TGS: Gran Turismo 5 Prologue Comments by Tom Bramwell

Pika Pika

For those of you obsessed with damage it is being worked on and may be included in a section of GT5, but not the full game.

Polyphoney wish to implement real damage, not simple dents and missing body panels which is lame to say the least!

I can appreciate arcade racers for what they are, I don't want to turn Burnout into GT.

Can reviewers also stop moaning about 'bland' real circuits, it's a driving sim, real circuits like Le Mans and the Nurburgring are what car enthusuasts WANT.

If your a car enthusiast it is quite clear from scrrenshots and videos car/track detail is on a different level to the already fine looking Forza 2/PGR4, it's this attention to detail that stands GT above the rest.

Increasingly, visiting EG only serves to enhance my belief that I am one of the few people on Earth not taking "Dickhead Pills" on a daily basis. If damage even makes your Top Five of things that need fixing in GT you have fucked up priorities. If it's the first thing out of your mouth, you don't even belong in the discussion.

They'll need to punish bumper car driving (with a refined version of the penalties GT4 Prologue and GT4 proper did), obviously, but GT needs vehicle damage like LocoRoco needs assault rifles. Play the Arcade mode of GT 2 with damage on and see how long you leave it on. One sideslap into a barrier and your steering rack snaps, that's reality, and in a game which features 24 hour races, I want that replicated on the last lap like I want cancer. It's a massive exercise in utterly missing the point. Never has it claimed to be the "Real Crashing Simulator", and for those fatuous cretins who say "crashing is a part of driving", yes, the very last part of it you want to experience. having been in 9 car crashes, I know whereof I speak.

GT is about owning the cars, so unless players have a strong desire to have to spend their hard earned game credits on massively expensive repairs or in game insurance policies, I think there are levels of realism that simply don't need replicating. Unless the cars are supposed to magically heal themselves between races, which is yet another stick for idiots - who wouldn't buy the game even if they did include damage - to beat it with saying "That's not very realistic is it?" If you want realism, your driver should actually die after a big smash and you should never be able to play the game again. Every single game draws a line in the sand where realism is concerned. If they can achieve it without sacrificing the visuals, or the critically important frame-rate, great.

But, you know, hooray for Forza managing vehicle damage! That's why it needed 12 times the processing power to finally match both the visuals and framerate of a PS2 game (double the processing power didn't seem to be enough for the original). I've yet to try the sequel myself, maybe it doesn't handle like a bloody pudding this time and it deserves all the praise, but the last one got massive scores it didn't deserve, so I won't rely on any review source or the opinion of anyone who favours it over GT.

There are plenty of games out there for the single digit IQ crowd that likes "Hur hur, me liek to smahs stuff!" action, if GT doesn't appeal to you, I'll give a cheer, because you're probably the kind of arse who would drive backwards smacking into everyone else in an online game and I'd rather you didn't buy it.

I hope I have offended the vast majority of posters in this thread, because you deserve it. You can even reply if you like, but as I've been instantly ignoring morons on a zero tolerance basis lately, I probably won't see your post.

*hugs*

"...GT needs vehicle damage like LocoRoco needs assault rifles"

/Passes Hughes. 'quote of the day' award.

damagelol

It may be the beer talking, but LocoRoco with assault rifles will r0xx0r my b0ll0x0rs.

The deal with damage is simple, in an online game, if you don't have damage the game is over. Any idiot can decide to ram you out of the way for a couple of extra places, with absolute impunity to what will happen to him. You'll go spinning off the track, if it's a real sim you'll then *never* manage to catch up (providing you're not some magic genius and everyone is a 'tard), he gets a couple of places ahead. Now, in something like Forza everyone knows that if they try something like that they're as fucked as you are, they're not going anywhere as their car will be trashed. They have no incentive to try that.

Now, I know, I know that a lot of people cry foul about these games and how Forza or PGR or Burnout is better. Honestly, I love all of them, I can't get enough of racing games, no matter what platform. I just wish that GT finally got the damage modelling down, as it really is something that I like.

And yeah, getting kicked in the balls by the AI in the last lap of an endurance race is harsh, but I can take it, I'll just whack the retry and go again.

Damage does make my top 5 things of things I want in GT. I believe I still belong in a discussion about a series I have played for many years.

