Forza has a pathetically paltry list of manufacturers featured compared to the average GT game. While you may be able to wheel and deal your way into car damage (minus things like windshields and tires deflating/falling off and numerous other restrictions) when you're only dealing with a few companies, when you have nearly every major automaker on the planet it becomes considerably more difficult.
Scrolling through the Forza 2 car list, I count 47 manufacturers.
And I'm not sure if it's possible to do 100% accurate car damage yet, but games like GTR2 and rFactor are certainly approaching it.
so because it's impossible to do entirely real damage you should scrap it and make the game a kart racer, right?
You're joking, right? I really hope that was just strawman sarcasm and that's not something you posted in seriousness thinking you were smart or clever.
Too hard/too much litigation/can't be accurate enough
What part of those three things do you people not understand?
Some of you guys are retarded. I'm going to bed. Spend some time talking to actual developers who spend their time coding this shit for a living and then get back to me. Just because your uneducated ass thinks it "can be done easy" doesn't mean it can.
Think really hard about this for a second, because when you boil down all of the car damage arguments, they can all be solved by the following sentence: If it was as easy as some of you primitive screwheads are trying to make it sound for car damage to be in every single car in a GT game, don't you think it would be done already?
Forza has a pathetically paltry list of manufacturers featured compared to the average GT game. While you may be able to wheel and deal your way into car damage (minus things like windshields and tires deflating/falling off and numerous other restrictions) when you're only dealing with a few companies, when you have nearly every major automaker on the planet it becomes considerably more difficult.
Scrolling through the Forza 2 car list, I count 47 manufacturers.
And I'm not sure if it's possible to do 100% accurate car damage yet, but games like GTR2 and rFactor are certainly approaching it.
GT4 had 80 manufacturers, so while I wouldn't go so far as to call Forza 2's list 'paltry', it's still much smaller than GT's.
Btw, I should mention that one of the reasons PD hasn't done car damage is because they've said that since they're perfectionists, they don't want to do it until they can do it right. They have expressed interest in doing it in GT5 and they've probably toyed around with it a fair bit, but it may end up getting pushed back to GT6.
You obviously can't do 100% accurate cosmetic or mechanical damage with current technology, because in order for it to be truly accurate you would need to realistically model -everything- in the world. Each piece of rock in the gravel traps. Each mechanical component in each car, down to the individual springs, shocks, frame rails, even the valves in the motors. Etc, etc, etc. I doubt the most powerful computers in the world, currently, could do that in real time.
But to have no mechanical damage in a game that prides itself a simulator is asinine. If there are no consequences for collisions then you're not going to approach the race in a realistic manner. And you don't have to turn damage on if you don't like it in Forza, so why eliminate it entirely in the GT series?
so because it's impossible to do entirely real damage you should scrap it and make the game a kart racer, right?
You're joking, right? I really hope that was just strawman sarcasm and that's not something you posted in seriousness thinking you were smart or clever.
Too hard/too much litigation/can't be accurate enough
What part of those three things do you people not understand?
Some of you guys are retarded. I'm going to bed. Spend some time talking to actual developers who spend their time coding this shit for a living and then get back to me. Just because your uneducated ass thinks it "can be done easy" doesn't mean it can.
Think really hard about this for a second, because when you boil down all of the car damage arguments, they can all be solved by the following sentence: If it was as easy as some of you primitive screwheads are trying to make it sound for car damage to be in every single car in a GT game, don't you think it would be done already?
Did you just not play Forza 2? You need to sleep on this, you're acting crazy son. You're missing the point entirely, which is that you're playing a sim game where your car does not take damage, allowing you to bounce off other cars to corner better. It doesn't take thinking hard to realize this.
If it was as easy as some of you primitive screwheads are trying to make it sound for car damage to be in every single car in a GT game, don't you think it would be done already?
You make it sound like some herculean task. Maybe you should talk to some programmers. Try CodeMasters, MGS, fuck even Microprose back in the DOS days. No one's asking for you to accurately track every farkin screw, bolt and torsion bar.
Wait, GT still doesn't have Ferraris and Lambos? What the hell?
Solution to car companies not letting you damage model their cars: drop them. 100 less cars won't bother anyone especially when they're just a shitty hatchback or fucking ugly 70's Japanese car
And no you don't need 1234 Lancers / skylines / nsx, seriously.
If only you knew how hilarious it is that you're telling me that I should talk to some programmers.
