The Words of the Winds are Now all Clear

  • Thread starter Thread starter amar212
  • 3,560 comments
  • 538,270 views
Well, now that I look again, it wasn't in the original quote. I suppose it manifested itself in my head as the discussion progressed. :dunce: Carry on.
 
Keep in mind this 150G statement probably means 150G spike, not average deacceleration as calculated by the deaccel m/s. G forces during a accident is not a constant.
 
CyborgGT
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.
Click to expand...
Personally, I wouldn't be happy. I have said in variou sother discussions that I want DNFs. I want to be completely out of a race and have to restart in single player, sit out in multiplayer.

Games on my Commodore 64 did that. Damage didn't look realistic, but your car drifted to the side of the road and you waited for the other player to finish.
 
Agree - DNF's should be in - could be coupled with yellow flags whilst they clear away the debris too?! (Or would it just be the flashing invisible cars that you can drive through (like someone when they have a penalty))

C.
 
Something I thing you guys have forgot about, though, is that, if they implement damage, it will not be realistic, and sooner or later, it will drive you guys to criticize it. I would rather be criticize by something I haven't done than something I have done wrong.
 
True. Damage doesn't replicate real world consequences and it is therefore mostly just eye candy.
 
Indeed. And as it is eye candy, as you say it is, it would only prompt drivers to crash each others on purpose just to see it. Therefore, mechanical damage would be the only thing I would like to see. Leave visual damage for further games, if any.
 
It would be stupid to have only mechanical damage though. 👎 For example: you hit the barrier head-on at 200 mph; every component in your car is wasted, but visually you don't even get a scratch. How is that realistic? :ouch:
 
Last edited:
All I'm waiting for is to see that NEW E3 trailer displaying the weather changing of a parked up Mazda RX-7, on the Fuji track.

If it is, then possibly the first VG in history to feature real-time weather not that day & night that you see in Dragon Quest VIII. Weather change. :/

Sorry for my bit to bit grammer mistake. I'm dyslexic #_-
 
So many games have damage and weather changes... i don´t understand why it´s so hard for PD to put that in? (if we don´t get damage and weather)

Hope we get DNF... in Toca 3 it was very funny to race (i must say it was funny too to crash the cars :D )

So we got 34 days to E3 keep fingers crossing that we get some infos
 
Final objection:

Many games have damage and weather changes: do you like them as much as GT5? If you like them better, why bother playing GT5? If you don't, why would you like damage, as you see GT5 is perfect as it is or we can imagine it is right now? You would only add work to programmers.
 
So many games have damage and weather changes... i don´t understand why it´s so hard for PD to put that in?
Click to expand...
I can tell you why you dont understand it, but i will leave it here. :)
 
Codename L
Final objection:

Many games have damage and weather changes: do you like them as much as GT5? If you like them better, why bother playing GT5? If you don't, why would you like damage, as you see GT5 is perfect as it is or we can imagine it is right now? You would only add work to programmers.
Click to expand...

Eh? There's nothing wrong with wanting the one thing you like the most to be even just a little bit better. "Improvement" is what most people live for, more or less.

Anyway, dynamic day/night is "easy" assuming that PD have used a compatible lighting method (probably not...) dynamic weather is a bit harder to implement (artistically), however it could still rely on a dynamic global lighting system, which is potentially computationally expensive and may require compromises elsewhere.

Those programmers will be paid, so what's the problem? :sly:

For the record, I vote mechanical damage in place of superficial visual damage! 👍
 
Codename L
Many games have damage and weather changes: do you like them as much as GT5? If you like them better, why bother playing GT5? If you don't, why would you like damage, as you see GT5 is perfect as it is or we can imagine it is right now? You would only add work to programmers.
Click to expand...
Just because YOU think GT5 is perfect doesn't mean PD shouldn't add damage and develop the game further. :rolleyes: But I suppose you are perfectly happy with cars unrealistically bouncing off each other without a scratch from here to eternity. :)
 
Last edited:
Evan the all mighty Kazunori Yamauchi said that they are not half way done with the stuff he wants to put in GT games.. So yeah it's not perfect.. We need damage and weather effects before body kits..
 
Antti-san
Just because YOU think GT5 is perfect doesn't mean PD shouldn't add damage and develop the game further. :rolleyes: But I suppose you are perfectly happy with cars unrealistically bouncing off each other without a scratch from here to eternity. :)
Click to expand...

Alright, you obviously got the wrong idea. You seem to think that I am saying I've got the final word when it comes to GT5 development. I am just saying that it is their decision as the makers of the game to do what they think it is needed, because they are the ones who made an amazing franchise, not you, or me, or everyone on the forum for that matter. We must not tell them what to do, but we can give them ideas (if they take a look around here, at least).

Secondly, you supposed wrong. Do you think I like to see the cars bounce of each other? No. What I'm saying is that, if they didn't do it until now, there was a reason for it. If YOU are the one who thinks the game is not perfect the way it seems to be heading, don't bother in playing it. At least, one way or another, I will play, because damage sincerely means nothing to me. If you decide to play a game, just because it has damage, then hell, I would redo GT1 with damage just so you can play it, and I earn money. That shows how interested in visual effects you actually car, leaving the real game behind.