One of the reasons I like the GT franchise is because of its realistic handling and physics. bouncing off other cars detracts from immersion and realims. I dont play the game to crash, but when I make a mistake I want realistic reprocussions.

The thing is, if damage was added and you were given the option to turn it off, that would seem the best solution.

How many times in the real world has disaster struck on the last lap? that is what makes motorsports so enticing. If that was the case then all the hardcore guys would feel right at home. people here seem to think that the option of damage is permanent. of course it will be possible to switch it off. but i would love to have damage and then as the race nears its conclusion something would go wrong, that would make me attempt the race again and i would feel that this is the real world of racing.

the talk of the real driving simulator would really be apt if that were to happen. oh and before i forget, after reading the article i played some gt4 and all the guys in defence of GT4 and its qualities... so true it just felt absolutely beautiful to be in control of your car!

If you don't like a game, here's a thought don't buy it (or do and if you don't like it then you can trade it back or something) and let the sales figures for games do the talking. If a game does really badly from a profit point of view, I'm sure the developers will try and do something about it. What I'm saying is if the GT series was really crap, then it wouldn't still be spouting games, its a formula that people like.

Here another thought, instead of absent-mindedly hating a game because it doesn't do something that another game does, enjoy the game on its own terms. Its good that games are different, I mean think of how many people go on about the number of WW based FPS's....If every game was the same what would be the point. Especially as I'm gonna guess that most people who have posted have a 360 (the Forza2 comments spawned this thought-train) so you wouldn't buy the game anyway.

I mean think of how many people go on about the number of WW based FPS's....If every game was the same what would be the point.

You mean they're not? ;)

@ Stepharneo

I really like the GT franchise. Its a system seller for me and will be one of the reasons I pick up a PS3. However, its possible for a fan of a series to disslike certain aspects about it. Collision phyiscs and damage is something I feel should be added in the series 'next-gen' iteration.

earlier arguements in this thread have been ridiculous such as

'GT is a driving simulation, therefore it shouldnt have crash damage'. comments such as these come across as fanboy GT apologests.

I love GT handling, GT graphics, GT library cars/tracks, GT tuning. This I am sure the game will deliver, and is enough to make me love it.

However, I also want the series to develop more than just graphically.
I want real-time tuning, in depth tuning-tutorials, online functionality, improved AI, damage, improved career mode. Wanting these things doesnt make me dislike the series, they are just thing I believe would make the series better.

@ Hughes. Do I still belong in the discussion?

earlier arguements in this thread have been ridiculous such as


Blah dee blah blah.

The point is that there are other games for that which are available to you. Why can't some people just accept that not every game needs to completely conform to the "rules" of its genre? Do you complain that not every FPS is Halo?

@Hughes.:
"Increasingly, visiting EG only serves to enhance my belief that I am one of the few people on Earth not taking "Dickhead Pills" on a daily basis. If damage even makes your Top Five of things that need fixing in GT you have fucked up priorities. If it's the first thing out of your mouth, you don't even belong in the discussion."

No . . . it looks like you're getting your dickhead pills just fine.

"Prologue" = how arrogant and self important can u get?

Cut the crap Sony , we all know you're trying to make us pay for a demo.

Buying your time, so to speak.

The crash "thing", fellows, haven't you learnt yet, with the "rumble is so last-gen" ? Next GT will have crash models, and they'll say that is the right thing to do after all, wont that make you feel a little bit st..., then ?

At least you should be more careful with your statements, saying the "WILL NEVER NEED CRASH DAMAGE" - is a bit too much, considering previous statements..., I'll take note of that...

I think it would be better of if we all agree with "I'm sure it'll be a nice game, too bad about the no damage, as the online will suffer, I'm sure next one will feature it..."

Hughes, m8, chill, it's just a game, some/many ppl want crash damage you (probably too, but...) no, that's fine...

As I said it's not disrespectful to complain to something that our dear brand did/does, it's not.

re: damage, all people want is to have it as an option - nothing wrong with that IMO.

I want damage in GT, but real damage with chassis that bend and twist, not a scratch or dent here and there just so they can tick the damage box.

Until that is possible it is FAR more important to have realistic physics, cockpit views and photo realistic cars/tracks.

My problem here is that GT has put itself across as a 'driving simulator', however it's moving more and more into the realms of 'arcade racer' as other racing games forge ahead with handling and damage.