Getting realistic car damage modeling up and running on 700+ cars (and, on a side note, maintaining 16 of those in-game without using up too many resources) is pretty much the definition of "herculean".
You guys can speculate all you want. The bottom line is very few of you have any idea what you're taking about, and it shows. I'm going back to the demo.
Except GT5 won't have that many. And when you factor in duplicate frames or chassis, even less. In fact it brings it a hell of a lot closer to Forza on individual chassis count, and they managed a suitable damage model in a timely manner. And if in fact it is still too much of a task for the reason you have quoted, then they have bitten off more than they can chew, and for the sake of GT as a sim, should start on that instead of adding yet more cars no one has heard of just to complete Yamauchi's museum.
[but yes, thread well and truly sabotaged sorry, from first reply even. I'll be bowing out and let people talk about the release.]
If only you knew how hilarious it is that you're telling me that I should talk to some programmers.
Getting realistic car damage modeling up and running on 700+ cars (and, on a side note, maintaining 16 of those in-game without using up too many resources) is pretty much the definition of "herculean".
You guys can speculate all you want. The bottom line is very few of you have any idea what you're taking about, and it shows. I'm going back to the demo.
Looking at your gamertag, it doesn't appear like you've played Forza Motorsport 2. I'd give that a try.
Except GT5 won't have that many. And when you factor in duplicate frames or chassis, even less. In fact it brings it a hell of a lot closer to Forza on individual chassis count, and they managed a suitable damage model in a timely manner.
Duplicate frames and chassis? What? Each one still has to be modeled, just because this Skyline and that Skyline look alike and both say "Skyline" doesn't mean that it's the exact same car! They each have to be modeled, they're different!
Jesus there is so much stupid in here.
The difference between a 1995 and a 1996 automobile is subtle at times, but each car is individually modeled, you don't just load up an '05 Impreza and move some polys around and call it an '06.
Just stop talking, all of you armchair programmers who have no idea what you're talking about. Please.
This demo-demo has flaws. But the fact that they fixed the physics engine makes me very happy. The game now feels alive(compared to GT4/GTHD), like GT 1-3 used to.
There are graphical problems, like jagged shadows on the interiors. The shadows themselves are a very nice touch, and add even more realism to the amazing cockpit models. The lack of fully modeled backgrounds in the side view mirrors is strange, since the interior rear view mirror is fully modeled.
Sounds are better, but not great.
Finally, the visuals in replays are just jaw-dropping. Hitting triangle to zoom in...it's amazing.
And you are obviously not even an armchair car enthusiast.
Each car is not a delicate snowflake, immeasurably different from the next. There are many many duplicates, with swapped out drivetrains, suspension, whatever.
And when all is said and done, it will have no bearing on a "good" car and a "damaged" car in-game. You're trying to claim the only way to do it is to apply it individually car-to-car. Like a 20 degree bash on the wall will not hurt a Subaru GT as much as a GTB. We're not asking them to make it so that a nose-to-tail affects Bilsteen shocks more than factory ones. We're not asking that it be done procedurally by a super computer. At its most basic level, it is "if you fuck your steering you can't steer very well". That's all it takes to put the "sim" in to the racing like it has with the driving.
So no, the fact you know more about programming has no bearing whatsoever on our complaints. Other games are doing it fine, and they're not all "oh noes, there not enuf megahurtz for teh programmerz!".
These replays are absolutely amazing. I forgot how great the GT series' replays usually are.
And zooming with the triangle button shows even more detail.
If only you knew how hilarious it is that you're telling me that I should talk to some programmers.
So why don't you tell us so we DO know, and can share in the humour?
I can tell you from a programmer's standpoint that to model each of the hojillion cars in a GT game individually is vastly inefficient and retarded. Especially with current graphics technology when you can load a basic model and use a cleverly crafted series of normal maps to make the minute differences visible, if you even have to.
There's also the possibility of having a number of models of each part of the chassis that are composited at run-time.
My example is still a very high level (and possibly completely inaccurate) statement, but at least I can say I'm coming from my own experience instead of just spewing what I think and saying something like "hey, I KNOW programmers, so anything you say is stupid."
So why don't you put your ad hominems back in your toybox and give us a real statement or something even anecdotal from one of your supposed programmer friends.
Or, if you are a programmer yourself, why don't you just tell us what company you work for, and any released projects you've worked on?
robotbebop on
Do not feel trapped by the need to achieve anything, this way you achieve everything.