I don't care how the other games are doing. GT is the game I choose to play.
 
Griffith500
For the record, I vote mechanical damage in place of superficial visual damage! 👍
Click to expand...

+∞

Seriously, I could really care less about the cosmetics, which is one of the big issues I have with the so-called damage effects in most games, like Forza 2.

One of the really great things about DiRT and F1:CE and perhaps a few other racing games, is the option to make damage realistically impact performance, including an immediate DNF from a crash that realistically would certainly end your race.

I also don't want to force it on everyone, as I strongly feel that great games offer a wide variety of game options so that everyone can tailor a game to best match the kind of experience they are looking for at any given moment.

One of the problems I have with most online racing games, including GT5:P is that there are no realistic mechanical damage options that would allow you to setup a race that properly rewards drivers who do not wreak.

I totally understand though that just like past GT games, the disadvantage PD has is their games include licensed cars from so many different manufacturers, and it's widely known many of them are not in favor of damage on production road cars... race cars is a different hing, which explains why games like DiRT and F1:CE have been able to implement extensive damage modeling for all their cars.

At the very least though, I seriously hope PD implements more realistic consequences to poor driving (and that means more, not less, severe penalties), and especially a DNF option.
 
Codename L
Final objection:

Many games have damage and weather changes: do you like them as much as GT5? If you like them better, why bother playing GT5? If you don't, why would you like damage, as you see GT5 is perfect as it is or we can imagine it is right now? You would only add work to programmers.
Click to expand...
That's kind of a weak argument, mate.

Many games do have damage and weather, but they lack in other areas where GT5 makes up. However, this works both ways in other departments such as tuning. GT5 isn't perfect, not by a long shot when the definition of a perfect game varies by individuals. :)
 
Codename L
Alright, you obviously got the wrong idea. You seem to think that I am saying I've got the final word when it comes to GT5 development. I am just saying that it is their decision as the makers of the game to do what they think it is needed, because they are the ones who made an amazing franchise, not you, or me, or everyone on the forum for that matter. We must not tell them what to do, but we can give them ideas (if they take a look around here, at least).
Click to expand...
No, I don't think that you have any final word on how GT5 is developed. ;)

Codename L
Secondly, you supposed wrong. Do you think I like to see the cars bounce of each other? No. What I'm saying is that, if they didn't do it until now, there was a reason for it. If YOU are the one who thinks the game is not perfect the way it seems to be heading, don't bother in playing it. At least, one way or another, I will play, because damage sincerely means nothing to me. If you decide to play a game, just because it has damage, then hell, I would redo GT1 with damage just so you can play it, and I earn money. That shows how interested in visual effects you actually car, leaving the real game behind.
Click to expand...
So I shouldn't play the game because I don't think it's perfect? :rolleyes:

Damage or not, I'll still buy the game, you can bet on that! Because regardless of the shortcomings, I still love the Gran Turismo series, and I'll buy GT5 just like I've bought every other game in the series so far.

The reason I want damage in GT5 is that it would make the game even more realistic. NOT because I want to see "awesome" crashes and visual effects. OK!? :banghead:
 
Antti-san
Damage or not, I'll still buy the game, you can bet on that! Because regardless of the shortcomings, I still love the Gran Turismo series, and I'll buy GT5 just like I've bought every other game in the series so far.
Click to expand...

Then why should we fight and argue over the damage? As long as we don't have the game, we don't know for sure if damage has already been included. Sure, someone will find a way to prove me wrong, but I have learned a long time ago that especulating will only make things worse in the long way. For us who don't especulate, if damage is released, it will be a nice surprise for sure! For those who expected it, what can they say? "I knew it was going to be in it!". But if it is not there, then this will happen: I will say "at least I knew damage was not going to be in it", while the others will scream and cry "NOOOOO, WHY??!!!! WHERE'S DAMAGE??!!! WHY DID YOU DO THIS TO ME, PD??!!!". Lesson is, never expect something good to happen. Always be prepared for the worse :lol:
 
FoolKiller
Personally, I wouldn't be happy. I have said in variou sother discussions that I want DNFs. I want to be completely out of a race and have to restart in single player, sit out in multiplayer.

Games on my Commodore 64 did that. Damage didn't look realistic, but your car drifted to the side of the road and you waited for the other player to finish.
Click to expand...

I just meant in terms of the aesthetics front. Judging by the comments here, it sounds like a lot of us wouldn't mind if our car didn't disintigrate completely realistically. Mechanical damage is a must.
 
CyborgGT
Judging by the comments here, it sounds like a lot of us wouldn't mind if our car didn't disintigrate completely realistically. Mechanical damage is a must.
Click to expand...
If damage is implemented, I'm not expecting the cars to disintegrate like in that YouTube video! ;) First of all, the car manufacturers most likely wouldn't allow it, plus it would be too much of a drain on the system resources if a major pile-up involving 16 opponents happened during a race! :nervous:

I understand that you can't have completely realistic crash physics in any game; they are still games and system resources (PC or console) are always limited one way or another. But if PD did include visual damage, I'd like to see dents, scrapes, smashed windshields, damage to the tires and the possibility of few bodypanels coming off in case of a major crash.

