The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
There was a report on the Upwire a while back stating that Gran Turismo 4 was 50% completed. As a massive fan of the GT series I’m delighted to hear this. As I’m sure that many of you’ll agree, a major thing missing so far in these games has been crash damage. Will we finally see this implemented in GT4?
I doubt it. Polyphony Digital has always argued that car damage cannot be implemented as the manufacturers disapprove of having their gleaming beauties smashed to pieces. Fair enough. However, we are on the verge of seeing a new game called The Getaway appearing on the market. It’s not a racing game in the strictest sense but it will see Jaguars, Fords, Rovers, TVRs, Peugeots and more, all in fully destructible 3D. Further more you’ll be performing all manners of crime in them! Now if this isn’t showing these cars in a bad light, then I don’t know what will.
The Getaway has also proved to be a fantastically expensive game to produce. This suggests that damageable-car licenses are available, just at a price. Maybe Polyphony Digital has been a touch economical with the truth?
It is possible that there are only certain manufacturers that will sell there car licenses and allow damage. Supposing the majority will allow this will crash damage find it’s way into GT4? I think that Sony learned a valuable lesson with GT Concept; each GT sequel needs to provide something substantial that is new. GT Concept failed to deliver this, it in fact delivered a lot less than GT3, and it consequently didn’t sell that well.
I suspect that Kazunori Yamauchi thinks that he has the key ingredient for GT4 already – online play. And maybe he’s right. But he has always prided himself on striving to create “The Ultimate Driving Simulator”. Online play will go a long way towards achieving this goal but I don’t think he will have truly succeeded until car damage is included in GT’s vast array of features.
With the evidence provided by games such as The Getaway and Project Gotham that manufacturers will let games feature damage to their cars if the price is right, I think that Polyphony Digital could implement crash damage if they really wanted to. It may require them loosing a few of the manufacturers, but it could be done. GT2 had an unbelievable amount of cars, and when GT3 had less, no one seemed to mind. I think that the case would be the same if a few more vehicles were lost in exchange for a feature such as crash damage.
I would imagine that pretty much every PS2 owning racing game fan will buy the next Gran Turismo instalment regardless of what it features. It’s reputation goes before it. Kazunori Yamauchi could release GT4 with crash damage, or he could release it without and pay a lot less in license fees. Either way, He’ll sell a copy to each and every racing nut in PS2 land. So from a business perspective it makes more sense to save money and not implement crash damage. But if he wants to create the ultimate racing sim, he really should include it! So what will Sony and Polyphony Digital do?
I doubt it. Polyphony Digital has always argued that car damage cannot be implemented as the manufacturers disapprove of having their gleaming beauties smashed to pieces. Fair enough. However, we are on the verge of seeing a new game called The Getaway appearing on the market. It’s not a racing game in the strictest sense but it will see Jaguars, Fords, Rovers, TVRs, Peugeots and more, all in fully destructible 3D. Further more you’ll be performing all manners of crime in them! Now if this isn’t showing these cars in a bad light, then I don’t know what will.
The Getaway has also proved to be a fantastically expensive game to produce. This suggests that damageable-car licenses are available, just at a price. Maybe Polyphony Digital has been a touch economical with the truth?
It is possible that there are only certain manufacturers that will sell there car licenses and allow damage. Supposing the majority will allow this will crash damage find it’s way into GT4? I think that Sony learned a valuable lesson with GT Concept; each GT sequel needs to provide something substantial that is new. GT Concept failed to deliver this, it in fact delivered a lot less than GT3, and it consequently didn’t sell that well.
I suspect that Kazunori Yamauchi thinks that he has the key ingredient for GT4 already – online play. And maybe he’s right. But he has always prided himself on striving to create “The Ultimate Driving Simulator”. Online play will go a long way towards achieving this goal but I don’t think he will have truly succeeded until car damage is included in GT’s vast array of features.
With the evidence provided by games such as The Getaway and Project Gotham that manufacturers will let games feature damage to their cars if the price is right, I think that Polyphony Digital could implement crash damage if they really wanted to. It may require them loosing a few of the manufacturers, but it could be done. GT2 had an unbelievable amount of cars, and when GT3 had less, no one seemed to mind. I think that the case would be the same if a few more vehicles were lost in exchange for a feature such as crash damage.
I would imagine that pretty much every PS2 owning racing game fan will buy the next Gran Turismo instalment regardless of what it features. It’s reputation goes before it. Kazunori Yamauchi could release GT4 with crash damage, or he could release it without and pay a lot less in license fees. Either way, He’ll sell a copy to each and every racing nut in PS2 land. So from a business perspective it makes more sense to save money and not implement crash damage. But if he wants to create the ultimate racing sim, he really should include it! So what will Sony and Polyphony Digital do?
