The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Gran Turismo 5 - Late 2008? No damage modeling
bruin
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=167050
No damamge modeling = massive failure in my eyes. Hasn't the cell processor been touted from day one to make this kind of thing happen? I could understand why the PS2 GT games wouldn't have it, but there's no reason for GT5 on PS3 to not have it at least as good as Forza 2 does on 360. It's supposed to be "the real driving simulator", isn't it?
The release of the highly-anticipated Gran Turismo 5 on PS3 could be pushed back as far as late 2008 says director Kaunori Yamauchi, who wants the game to be absolutely perfect before it's released.
Speaking with US-based Car and Drive magazine (via Gamers-Creed), Yamauchi touted spring 2008 as the earliest that the game could see release, but affirmed that Sony is more than willing to push that date back to the end of the year should his team need more time.
Yamauchi made reference to the cars as being one of the key time-consuming aspects of developing the game. It's taking 180 days for someone to build a car in the levels of detail required for GT5, as oppose to 30 days for GT3 and just one day for the original GT on PSone.
Crash damage has also once again been ruled out, Yamauchi saying that some companies don't want their cars smashed up in the game (despite damage featuring on the licensed cars of PGR, Forza and other games).
He also says adding the perfect damage system would mean changing the physics model of the game, and modelling each panel of every car separately, both normal and crumpled, with different lighting and shadows. Again, if other games can do it, why can't GT? They're not exactly short of time.
He did say, however, that crash damage could possibly be delivered as a post-release download, and that downloadable cars were a certainty.
Meanwhile, you'll have to make do with the minimalist offerings provided in GT HD for another year or more.
No damamge modeling = massive failure in my eyes. Hasn't the cell processor been touted from day one to make this kind of thing happen? I could understand why the PS2 GT games wouldn't have it, but there's no reason for GT5 on PS3 to not have it at least as good as Forza 2 does on 360. It's supposed to be "the real driving simulator", isn't it?
bruin on
0
Posts
DiRT.
Forza 2 has impressed me. Quite a lot actually.
i don't think forza 2 has realistic damage, just fun damage
I've never driven a car into a wall like I do in forza, but it didn't seem too bad to me.
PS: There is cosmetic and simulation damage in Forza 2. Cosmetic means you can break glass, knock panels off, etc... Simulation means you can be raped.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
How does GT3 and 4 stack up to newer racing games in regards to the amount of cars in the game. I'm sure if they did do damage, they would lose more then half of the companies that were in the game. It's a fair trade off I would think.
And now, i use 'gran turismo' as a verb, meaning to use another car as a mobile steering assist.
"then on the last corner, i totally gran-turismo'd into the leader. BAM!"
pleasepaypreacher.net
i would have thought burnout's is more realistic, insomuchas, your car is totalled ;o
What you will not find in Forza is shit like a 1980 toyota corolla... which nobody really wants to drive anyways. There is still a sick number of cars in the game from all over the world, and they agreed to do full damage modelling, just so long as the vehicle cannot flip over. That was the one sorta dumb request.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Gran Turismo was a shitty franchise that gained popularity because nothing else was out to rival it. And it has now been surpassed by better games. Bye, bye, Gran Turismo.
The car manufacturers care.
That's the only way GT has been able to get the licence to model all the cars in the games all these years. The manufacturers won't license the cars to them unless they promise not to smash them up.
i am pretty sure this is not true
bye bye drez
I'll stick to the Forza series. Sure, it's not the most accurate damage model system, but at least they are trying to simulate the fact that your $300,000 car will fucking DIE if you hit a brick wall at 150+ mph.
After all, it's a simulator. Simulators are supposed to simulate. For better or worse.
I guess I must have imagined the damage modelling in Forza, then.
Hint: It's an excuse. Turn10 has gone on record to say car manufacturers don't mind damage, as long as it's within reason. Polyphony just doesn't want to bother, because they think it's not important, and they're making excuses.
I'M A TWITTER SHITTER
Which part? That there are vastly superior racing sims out there, like Forza Motorsport 2? That it is unforgivable for a game that advertises itself as a racing "simulator" to have no car damage whatsoever, visible or otherwise? That Gran Turismo always was and always will be a boring, stupid piece of shit that never deserved the popularity it had?
Nah, I'm pretty sure I'm right about all that stuff.
bye bye bongi
Didn't GT3 have about half the cars available in GT2?