I'm not talking just about scratched panels, but performance altering damage. If you drive across gravel your suspension, drivetrain, tyres will suffer.

GT1 and 2 were undoubtedly the kings of driving, but Forza came out and was so much more 'hardcore'. GT is still nice to play, but feels somewhat immature when compared to the incredibly detailed and sophisticated Forza.

GT needs to have an overhauled handling system. It's had a massive graphical upgrade, but gameply is sadly lagging behind.

Oh yeah, that game where you can hurtle round the track, bump other racers and crash all you like then just race on...Burnout your after then sir?

Myself, I don't like damage in any racer, unless it's having fun with that feature(Burnout, FlatOut) - I've played Forza 2 demo, for instance and I found the damage modelling ugly. But that's just my preference and I completely understand other people who like that feature. That said, all arguments about how GT (or any other racing game with a word simulator somewhere on it's box) doesn't nEEd damage are just plain stupid. It's one thing to say, okay, it doesn't have damage, but it has many other things done right and I don't even like damage in my racers, but quite another to say "if you want damage, go play Burnout" or "GT needs damage like LocoRoco needs guns". Those are not arguments, but somebody pissed of 'cause someone else said something about their beloved gaming series. Damage moddeling is a preference, okay? Some people like it and want it and their reasoning for that isn't wrong, like Hughes. & Co. would like us to believe.

I've played Forza1/2 and I don't think there's any doubt it's more arcadish than GT HD hence why more non hardcore reviewers prefare it's handling and tuning/paint scheme gimmick's.

'Gameplay' is very different to a good handling model, I personally only hotlap and play online, I don't play against the AI unless it's to unlock cars.

God,


I swear some folks on this board have serious issues. They are satisfied with the most mediocre series ever. From GT1 til almost 5, it has almost always been about graphics. So, we've got the graphics, but where is the actual game?

This game seriously is a driving simulator, might as well take out all the "AI" cars and drive on an empty f*cking track -- they'll be able to free up more resources to improve the graphics even more.

This game is completely soul-less. Face it, you blind dingbats. Tired of GT from GT3, sheesh.

@Rodney

Indeed you belong, the only people who need to get out are the ones who have nothing to offer except "the series needs damage" and nothing else. That they can look at all the things that have stagnated in GT and still think smashing things up is more important shows the sigle-digit IQ shitwits you need to smack down if they get their cretinous foot-hold on the subject of Gran Turismo.

The handling on rally stages is awful; apart from wet tracks with clear blue skies there are no weather effects; you can do a 24 hour race with the sun nailed to the same spot in the sky for the entire duration; powerful rear wheel drive cars plow into bends with understeer (I mean WTF?); every single car comes magically fitted with ABS, traction control and electronic stability management, even 60's American muscle cars, features which didn't even appear until the early 90's and didn't become regular features on cars until the late 90's, and these devices turn everything into a crap cornering mess until you go to the settings menu and turn them off manually, which you have to do EVERY time you buy or win a car. This shit needs fixing.

But of course later commenters are correct that my objection to damage is purely down to my blind love of the game which blinds me to all its flaws, innit.

If damage could be implemented without downgrading the visuals, or causing even the slightest drop in frame rate, hooray for Polyphony. However, if I ever see the series take a wrong turn trying to please the people who don't like it, instead of improving it for the people who do, like the bloody awful pop-down, slow-down, bug ridden mess that was GT2, then I may have to go on a Jay & Silent Bob style world tour of internet cuntflaps who need a good beating.

I stayed away from this thread for long enough for the urge to commit murder to die down as it is.

SAH1977 - "I've played Forza1/2 and I don't think there's any doubt it's more arcadish than GT HD hence why more non hardcore reviewers prefare it's handling and tuning/paint scheme gimmick's."

Lawl, Forza more arcadish than GT? No, just simply no. We're talking handling here, not paint schemes, handling. GT needs an overhaul, it's not progressed for far too long, and pretty graphics are not enough to make a good game.

"susceptible as ever to the old ruse of braking late into a corner and banging off their inside to gain position and remain on-track at their expense."

"Oh great, nice to see that they've stuck with realism then"

I think you will find that it is a realistic expectaion of anyone let a lone AI to assuse that a fellow racer will not cars as barriers to stop them flying off at corners. This is simply down to people racing properly. It can be done in any game Inc Forza 2 - yes you have damage but it still works.