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> The simple answer, of course, is to leave out the cars of
> those manufacturers whining about it. But those are probably
> the cars that most people want - TVR's, Porsches (or RUF
> in the case of GT), and all the 'hot' cars - and despite it
> being a great game, I'm sure GT wouldn't be as popular if
> those models were taken out.
This is probably true. However remember that the lead character in "The Getaway" drives a TVR cerbera. And also that Ferraris and Lamborghinis in Project Gotham had damage. I believe that GT doesn't use the top marques from a combination of reasons including cost and exclusive licenses that had already been given to other games (eg. Need for speed Porsche whatever...).
I think that with GT3 the appeal of driving a car that you might actually drive in real life went as Polyphony sacrificed a lot of the low end cars. Perhaps GT4 should look at concentrating on sports marques such as Pagani, RUF, TVR, and expand into makes like Ferrari and the like?
And I agree that If they get around to implementing crash damage, It'll no doubt be the best you've ever seen. That's why I hope that they implement it!
Flying Pig wrote:
>Seriously annoying if you've just raced 9 tough laps to slide
> into a wall, crumple your car and lose because you haven't got
> as much grip and control as your rivals. When a 10 race
> tournament can be decided on 1 result, this could made the game
> frustrating.
If you think about it, The learning curve would be the same as before, starting in slower cars and working your way up. So in early races your crashes would be slower. You'd gradually learn to drive to avoid crashing, as the faster your car got, the more and more serious your crashes would be, right up to horrific 200mph smashes that obliterate your Toyota GT One or FTO LM.
This sort of scenario would require a massive overhaul of the opponent AI though...
> The simple answer, of course, is to leave out the cars of
> those manufacturers whining about it. But those are probably
> the cars that most people want - TVR's, Porsches (or RUF
> in the case of GT), and all the 'hot' cars - and despite it
> being a great game, I'm sure GT wouldn't be as popular if
> those models were taken out.
This is probably true. However remember that the lead character in "The Getaway" drives a TVR cerbera. And also that Ferraris and Lamborghinis in Project Gotham had damage. I believe that GT doesn't use the top marques from a combination of reasons including cost and exclusive licenses that had already been given to other games (eg. Need for speed Porsche whatever...).
I think that with GT3 the appeal of driving a car that you might actually drive in real life went as Polyphony sacrificed a lot of the low end cars. Perhaps GT4 should look at concentrating on sports marques such as Pagani, RUF, TVR, and expand into makes like Ferrari and the like?
And I agree that If they get around to implementing crash damage, It'll no doubt be the best you've ever seen. That's why I hope that they implement it!
Flying Pig wrote:
>Seriously annoying if you've just raced 9 tough laps to slide
> into a wall, crumple your car and lose because you haven't got
> as much grip and control as your rivals. When a 10 race
> tournament can be decided on 1 result, this could made the game
> frustrating.
If you think about it, The learning curve would be the same as before, starting in slower cars and working your way up. So in early races your crashes would be slower. You'd gradually learn to drive to avoid crashing, as the faster your car got, the more and more serious your crashes would be, right up to horrific 200mph smashes that obliterate your Toyota GT One or FTO LM.
This sort of scenario would require a massive overhaul of the opponent AI though...
The other issue with damage is how it affects the performance of the cars.
GT can be pretty unforgiving in terms of braking late etc - how many times have you lost concentration for a second and slammed into a wall - I know I have.
At one end we would have it that cosmetic damage makes not difference to the cars performance - downforce isn't affected. But big slams damage steering, engine performance and gears etc.
This is the most popular one (TOCA, V-Rally etc), and its certainly better than nothing at all! But the when you have to pit to repair the damage, you'll lose so much time that you'll never recover to win.
If they go for the all out sim route, which is more akin to GT anyway, even slight dings and dents can seriously affect the handling of the car; ripping off the front air intake will practically eliminate the front downforce of the car making braking and steering difficult/ impossible.
Seriously annoying if you've just raced 9 tough laps to slide into a wall, crumple your car and lose because you haven't got as much grip and control as your rivals. When a 10 race tournament can be decided on 1 result, this could made the game frustrating.
I think that collision damage in GT would be fantastic and would be happy to have a reduced number of manufacturers in exchange for this, but my point is that PolyPhony have to be extremely careful how it's implemented or risk damaging (sorry) a bench mark game that is still to be bettered.
On the other hand, adding collision damage could make you more careful, more afraid of braking to late - ever striving to get closer to that 'Perfect Lap' without over cooking it.
