The PC Gaming and Hardware Technobabble Topic

[DGFone]

That video did look real, I'll give you that, LOD issues aside ( which don't really matter in this case anyways). Although it is just me who thinks that GT5 reall doesn't look all that impressive? The lighting on the cars might be, but everything else seems rather dull, and the world empyt.

But in order to paraphrase what you said: GT5 can handle these kinds of collisions rather well, but not harder crashes. As you just said: "The game will never let your car become a completely engineless dud".

From a simulation standpoint, there really shouldn't be any reason why the game won't do that. Sometimes even after what might appear to be a gentle crash, your engine's too busted up to move. Or you lose a wheel or two.

To use Richard Burns Ralley as an example, last time I tried, it was unplayable on Linux because randomly after some time, most terrain objects will stop being rendered. And in that game, you will and do lose your engine if you smash into a rock or a tree.

Might be personal bias, but if you are already considering yourself a sim, and you already realistically simulate minor damage, why not go finish the walk and simulate all possible damage that you can think of?

Damage or no damage, 80% of people will leave the lobby the first time they get spun around and realize they're at the back of the field.

I dunno about you, but I'll go down fighting. Plus I've read that GT5 doesn't penalize you for what would disqualify your butt in real life, so that always helps in getting back some time, no?

[Regulus]

^ penalties can be turned on or off. Also, that's a custom generated track, so that's why it looks rather dull.

But seriously, if it's that big of a deal that you can still go 20 mph after what would kill your car in real life, then make your own racing simulation. It's a very minor point, at best.

[DGFone]

^ penalties can be turned on or off. Also, that's a custom generated track, so that's why it looks rather dull.

But seriously, if it's that big of a deal that you can still go 20 mph after what would kill your car in real life, then make your own racing simulation. It's a very minor point, at best.

Richard Burns Rally and done.

There's a reason why it's considered the "hardest" of all hardcore rally sims.

[Regulus]

Harder doesn't necessarily mean more realistic. Driving is something most of us do everyday. It isn't hard. If I have no problem driving through traffic on a Sunday afternoon in real life, then I shouldn't struggle to maintain control of my car in a video game, either, given similar circumstances.

And, quite frankly, what's the difference between being last, several minutes behind every other car, and being unable to continue after crashing? Either way, you lost, and the race wasn't very good after the point when you screwed up.

---

Apparently, RBR was also released on the PS2 and Xbox as well, which proves my exact point. Most of the features that GT5 lacks are intentionally lacking, and not a result of insufficient hardware.

[DGFone]

Harder doesn't necessarily mean more realistic.

You do know that "hardcore" in simulator jargon means realistic, right? The phrase " it's considered the "hardest" of all hardcore rally sims" means that it's considered the most realistic of all rallying sims.

However, because reality is also hard (how many years are you in school preparing to live your own life, eh?), the most realistic sims also tend to have a nasty tenancy to be the hardest as well.

And, quite frankly, what's the difference between being last, several minutes behind every other car, and being unable to continue after crashing? Either way, you lost, and the race wasn't very good after the point when you screwed up.

There's still that awesome feeling of limping past the finish line. On the other hand, limping past it while knowing that you shouldn't be able to move quickly turns that feeling into a sour one.

Apparently, RBR was also released on the PS2 and Xbox as well, which proves my exact point. Most of the features that GT5 lacks are intentionally lacking, and not a result of insufficient hardware.

It was also released for the Gizmondo. You first have to consider the fact that the versions might no be identical. After all, look at the different version of The Lion King (and the numerous videos and sites comparing them), or for a more recent example: C&C 3, PC vs XBox 360.

Looking quickly at videos on YouTube, I can already see differences at least in the graphics. I somewhat suspect a simplified physics model as well. (Remember that 2005 was near the end of the original Xbox's and PS2's life cycle. By then PCs were much more powerful than either of these consoles.)

[Regulus]

You do know that "hardcore" in simulator jargon means realistic, right? The phrase " it's considered the "hardest" of all hardcore rally sims" means that it's considered the most realistic of all rallying sims.

However, because reality is also hard (how many years are you in school preparing to live your own life, eh?), the most realistic sims also tend to have a nasty tenancy to be the hardest as well.

Harder never directly means more realistic. When someone says a game is hard, that generally implies a few things:

• The player is intended to make several attempts before completing a task successfully (usually against all odds, requiring that one-in-a-million stroke of luck).
• The player is faced with a very steep learning curve (usually meaning game mechanics are not explained well, as they are introduced).
• The interface is hopelessly difficult to navigate (meaning the game was designed poorly).
• The game is unforgiving (meaning that if you screw up, you have to start all over).

What about that means 'more realistic?'

There's still that awesome feeling of limping past the finish line. On the other hand, limping past it while knowing that you shouldn't be able to move quickly turns that feeling into a sour one.

It doesn't work that way. All races automatically end 20 or 30 seconds after the leader wins. Nobody wants to sit around and wait for you to finish your laps in your banged-up car. It's pointless. Wrap it up and try again.

It was also released for the Gizmondo. You first have to consider the fact that the versions might no be identical. After all, look at the different version of The Lion King (and the numerous videos and sites comparing them), or for a more recent example: C&C 3, PC vs XBox 360.

Looking quickly at videos on YouTube, I can already see differences at least in the graphics. I somewhat suspect a simplified physics model as well. (Remember that 2005 was near the end of the original Xbox's and PS2's life cycle. By then PCs were much more powerful than either of these consoles.)

Graphics aside, multi-plat releases are almost always the same game. The version for the Gizmondo is an obvious exception, because it wasn't developed until a year later. That was a port, which is different.