@Darleysam: Man, I remember Viper Racing. I don't even remember how I came across that game, but I played the holy hell out of it.
EDIT: GT3 has 150+ cars, to Forza's 310, GT2's 650, and well.... yeah. It's not a very big selection...
amen
Well the whole notion of "You're not crashing MY company's car in your game!" is pretty stupid to begin with.
Everyone knows that when you hit stuff, it breaks. They're not successfully hiding some great conspiracy from us.
Plus, if manufacturers really did say no, and the GT people REALLY WANTED damage modeling, they'd just throw money at the problem.
PSN/XBL: dragoniemx
It seems to me that this realistic damages simulation is a great idea as an abstraction but a real deal-breaker in implementation.
In Forza 2, moving up the field of cars takes a lot of time, planning, and careful execution, because if you damage your car passing the 5th place driver, you're not going to win. Not to mention, the AI drivers become more aggressive if you smash them; They will spin you out later in the race.
In Gran Turismo, you pass everyone on the first turn by using them as a guard-rail, and then fight the rubber-band AI. GT was an excellent racing game, but after playing Forza... I'm not going back until they add damage.
i even used that this weekend. I was talking to my older brother, and he mentioned Gran Turismo, and slamming into the other cars on the track to help you get round a corner. I recounted one of my favoured memories, on the Tokyo circuit in a head-to-head race, i think. I was a good 50m behind the other car, heading into the final lap, and saw him slow and turn into the first corner. Realising that by braking and trying to race him fairly, i'd only narrow the gap by a small amount, i kept the accelerator down and powered straight into the side of him. He found the barrier, and i sauntered on with a cocky swagger to claim victory.
So in a realistic racer like Gran Turismo, what's the point of modelling such damage, if the result of 99% of car damage is the end of the race for you and your race team? I'd rather the development time be spent on the rest of the game, personally.
EDIT: I just read Evangir's post above, and okay, I can agree with that point, I guess.
I think I accidentally "gran turismo'd" one time before I realized how bad it fucked my car up.
Basically, car damage is the difference between realistic and non-realistic racing. You might as well be playing ping-pong without it. There are many other factors too, but without car damage, you are just a sloppy sim.
I have both GT3 and 4 and enjoyed them a fair amount. After spending about 5 hours with Forza 2 I doubt very much that I will be bothering with GT5. Also I agree with your entire poast.
I am severely disappointed with the route Sony and Polyphony have taken the last couple of Gran Turismos. The lack of battle damage makes the game less of a simulator and more of an arcade-y racer, ESPECIALLY when they've been touting the game as the end-all, be-all embodiment of real life driving simulation.
Like the previous anecdotes, Gran Turismo begat the one of the greatest video game lines between me and my friends.
"Brakes? Real men don't need brakes."
Guaranteed wins using 1000hp Pikes Peak wall-riding FTL. Every time. Especially in the endurance races. At least the physics are floaty enough for me to master the art of angling my car parallel to the wall/other car, losing traction and sliding into the barrier/car, and bouncing off headed in the right direction with little to no loss of speed.
This is why this developer is full of shit, not just for the licensing thing. All modern (and at least first party games) would be using a universal lighting pipeline in their game, ie you no longer need to actually draw shadows onto things anymore. We stopped doing that shit on the N64/PS2.
Yeah, don't you know it. GT5 was the ONLY reason I wanted a PS3. Now that I have Forza 2, I don't any reason what so ever to want/need a PS3......yet.
Maybe after a price drop or two.
Yeah, that was easy money there. Some duct tape on the gas button, and you could go to the movies and come back and have won a endurance race.
See, this is one of the main reasons I enjoy the Gran Turismo series.
I like buying a crapmobile and adding 200hp-400hp to it, then racing the scrubs in the pick-up races. I get immense amounts of pleasure fiddling with the transmission enough to get that Toyota sedan going from 0-60 in 4 seconds.
If anything, I'd like to see MORE of these older "average" cars (American cars, you rat bastards!). I like racing with cars I've actually owned.
I'm not saying this validates things... but to think that after 4 GT's, people bitching about "no crash damage" each time a sequel comes out, yet it still sells like hotcakes--yea, GT5 will still sell like nobody's business, crash damage or not.
It may not be the greatest 'competitive racer' online, but damn if it isnt fun to play.