Isn't that what makes GT great?
GT can be pretty unforgiving in terms of braking late etc - how many times have you lost concentration for a second and slammed into a wall - I know I have.
At one end we would have it that cosmetic damage makes not difference to the cars performance - downforce isn't affected. But big slams damage steering, engine performance and gears etc.
This is the most popular one (TOCA, V-Rally etc), and its certainly better than nothing at all! But the when you have to pit to repair the damage, you'll lose so much time that you'll never recover to win.
If they go for the all out sim route, which is more akin to GT anyway, even slight dings and dents can seriously affect the handling of the car; ripping off the front air intake will practically eliminate the front downforce of the car making braking and steering difficult/ impossible.
Seriously annoying if you've just raced 9 tough laps to slide into a wall, crumple your car and lose because you haven't got as much grip and control as your rivals. When a 10 race tournament can be decided on 1 result, this could made the game frustrating.
I think that collision damage in GT would be fantastic and would be happy to have a reduced number of manufacturers in exchange for this, but my point is that PolyPhony have to be extremely careful how it's implemented or risk damaging (sorry) a bench mark game that is still to be bettered.
On the other hand, adding collision damage could make you more careful, more afraid of braking to late - ever striving to get closer to that 'Perfect Lap' without over cooking it.
Isn't that what makes GT great?
Most of the manufacturers refusing to let their cars be smashed up were European - the American and Japanese manufacturers don't have a problem with it.
And the problem is, if you can't damage one brand, you can't damage any brand.
It may interest you to know that I've played a demo of Sega's *ahem* "answer" to Gran Turismo - Sega GT 2002 on Xbox - and there's no damage in that either, so it seems they've had the same problem.
The simple answer, of course, is to leave out the cars of those manufacturers whining about it. But those are probably the cars that most people want - TVR's, Porsches (or RUF in the case of GT), and all the 'hot' cars - and despite it being a great game, I'm sure GT wouldn't be as popular if those models were taken out.
Knowing how much Yamauchi loves cars, and how keen he is to produce the best racing game possible, I'm sure he'll put damage in as soon as he can. And I'm also sure that, given the quality of the GT titles, it'll be the best darn damage model you've ever seen... if he gets the chance.
And the problem is, if you can't damage one brand, you can't damage any brand.
It may interest you to know that I've played a demo of Sega's *ahem* "answer" to Gran Turismo - Sega GT 2002 on Xbox - and there's no damage in that either, so it seems they've had the same problem.
The simple answer, of course, is to leave out the cars of those manufacturers whining about it. But those are probably the cars that most people want - TVR's, Porsches (or RUF in the case of GT), and all the 'hot' cars - and despite it being a great game, I'm sure GT wouldn't be as popular if those models were taken out.
Knowing how much Yamauchi loves cars, and how keen he is to produce the best racing game possible, I'm sure he'll put damage in as soon as he can. And I'm also sure that, given the quality of the GT titles, it'll be the best darn damage model you've ever seen... if he gets the chance.
Interesting thing about Volvo is that I've been smashing up their saloons for years in the TOCA series, so Gran Turismo don't really have a leg to stand on; they simply must implement crash damage, better opponent AI, faster tracks (narrow ones would be good instead of driving along airport runways for most of the race, you might get an impression of speed that way) and it would be nice if they made the Golds a bit easier to get on the licence tests...but that's just me...
ssxpro wrote:
> GT needed loads of
> Japanese allowance, which was either never going to happen, or
> ridiculously expensive.
I seem to remember reading something saying that a some of the Japanese manufacturers such as Toyota were bending over backwards to help with GT3 developement.
I guess that that probably didn't mean all of them though.
I also remember reading that some manufacturers (eg. Volvo) refused to have anything to do with GT, let alone crash damage.
Hmmmm.
> GT needed loads of
> Japanese allowance, which was either never going to happen, or
> ridiculously expensive.
I seem to remember reading something saying that a some of the Japanese manufacturers such as Toyota were bending over backwards to help with GT3 developement.
I guess that that probably didn't mean all of them though.
I also remember reading that some manufacturers (eg. Volvo) refused to have anything to do with GT, let alone crash damage.
Hmmmm.
I seem to remember it being only certain car manufacturers that had a problem with car damage. Where The Getaway might only need a handful of licences, most of which are European cars, GT needed loads of Japanese allowance, which was either never going to happen, or ridiculously expensive.
There was a report on the Upwire a while back stating that Gran Turismo 4 was 50% completed. As a massive fan of the GT series I’m delighted to hear this. As I’m sure that many of you’ll agree, a major thing missing so far in these games has been crash damage. Will we finally see this implemented in GT4?
