This. Don't give a fuck about licenced cars. Give me car classes and realistic damage every time. You wanna spin your plastic steering wheel around and pretend you are driving a car then buy a sim racer.
So you had me right up until you started talking smack about racing wheels. Many of the best arcade racers come from the arcades where climbing into the driver's seat and taking hold of the wheel is a major component of what makes that game what it is. The N64 version of Rush is fine but nothing beats playing that game in the arcade.
Prior to this tread existing I wouldn't have even thought it to be a question. In a racing game (other than kart, or similar arcade style races), licensed cars are crucial (to me) - I feel it helps to create a connection with the game, and provides context on differences between the various cars. I couldn't care less about damage models. In fact, I wouldn't have even considered it to be a major factor in a game. .
Also, the whole "licensed cars can't show damage" thing has been relaxed a lot in the past 10+ years. The cars in Forza Horizon 3 for instance can get pretty banged up, not to the extent that you see in BeamNG or Burnout, but it's nothing like back in the day when games like Gran Turismo 3 had zero damage modeling.
Also, the whole "licensed cars can't show damage" thing has been relaxed a lot in the past 10+ years. The cars in Forza Horizon 3 for instance can get pretty banged up, not to the extent that you see in BeamNG or Burnout, but it's nothing like back in the day when games like Gran Turismo 3 had zero damage modeling.
I think I prefer the "realistic" damage models in arcade racers.
The slow-mo crashes in Burnout 3 were pretty phenomenal: you got an insane-looking crash and then you were back on the road in seconds, arcade-style.
In sim-racers a crash should put you out of the running, so, strangely, I don't care much what those look like. It pretty much means game over no matter what.
As others have said, it depends on the type of racer. Something like Forza Horizon would lose far more from not having the licensed care, than it would (or does) for the limited damage that can be applied to them. But then, Forza Horizon isn't really what I'd call an arcade racers, so...
Whereas, in something like Burnout or Destruction Derby, sacrificing damage in favour of licensed cars would be a stupid decision, whilst in games like Daytona USA, Ridge Racer or Outrun any form of damage at all is completely unimportant. With that said though , even in those cases (Daytona USA, Outrun, Sega Rally) whilst I like the use of licenses, I'm not convinced that they're worth the deathclock that licensing places on them. I'd just as happily play Sega Racing Classic instead if it'll prevent the game from disappearing forever. There are so many classic Sega arcade racers (like Scud Race) that are essentially gone forever as the licensing effectively rules out future ports.
Burnout and Destruction Derby both suck tho, so overall I'd vote licenses in a world where licensing itself weren't an issue. Motorstorm is the only racer I can think of that I give a shit about, where damage trumps licensed vehicles.
haven't played the sequels, but what bothered me in horizon 1 was that, unlike the mainline forzas, you couldn't damage anything. in forza 3, the aesthetic damage was pretty basic, but you could destroy not only different parts of your body, but your engine, suspension for various wheels - and if you shifted without using the clutch, you could mess up your transmission. it's what stopped me from playing- i could just bang into the walls and other cars with no consequence.
plus, as those burnout gifs demonstrate, good damage physics are so damned satisfying.
short answer for me is damage, but i wish they didn't have to be mutually exclusive.
The sequels have damage modelling similar to the Motorsport games. I always set it to cosmetic damage only though, because I find turning your car into a shambling wreck 11km from your destination to not be the most fun experience.
This soft body Beam physics engine is something that has been in perpetual development since the early 2000's. It started development with Rigs of Rods which was initially released in 2005 but went retail with Beam.NG in 2013. By far the most refined vehicle damage physics model available for a games engine at this point.
Personally I would prefer real world cars with realistic damage physics, but I am OK with fictional cars with realistic physics as well. But it really depends on the type of game being developed. I love the fictional car designs in older arcade styled racers like Ridge Racer Type 4...
Even though these vehicles did not have realistic damage models.