In my opinion, mechanical and visual damage walk hand in hand. To be blunt; If PD can't implement both, they shouldn't do damage at all. It would be unrealistic to have just visual or just mechanical damage. Just my 2 cents! ;)
 
yeti
Agree - DNF's should be in - could be coupled with yellow flags whilst they clear away the debris too?! (Or would it just be the flashing invisible cars that you can drive through (like someone when they have a penalty))

C.
Click to expand...


Or maybe the pace car will have to come out while they clear away a totaled (vastly improved AI) car from a incredibly greasy hong kong track after an un-forecasted tropical downpour? Meaning you have time to catch up to the car in front or rush into the pits to swap to the wets.
 
Antti-san
In my opinion, mechanical and visual damage walk hand in hand. To be blunt; If PD can't implement both, they shouldn't do damage at all. It would be unrealistic to have just visual or just mechanical damage. Just my 2 cents! ;)
Click to expand...
+1 once again. It would just be wrong to have one or the other, but not both.
 
Antti-san
In my opinion, mechanical and visual damage walk hand in hand. To be blunt; If PD can't implement both, they shouldn't do damage at all. It would be unrealistic to have just visual or just mechanical damage. Just my 2 cents! ;)
Click to expand...

I understand what you mean, but there is a lot of real world mechanical damage that occurs without any noticeable visual damage... including DNFs without so much as a dent in the body work of a race car.

Regardless of that, I really can't understand why you would really want PD not to implement ANY damage if they can't do both. That really sounds like an example of cutting off your nose to spite the face.

Yes, both would be very nice, but at the end of the day visual damage is just that... visual. In terms of gameplay, physics, not graphics are what truly separates a game from being an arcade and being a simulation. Don't get me wrong, I can appreciate excellent realistic graphics just as much as anyone, but mechanical damage would play a massive role in their actual gameplay, and if PD can pull it off, even without visual damage, it would set yet another standard for other racing games to try and live up to.

I for one dearly hope PD does everything in their power to bring as much damage modeling to GT5 as they can, and doesn't share the sentiment that if they can't apply both visual and mechanical, that they wont apply either. :ouch:

I suspect, based on what Kaz has said already though, the decision they may have to make is whether or not they apply damage to some cars, and not others, or no damage at all... but here agin, I would still want them to at least apply damage when and where possible, because for me at least, something is indeed better than nothing at all.
 
Yeah, I feel sorry for PD, they have a huge amount of pressure on them to make damage in GT possible. But how would you deal with manufacturer's saying "I don't want my cars to get damaged in a game"? Do you take them out of the game and say it damage or your outa here...in which case the fans of that manufacturere would have the craps about not having there favourite cars.:rolleyes:
Or would you make the game with only some cars with damage and others without. So that punters drive the indistructable Car's while real races drive destructible cars and get taken out of the race because they want damage?
Not an easy situation is it.
I will be happy and not complain about what they do in this situation, the manufacturer's are the one's that everyone should complain to! They are the ones really making it tough. Not PD whol are stuck with what they say.
Go PD I say, whatever they think is good enough will be good enough for me :)👍
Rusty*
 
Rusty*
Or would you make the game with only some cars with damage and others without?
Click to expand...
I'm sure Kaz was speaking hypothetically, with one possible caveat. It has been discussed here and there, the possibility that street cars might not have damage at release until negotiations are ironed out, if there are still unresolved issues. This would restrict damage to tuners, possibly, and race cars definitely. That would be really strange, but I could live with that. However, I'd have to contact the auto manufacturers and voice my displeasure with them, especially highlighting the current economic conditions, and threat of nationalization for American companies by Obama.
 
I recently picked up SBK 08 (aka World Superbike Championship) and have a little bit to say about pure mechanical damage systems. To start off, SBK has one. I know it's not a car racing game, but SBK includes various components (suspension, brakes, tires) and even rider "health." If either is completely drained, your race is over. No picking up, dusting off, and taking it back to the track.

What SBK doesn't have is any visual aids, but when I think about it, they aren't necessary. I've learned over my years in gaming that visual damage is a novelty. Except in a few key games, it serves no purpose other than visually stimulating your brain, even if it's complemented by a mechanical damage system. When it comes down to it, a mechanical system is all that matters. The system ended up being used in the game in the long run the most is mechanical, and it provides the data for the most realistic depiction of damage effects.

So, basically, unless PD can accurately implement visual and mechanical damage systems, I'd take mechanical or none at all. If they can, however, link the physical models to a mechanics based input, then by all means, they should go go go. If I damage my right rear spring, I want that wheel to show it. I don't want a premade animation no matter where I'm hit on my right rear, I want a specific effect linked to the mechanical input.

I know it's asking for a lot, and I probably won't see it this gen, but this is the day I look forward to.

When
 

Latest Posts

Back