I doubt it. Polyphony Digital has always argued that car damage cannot be implemented as the manufacturers disapprove of having their gleaming beauties smashed to pieces. Fair enough. However, we are on the verge of seeing a new game called The Getaway appearing on the market. It’s not a racing game in the strictest sense but it will see Jaguars, Fords, Rovers, TVRs, Peugeots and more, all in fully destructible 3D. Further more you’ll be performing all manners of crime in them! Now if this isn’t showing these cars in a bad light, then I don’t know what will.
The Getaway has also proved to be a fantastically expensive game to produce. This suggests that damageable-car licenses are available, just at a price. Maybe Polyphony Digital has been a touch economical with the truth?
It is possible that there are only certain manufacturers that will sell there car licenses and allow damage. Supposing the majority will allow this will crash damage find it’s way into GT4? I think that Sony learned a valuable lesson with GT Concept; each GT sequel needs to provide something substantial that is new. GT Concept failed to deliver this, it in fact delivered a lot less than GT3, and it consequently didn’t sell that well.
I suspect that Kazunori Yamauchi thinks that he has the key ingredient for GT4 already – online play. And maybe he’s right. But he has always prided himself on striving to create “The Ultimate Driving Simulator”. Online play will go a long way towards achieving this goal but I don’t think he will have truly succeeded until car damage is included in GT’s vast array of features.
With the evidence provided by games such as The Getaway and Project Gotham that manufacturers will let games feature damage to their cars if the price is right, I think that Polyphony Digital could implement crash damage if they really wanted to. It may require them loosing a few of the manufacturers, but it could be done. GT2 had an unbelievable amount of cars, and when GT3 had less, no one seemed to mind. I think that the case would be the same if a few more vehicles were lost in exchange for a feature such as crash damage.
I would imagine that pretty much every PS2 owning racing game fan will buy the next Gran Turismo instalment regardless of what it features. It’s reputation goes before it. Kazunori Yamauchi could release GT4 with crash damage, or he could release it without and pay a lot less in license fees. Either way, He’ll sell a copy to each and every racing nut in PS2 land. So from a business perspective it makes more sense to save money and not implement crash damage. But if he wants to create the ultimate racing sim, he really should include it! So what will Sony and Polyphony Digital do?
I doubt it. Polyphony Digital has always argued that car damage cannot be implemented as the manufacturers disapprove of having their gleaming beauties smashed to pieces. Fair enough. However, we are on the verge of seeing a new game called The Getaway appearing on the market. It’s not a racing game in the strictest sense but it will see Jaguars, Fords, Rovers, TVRs, Peugeots and more, all in fully destructible 3D. Further more you’ll be performing all manners of crime in them! Now if this isn’t showing these cars in a bad light, then I don’t know what will.
The Getaway has also proved to be a fantastically expensive game to produce. This suggests that damageable-car licenses are available, just at a price. Maybe Polyphony Digital has been a touch economical with the truth?
It is possible that there are only certain manufacturers that will sell there car licenses and allow damage. Supposing the majority will allow this will crash damage find it’s way into GT4? I think that Sony learned a valuable lesson with GT Concept; each GT sequel needs to provide something substantial that is new. GT Concept failed to deliver this, it in fact delivered a lot less than GT3, and it consequently didn’t sell that well.
I suspect that Kazunori Yamauchi thinks that he has the key ingredient for GT4 already – online play. And maybe he’s right. But he has always prided himself on striving to create “The Ultimate Driving Simulator”. Online play will go a long way towards achieving this goal but I don’t think he will have truly succeeded until car damage is included in GT’s vast array of features.
With the evidence provided by games such as The Getaway and Project Gotham that manufacturers will let games feature damage to their cars if the price is right, I think that Polyphony Digital could implement crash damage if they really wanted to. It may require them loosing a few of the manufacturers, but it could be done. GT2 had an unbelievable amount of cars, and when GT3 had less, no one seemed to mind. I think that the case would be the same if a few more vehicles were lost in exchange for a feature such as crash damage.
I would imagine that pretty much every PS2 owning racing game fan will buy the next Gran Turismo instalment regardless of what it features. It’s reputation goes before it. Kazunori Yamauchi could release GT4 with crash damage, or he could release it without and pay a lot less in license fees. Either way, He’ll sell a copy to each and every racing nut in PS2 land. So from a business perspective it makes more sense to save money and not implement crash damage. But if he wants to create the ultimate racing sim, he really should include it! So what will Sony and Polyphony Digital do?