Why there aren't damage model how old sims?

Hi, i dont know if this is the right forum section.
I miss the damage model of old sims as Grand prix 4 geoff grammond's




Actually a big impact not is necessary a retirement of race, you not lost wheels or similar, only performance.

Why we can't get this in actual sims? I hope that a developer can answer me because I want know a real reason besides of community opinion. Its a BIG curiosity about actual race sims.

Thanks a lot!

 

It's because manufacturers don't like their cars getting smashed up in games because it affects people's perceptions of their safety.


[puts on nomex suit and runs away]

 

No. Lord Kunos himself--or perhaps it was Aris--has stated that is not true.

 

I would like to see more 'real' damage in game. If you crash into a wall at 150km/h its just to keep driving as it is now.

 

Adjust your sarcasm detector.

B2T:
Modeling the cars accurately is demanding. Modeling the cars when damaged "correctly" (whatever that means) and accurately is even more demanding.

To be honest, there are so many tasks and there seems to be so much on the todo list, I can understand that they don't rate that as being very important.

If you don't have the aspiration to accurately model the physics of the cars, then you can implement a "correct" damage model without too much effort.

As a side-note: I was involved in a crash of a 72D and a 312T (which thankfully was standing in the midlde of the road behind a corner behind a crest) and the damage to the suspension was so severe it was almost impossible to do right-handed corners and thus get back to the pits.
So at least for that sort of car, the damage model didn't seem to be that bad, at least regarding the physics.
Optics are a different story, of course.

 

I think that it's a big step behind to not take account of graphical crash damages in modern sim racing.
I remember even in the first Crammond G.P. you can split cars in two after an heavy crash!
In the next future they can try to incorporate a scaled down version of a 3rd party technology like the one from BeamNG Drive :



Really amazing!

 

Isnt beamng a game that is made to simulate crashed cars? If so, its not weird they do a good job with it.

 

People need to use /s tag.

Very hard to detect sarcasm through text.

 

IIRC, the approach that BeamNG uses is very similar to what Rigs'n'Rods does and for the latter it's actually included in the name.
The whole geometry and mesh is simulated as a net/mesh of points and springs that hold the respective properties for the materials.

So if you apply dedicated load onto them – thanks to modern computing power – you can accurately simulate how they would behave under the given load, including deformation.
While that is a very interesting approach, it's not yet the way to go for in a racing sim, since in reality the cars are very complex, especially if taking the surface (read: tarmac) etc. into account.

But I believe that at some (distant) point this approach is going to be the future.

 

The text in brackets was used instead of the /s tag

 

I don't see the point on diverting resources to this. When you crash heavily then your race is over, all Kunos need to simulate is a non working car. You can make the crash pretty but what does that add to the sim really?

Mechanical damage from wear or abuse, yeah include all that stuff. Extreme crash simulation is just a waste of time imo.

 

I think, (accurate) damage modelling like in BeamNG Drive is very CPU demanding.
AC already is very CPU demanding because the physics of each car on track are being calculated (as far as I know).
In my opinion it's all about compromises.
In favour of accurate driving physics (of each car on track) we have to lower our sights on more accurate damage modelling.

But: I'd like to see a visually more appealing damage model in AC. For example, I still like the damage modelling in Race Driver Grid or - as mentioned above - older F1 titles.

 

Im not demanding a accurate model or simple model, im curious why actual sims dont have lost of wheels at least when there are a big impact.
I remember for example the punctures in X-car a game of 1997, or dark smoke when motor burn. If old games have that, acurate or not, why actual race sims dev dont make it?

And yes, will be well that kunos make a little more realistic damage in wheels or tyres/tires, only with that its very inmersive, isn't necessary a beam NG acurate model .

Yes, that is the point.

 

it's a pitty modern so called simulators concentrate more on graphics and other cosmetics, while forgeting about the details of mechanical damages , car body damage and othe stuff we miss,Like engine overheating/damaging from heat, and their conrresponding options in the setup to deal with it, i remember playing all those sims from the 90's and early 00's, there was a lot of detail put into those things,, much more advanced weather systems, and specially ai worked much better, i remember playing those grand prix and indycar, nascar from papyrus games, where you could have brake , clutch, fuel pump, failures, the weather in indycar in 1995 already had wind simulated that affected your top speed and cornering. Pits had much more detail and inmersion with mechanics that really changed your tyres and operated a fuel pump, while the jacks raised your car,, or in grand prix, mechanic that pulled your car into the Box, yeah there were garages .
-Also diferent rules for each car types, aswell as far more advanced penalty systems, with drive thru, stop and go, etc.. pace car and formation laps, even recognise laps,.
Wish all those things we've lost in the last generation, were back.

 

To be fair though we have puncture, wings/lip damage impacting grip, suspension damage that mess up your day pretty badly, smashed window making it hard to see in tight racing and of course....engine gone, kaputt, bye bye and sayonara mister. Of course it would be cool to see parts flying (i would love that!). Kunos was cool enough to also add those physics objects on track (blocking closed roads etc like cones and those styro foam blockers). They messed me up real good at times when lying on the track after someone hit them and they landed on the track. Hit it and wheels turned and took me right into a wall.

 

I've seen wheels come off in AC. It's rare, but I've seen it.

 

Because stuff like that all just based on personal decision...there's no reality to a engine overheating function or a fuel pump failure function...it's just a number that a dev feels is reasonable (and in the case of a fuel pump failure, sometimes completely randomized); in reality it's just not that simple (nor is it that random: if you prepare correctly you aren't going to have many issues with your car - a simple random/time based function can't account for that).

 

This is like having a simulated toilet break for drivers, great for immersion but pointless for racing. Personally I do not care if the car looks broken, I care more about the broken mechanical parts of the car. A few times over the last few years I have had the pleasure of meeting wreckers and ne'er-do-wells on track and have been rather upset my car is undrivable from the damage incurred, not the idea of parts flying off in all directions. Yes pretty pixel pieces flashing past my helmet would be nice the first time, but I really would prefer the focus was on the damage to the mechanics than a pretty explosion of bits.

 

Yes, my question was more focused to functionality of lost a wheel or wing, or a puncture, not a visual deformation purely cosmetic/esthetic. In Grand prix 4 for example was very difficult return to boxes if you were losing a wheel. The crash had consequences, now you can continue runing more or less after of accident.

 

This will depend on the damage level set for the sever. If it is 100% and you have a right proper crash, bang, wallop then you can expect a much more difficult/impossible drive back to pits. I know as I have been there.