Oh, hey I'm making a game! Check it out: Dr. Weirdo!
Guys, I don't think you all understand what happend with the GT series and damage modeling.
When GT first came into being? Couldn't afford to pay manufactures the amount of money to add it in.
Same thing goes for GT2.
In comes GT3 development. Now they can afford it. But WHOOPS, GT is one of the best selling stupidly popular racing games to date, heralded as one of the big hitters of the fledgling PS2. It's gonna print money. Everyone knows that. Oh whoops looky here our price just went up for liscensing sorry about that oh you want damage that is going to be 70% more.. Polyphony says fuck it and goes with no damage.
And now? It's just a big hassel and a waste of time.
Forza gets away from it my faking it slightly, being less popular, and shitting money the manufactuers way. Less exposure means they don't really care all that much about the cosmetics getting dinged up a bit.
But GT? Known for it's mind breaking realism and attention to every single design aspect of a vehicle?
Im kind of sad with the demo right now. I didnt realise there were more tracks included (Found them by pressing circle at the main menu and watching the stock replays). That mixed with the fact that there are so many other cars "in" the demo but undrivable, plus the fact that yesterday 4 cars were locked out (I havent tried today) im a little sad.
But im so much more excited for the full prologue to come out in 2 months
Posts
Scrolling through the Forza 2 car list, I count 47 manufacturers.
And I'm not sure if it's possible to do 100% accurate car damage yet, but games like GTR2 and rFactor are certainly approaching it.
You're joking, right? I really hope that was just strawman sarcasm and that's not something you posted in seriousness thinking you were smart or clever.
What part of those three things do you people not understand?
Some of you guys are retarded. I'm going to bed. Spend some time talking to actual developers who spend their time coding this shit for a living and then get back to me. Just because your uneducated ass thinks it "can be done easy" doesn't mean it can.
Think really hard about this for a second, because when you boil down all of the car damage arguments, they can all be solved by the following sentence: If it was as easy as some of you primitive screwheads are trying to make it sound for car damage to be in every single car in a GT game, don't you think it would be done already?
Steam / Bus Blog / Goozex Referral
GT4 had 80 manufacturers, so while I wouldn't go so far as to call Forza 2's list 'paltry', it's still much smaller than GT's.
Btw, I should mention that one of the reasons PD hasn't done car damage is because they've said that since they're perfectionists, they don't want to do it until they can do it right. They have expressed interest in doing it in GT5 and they've probably toyed around with it a fair bit, but it may end up getting pushed back to GT6.
But to have no mechanical damage in a game that prides itself a simulator is asinine. If there are no consequences for collisions then you're not going to approach the race in a realistic manner. And you don't have to turn damage on if you don't like it in Forza, so why eliminate it entirely in the GT series?
Did you just not play Forza 2? You need to sleep on this, you're acting crazy son. You're missing the point entirely, which is that you're playing a sim game where your car does not take damage, allowing you to bounce off other cars to corner better. It doesn't take thinking hard to realize this.
You make it sound like some herculean task. Maybe you should talk to some programmers. Try CodeMasters, MGS, fuck even Microprose back in the DOS days. No one's asking for you to accurately track every farkin screw, bolt and torsion bar.
Solution to car companies not letting you damage model their cars: drop them. 100 less cars won't bother anyone especially when they're just a shitty hatchback or fucking ugly 70's Japanese car
And no you don't need 1234 Lancers / skylines / nsx, seriously.
Getting realistic car damage modeling up and running on 700+ cars (and, on a side note, maintaining 16 of those in-game without using up too many resources) is pretty much the definition of "herculean".
You guys can speculate all you want. The bottom line is very few of you have any idea what you're taking about, and it shows. I'm going back to the demo.
Steam / Bus Blog / Goozex Referral
Btw, thanks for ruining the thread guys.
Except GT5 won't have that many. And when you factor in duplicate frames or chassis, even less. In fact it brings it a hell of a lot closer to Forza on individual chassis count, and they managed a suitable damage model in a timely manner. And if in fact it is still too much of a task for the reason you have quoted, then they have bitten off more than they can chew, and for the sake of GT as a sim, should start on that instead of adding yet more cars no one has heard of just to complete Yamauchi's museum.
[but yes, thread well and truly sabotaged sorry, from first reply even. I'll be bowing out and let people talk about the release.]
Looking at your gamertag, it doesn't appear like you've played Forza Motorsport 2. I'd give that a try.
