Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

WHY is the damage modeling so bad?

48 replies to this topic
AlasClarin
  • AlasClarin

    Mack Pimp

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2013
  • None

#31

Posted 19 September 2013 - 02:55 PM

 

 

 

 

Damage is sweet. Better than IV.

Are you kidding me? Are you trolling me? 
Nope. Something must be wrong with your game, because the damage is amazing in mine.
 
Now explain why the vehicle handling and deformation is better than GTA IV.
To you? Nah. You're like one of the single whiniest users on here.

 

Just proved your retardation.


MrA
  • MrA

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2013

#32

Posted 19 September 2013 - 02:57 PM

More modern, better crash tested cars? :p


Mukaparska
  • Mukaparska

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2013

#33

Posted 19 September 2013 - 03:42 PM

More modern, better crash tested cars? :p

:D


Thebull94
  • Thebull94

    Mack Pimp

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 16 Aug 2013

#34

Posted 19 September 2013 - 03:49 PM

One crash could completely ruin your car in IV. That would not be fun after buying a car and customizing it to have it be destroyed so easily. Plus it would make online horribly dull.

There is good damage in GTA V, I've had some really cool experiences with it, it just takes a little more than in IV.

This argument right here I never understand.

 

If you jump of a cliff in the game. You die. it was your own stupidity that got you wasted. SO if you crash your car / total it bad enough to not be able to drive. Then it is your own stupidity / lack of driving skill.

  • Mukaparska likes this

DeafMetal
  • DeafMetal

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2012

#35

Posted 19 September 2013 - 03:50 PM

The damage modeling? Are you blind? The damage modeling stomps IV by a long shot. The damage progression you can make an argument for. The cars seem like they have an invisible forcefield sometimes, but the actual damage looks f*cking nice.


Hristov1984
  • Hristov1984

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Oct 2011
  • Bulgaria

#36

Posted 19 September 2013 - 04:07 PM

...The damage progression you can make an argument for. The cars seem like they have an invisible forcefield sometimes...

 

I believe he means exactly this.


poncratias
  • poncratias

    a thread for threads

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2008

#37

Posted 19 September 2013 - 04:13 PM

 

 

 

It's realistic that side panels break off, scratches are more realistic, but if you have a head on collision with another car, your front barely gets bent, while in GTA IV it did. If you fell on your roof, it bent a lot, while in V, you can barely see it bend. 

 


this.

if you crash at 200mph into concrete pole, there is NOTHING. only small scratches.

takes away fun for me.


Piramic
  • Piramic

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Sep 2013

#38

Posted 19 September 2013 - 04:29 PM

I have to say I dont really underdstand the direction they went with car damage either. There is customization that makes your car more tough, I dont understand why they didint make the stock cars just like in IV and after you added roll cage and armor etc they would be tough like they are now. As it is there is no reason to upgrade the cars because they are already like tanks.

Also the response to the OP about trying to save CPU cycles is wrong because all the deformation and damage is still in there, its just less. That means the console still has to calculate all that stuff, its just dampened before its shown as damage...


hexagramme
  • hexagramme

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2012

#39

Posted 19 September 2013 - 04:56 PM

Damage is sweet. Better than IV.

He's right. Absolutely right in fact. This damage model fits GTA way better than IV's did. Much better for all that over the top action high speed chase stuff. Christ, I love this game... :lol:


Mukaparska
  • Mukaparska

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2013

#40

Posted 19 September 2013 - 05:19 PM

I have to say I dont really underdstand the direction they went with car damage either. There is customization that makes your car more tough, I dont understand why they didint make the stock cars just like in IV and after you added roll cage and armor etc they would be tough like they are now. As it is there is no reason to upgrade the cars because they are already like tanks.

Also the response to the OP about trying to save CPU cycles is wrong because all the deformation and damage is still in there, its just less. That means the console still has to calculate all that stuff, its just dampened before its shown as damage...

Yeah, I don't know about those, but at least the FPS is still higher than in IV. 


Mukaparska
  • Mukaparska

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2013

#41

Posted 19 September 2013 - 05:21 PM

 

 

 

 

It's realistic that side panels break off, scratches are more realistic, but if you have a head on collision with another car, your front barely gets bent, while in GTA IV it did. If you fell on your roof, it bent a lot, while in V, you can barely see it bend. 

 

this.

if you crash at 200mph into concrete pole, there is NOTHING. only small scratches.

takes away fun for me.

 

Also they could make you invincible so you wouldn't die and fail missions, because dying takes fun away from some people. 


ILOVELOUDPACKS
  • ILOVELOUDPACKS

    I'm your pusher

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2012

#42

Posted 19 September 2013 - 05:23 PM

i was just driving at high speeds and hit a car once and my car wouldn't move anymore because it was so f*cked up. how is that bad?


TJGM
  • TJGM

    GTA Mods Led-By

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2011
  • Ireland

#43

Posted 19 September 2013 - 05:35 PM

The 'damage modeling' is the EXACT f*cking same as it was in IV. The only difference now is it takes longer to happen. Sorry if you miss your car looking like it was just squashed after you hit a wall in IV at a pretty low speed.


Mukaparska
  • Mukaparska

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2013

#44

Posted 19 September 2013 - 05:46 PM

The 'damage modeling' is the EXACT f*cking same as it was in IV. The only difference now is it takes longer to happen. Sorry if you miss your car looking like it was just squashed after you hit a wall in IV at a pretty low speed.

 

Why you must crash your car to a wall? They could've taken damage completely off, so people who crash their car don't get upset.


Mukaparska
  • Mukaparska

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2013

#45

Posted 19 September 2013 - 05:48 PM

i was just driving at high speeds and hit a car once and my car wouldn't move anymore because it was so f*cked up. how is that bad?

Yeah, but the external damage is rather small. 


Mukaparska
  • Mukaparska

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2013

#46

Posted 20 September 2013 - 11:33 AM

Still with the new complaint topics?  Oh yeah, and, it's NOT!  This is after a few rolls and shunts.

http://rsg.ms/1fc5grW

Should I be impressed? In GTA IV that would look so much better and more realistic.


RoadRunner71
  • RoadRunner71

    Try to Run, Try to Hide

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Mar 2012
  • None

#47

Posted 20 September 2013 - 11:36 AM

Because they probably needed to cut some things so the current gen. consoles could support the whole game.


Mr Vice City
  • Mr Vice City

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2009

#48

Posted 20 September 2013 - 12:04 PM

I don't understand what everyone is complaining about. Vehicle damage and deformation is pretty dam good. Could it be better, yes, but then so could alot of things if they had the firepower the PS4/XB1 will be packing. Given the tech I think they've done a fine job.


Tashan
  • Tashan

    Li'l G Loc

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 22 Sep 2010

#49

Posted 20 September 2013 - 12:07 PM

probably because of the cpu and ram limitations

 

It is exactly!





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users