the banked curve and entering the straight section and hitting slightly the rear part of our car against the sides of the track will make our car become utter junk. Game over. It's a small mistake, but physics calculations tell us we'd undergo a 150 G force. That equals death. The car is literally disintegrated.
From a slight tap against the wall? Who's doing the physics modeling on that one? Remember the horrific Robert Kubica crash at Montreal? He "only" underwent approx. 75 g during that crash, and that's one of the worst crashes I have ever seen. There's no way a tap against the wall at Daytona should be anywhere near 150 G.

★ "Formula One drivers usually experience 5 ''g'' while braking, 2 ''g'' while accelerating, and 4 ''g'' while cornering. Every Formula One car has an ADR (Accident Data Recovery) device installed, which records speed and g-force. According to the FIA Robert Kubica of BMW Sauber experienced 75 ''g'' during his 2007 Montreal GP crash." Link

Remember Ralf Schumacher's terrible crash into the wall at Indy a few years ago? Well, it was estimated to be 78 G: "On June 20, 2004, Schumacher was seriously injured in an accident at the United States Grand Prix. The deceleration was measured at 78 g (765 m/s²), one of the most severe in all of motor racing history." Link

It's hard to believe how off base the physics calculations can be some times :odd:
 
Last edited:
Ralf Schumacher crashed in Indianapolis (2004) with nearly 300 km/h into a wall and he underwent 77G.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBUxLIr4Gv0

David Reutimanns crash in California 2007 was aweful. i dont know how hard it was exactly, but if a NASCAR racecar can hardly keep a driver alive in such a situation, i guess a streetcar whould have been completely destroyed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axXH5vaZTZg

Edit: someone was faster than me there... again.
 
I'm wondering if something wasn't lost in the translation when KY described those forces.

Even so, his description of the end result is accurate. Your car is done and your race is over. I think DNFs are a great idea, but I also recognize that in sim physics that a lot of gamers will not find it fun when they can't complete any race and online woudl be ruined by punters who think it looks cool to run backwards on the first lap to cause a pile-up midway through the track.
 
You can solve both problems with adjustable damage and private rooms.
For online and arcade, yes. But your sim or GT or career or whatever mode needs to be consistent among all players. I will be very upset if someone gets to 100% and is bragging about while racing with dumbed down physics and no damage.

Of course, they could just make a gold trophy for getting 100% using their most complex physics and full damage.

I keep forgetting that trophies make a good option for separating the men from the boys.
 
Not only that, you could also limit some events on a specific damage or physics model.
Everything adjustable for beginner races and later more and more realistic, plus the A-Spec points system, realistic damage=more points, or even credits.
 
I think what was meant by "a tap" is that a tap from another driver could get you loose, sending you into the wall, causing an impact of x g-forces.
 
Posted Apr 20 2009


S



So this one is talking.. in my understanding, about PS3 release and PSP 2 (two) release. Seems Sony is allready testing out PSP2, and we all knew GT Mobile was coming to PSP, but we do not know about PSP2 and GT game, so we know a bit but not whole lot.. So no wonder he talks about "Realm will resemble realm already knows but it will be divine new and made in the image of it.

Another reason to support PSP2 GT game is that at first PD postponed GT Mobile game because of making GT5 game.. Then Kaz himself said once we finish GT5 game, we will start doing PSP GT Mobile game.. but now there has been news about GT coming to multiple consoles at the same time.. and recently PSP2 news occurred.. So yeah PSP2 GT Mobile game is going to be one of the 1st titles to see once PSP2 releases.


Hmm what is this I posted some time ago?


And what is this new news that GT-Mobile game will come to PSP2?

:sly:
 
For online and arcade, yes. But your sim or GT or career or whatever mode needs to be consistent among all players. I will be very upset if someone gets to 100% and is bragging about while racing with dumbed down physics and no damage.
Hey, it worked for Forza 2. 💡
 
Race cars are much different machines that are built to survive those kinds of accidents and drivers are wearing devices to support them in G forces like that. In GT we have more street cars than race cars.
But it's not exclusively street cars, and we have the ability to fit roll cages to street cars so rigidity can increase, and having the roll cage protects the driver more.

I should also remind everyone of Dale Earnhardt if you want to know what a slight tap on the rear at just the wrong time on Daytona can do.
Like you said before, fill in all the context of the DE incident. You call it a slight tap on the rear, which did send the front into the wall, but you don't include him being T-BONED AT 200MPH which is ultimately what killed him. As cpp214 said, the Schumacher one was 80G's which was worse. I found a guy that had a 160G impact and survived. Jerry Nadeau did that in the 2003 NASCAR season. When you watch it it doesn't look that bad but you can tell he hit directly parallel with the wall on the drivers side.

No, it wouldn't. Yamauchi couldn't show up at E3 and say that we will have damage, show a display video of it, and still people would say they'll believe it when they see it. If he said there won't be any people will begin debating whether he is trying to hide it or not.

He could turn up saying the sky was green with purple pokerdots and you'll still have people debating about how big the pokerdots were!! We all know this but it was worth an effort. ;)
 
At Talladega last Sunday, there was a typical crash towards the end of the race I believe, and there should be plenty of videos showing what happened.
This one?



Actually it's not that particular one, it's the Carl Edwards crash, which it looks like there are a few videos of it, one or two in HQ. It was right before the final straight, and he got flipped badly, landing on top of a car behind him and flying into the restraining fence. Debris went flying, and then when the car finally settled and the traffic passed, he jogged across the finish line.

I wish I could do that in GT5. :D

Yamauchi really disapointed me with his second problem. Dont look like he want to do it realistic.
Keep in mind that I'm unaware of any racing game which has that level of damage. GRID is pretty spectacular, but still not to that level. But it's just over a month to find out for ourselves.
 
Keep in mind that I'm unaware of any racing game which has that level of damage. GRID is pretty spectacular, but still not to that level. But it's just over a month to find out for ourselves.

I dont need spectacular damage, I want good "mecanical" damage. If I crash I want to be punished, like in RL. Tried Richard burns rally? Not spectacular, but it certenly gets you to drive more careful. I know that kind of damage ruins the fun for many so it must be possible to turn off.:dopey:
 
I forgot about Richard Burns Rally, which is sad, because I was thinking of it as I began reading this thread this afternoon. But phone calls and wonky PCs intruded. But still, just think of the dozens of other racing games out there, other than RBR, Burnout and Motorstorm. And keep in mind that the only reason Burnout and Motorstorm are a blast is because you get to respawn in race. ;) Besides, they come apart rather like scale models.

If damage makes it into GT5, which my gut feeling is that it will, it will probably be somewhere on the order between Forza 2 and GRID. However, if PD licensed the Digital Molecular Matter technology, you might find it possible to shred your car just like in real life - within limits, of course. Serious racing games never feature total damage such as a crushed driver compartment, but I have a feeling we'll survive somehow. ;)
 
Last edited:
I think what was meant by "a tap" is that a tap from another driver could get you loose, sending you into the wall, causing an impact of x g-forces.

I just have to ask, where are you quoting "a tap" from? It's definitely not said by Kaz in the 150g comment. He specifically talks about the car hitting the wall, no other cars involved.

To me it sounds like PD doesn't realize they can do half-assed, unrealistic aesthetic damage like Forza and that we'd be happy with it.
 
Back