Skimming at work, missed the tiny pic =/
Duplicate frames and chassis? What? Each one still has to be modeled, just because this Skyline and that Skyline look alike and both say "Skyline" doesn't mean that it's the exact same car! They each have to be modeled, they're different!
Jesus there is so much stupid in here.
The difference between a 1995 and a 1996 automobile is subtle at times, but each car is individually modeled, you don't just load up an '05 Impreza and move some polys around and call it an '06.
Just stop talking, all of you armchair programmers who have no idea what you're talking about. Please.
edit:
Forza 2 isn't in my Live Card because I don't play it with this GT.
edit 2: I just realized I don't play much of anything with this GT.
Steam / Bus Blog / Goozex Referral
This demo-demo has flaws. But the fact that they fixed the physics engine makes me very happy. The game now feels alive(compared to GT4/GTHD), like GT 1-3 used to.
There are graphical problems, like jagged shadows on the interiors. The shadows themselves are a very nice touch, and add even more realism to the amazing cockpit models. The lack of fully modeled backgrounds in the side view mirrors is strange, since the interior rear view mirror is fully modeled.
Sounds are better, but not great.
Finally, the visuals in replays are just jaw-dropping. Hitting triangle to zoom in...it's amazing.
Damn good show for a demo of a demo
Each car is not a delicate snowflake, immeasurably different from the next. There are many many duplicates, with swapped out drivetrains, suspension, whatever.
And when all is said and done, it will have no bearing on a "good" car and a "damaged" car in-game. You're trying to claim the only way to do it is to apply it individually car-to-car. Like a 20 degree bash on the wall will not hurt a Subaru GT as much as a GTB. We're not asking them to make it so that a nose-to-tail affects Bilsteen shocks more than factory ones. We're not asking that it be done procedurally by a super computer. At its most basic level, it is "if you fuck your steering you can't steer very well". That's all it takes to put the "sim" in to the racing like it has with the driving.
So no, the fact you know more about programming has no bearing whatsoever on our complaints. Other games are doing it fine, and they're not all "oh noes, there not enuf megahurtz for teh programmerz!".
And zooming with the triangle button shows even more detail.
So why don't you tell us so we DO know, and can share in the humour?
I can tell you from a programmer's standpoint that to model each of the hojillion cars in a GT game individually is vastly inefficient and retarded. Especially with current graphics technology when you can load a basic model and use a cleverly crafted series of normal maps to make the minute differences visible, if you even have to.
There's also the possibility of having a number of models of each part of the chassis that are composited at run-time.
My example is still a very high level (and possibly completely inaccurate) statement, but at least I can say I'm coming from my own experience instead of just spewing what I think and saying something like "hey, I KNOW programmers, so anything you say is stupid."
So why don't you put your ad hominems back in your toybox and give us a real statement or something even anecdotal from one of your supposed programmer friends.
Or, if you are a programmer yourself, why don't you just tell us what company you work for, and any released projects you've worked on?
Oh, hey I'm making a game! Check it out: Dr. Weirdo!
When GT first came into being? Couldn't afford to pay manufactures the amount of money to add it in.
Same thing goes for GT2.
In comes GT3 development. Now they can afford it. But WHOOPS, GT is one of the best selling stupidly popular racing games to date, heralded as one of the big hitters of the fledgling PS2. It's gonna print money. Everyone knows that. Oh whoops looky here our price just went up for liscensing sorry about that oh you want damage that is going to be 70% more.. Polyphony says fuck it and goes with no damage.
And now? It's just a big hassel and a waste of time.
Forza gets away from it my faking it slightly, being less popular, and shitting money the manufactuers way. Less exposure means they don't really care all that much about the cosmetics getting dinged up a bit.
But GT? Known for it's mind breaking realism and attention to every single design aspect of a vehicle?
They aren't gonna let them get away with shit.
this better mean the toyota hilux is in
damage modelling? what damage!
You mean the suzuki liana.
Im kind of sad with the demo right now. I didnt realise there were more tracks included (Found them by pressing circle at the main menu and watching the stock replays). That mixed with the fact that there are so many other cars "in" the demo but undrivable, plus the fact that yesterday 4 cars were locked out (I havent tried today) im a little sad.
But im so much more excited for the full prologue to come out in 2 months
Check out my band, click the banner.
This has now pushed me over to buying this game when I get a PS3, even though before I was perfectly happy with Forza as my driving sim.
Love Top Gear.
XBL/PSN/Steam: APZonerunner