I'm a sucker for good damage and destruction in my racers (Destruction Derby 2 and the Burnout series are some of my all time favourite games) but it depends on the game for me.
I like Forza Horizon because of the licensed cars. In fact I turn the damage off all together in that game as I like the clean look.
I have never liked Ridge Racer.
I get my damage fix from BeamNG Drive & Next Car Game (Wreckfest).
In general? I'd take damage modeling over licensed cars in an arcade racer. At least you can develop some kind of gameplay mechanic around the former whereas the latter basically just introduces an expiration date.
Driving knockoff cars is less satisfying than driving real cars with a limited damage model. Ideally we would have both, but realistically each has it's place depending on what the game is going for.
For me, the primary factor of an arcade racer is the control, followed by the sense of speed. Licensed vehicles and damage models are really really nice to have, but aren't essential to a good arcade racing experience.
Burnout is a legendary arcade racer because its unrivaled sense of speed and tight control tied in extremely well with the crashing, or rather the idea of driving dangerously without crashing. This created a pure arcade "easy to play hard to master" experience that few other racers have today.
I do personally prefer damage models over licensed cars. Destruction is fun.
There are two things I wish to see in the future.
1. Licensed cars with Burnout damage modeling. Never gonna happen, but it'd be hilarious and awesome.
2. A new arcade racer that uses crashes as a skilled gameplay mechanic instead of as a penalty. Burnout's Aftertouch is nice, but a game that allowed you to actually create traffic pileups behind you would be amazing.
Arcade physics model + licensed cars (with solid underlying gameplay, of course) is my highest preference.
Forza Horizon is my favorite racing series nowadays.
I liked Burnout back in the day, too, and wouldn't mind seeing it make a comeback. The damage in that game was indeed fun, but I'd still rather play with a lean of emphasis on cleaner racing and highly exaggerated proper driving techniques than with an emphasis on combative crashing.
We need a modern RUSH game... And it needs the stunt arena...
Few things in this life are as satisfying as finally getting you generic version vw bug to do cartwheels half way across the map and land it without blowing up.
We need a modern RUSH game... And it needs the stunt arena...
Few things in this life are as satisfying as finally getting you generic version vw bug to do cartwheels half way across the map and land it without blowing up.
Pretty sure Warner Bros. Interactive owns the Rush franchise now, along with Hydro Thunder too. I honestly would love to see a brand new installment of both games.
I'm all for more fictional cars and fictional tracks; regardless of damage or no damage model.
The racing market is probably too small to support it, but I'm tired of real life cars in every title. It's like seeing the same characters over and over again, and I love, love, love cars.
How fictional are they really? They're probably based on something real (I'm not a car guy so i wouldn't know what exactly). Those car designs were always cool, but a lot of their charm is in the livery, which you could really slap on anything. That's where Ridge and Daytona cars get most of their personality from. It seems these days that it'd just be easier and safer (but maybe not cheaper?) to use licensed models. It's not like a futuristic racer, which can have designs not bound by reality - so how much different to real life cars can they make them look, really? What if the Ridge Racer cars were designed by an actual car manufacturer for the game only - is that then licensed or fictional?
I don't really know half of half the cars in a licensed game anyway, so they may as well be fictional to me. Driveclub has a stack of cars that wouldn't look out of place in Ridge Racer. In essence, the stats and feel of a car is what matters to the gameplay, and that can be applied to any car model - so people shouldn't care about licences at all. But they do - they simply like driving "real" cars even if they have no idea whether the feel matches the real car at all. The licenses help with the illusion of realism, and with the majority of racers favoring realistic gameplay, that makes the most sense. 2 otherwise identical realistic racing games, one with licenses, one without - the without is going to look cheaper to a lot of people (a bit like Fifa/PES) - the cars would feel like knock offs.
In true arcade racers, where the gameplay isn't very realistic, the game needn't have an association with real cars. It might even be to it's detriment really - when people see a highly accurate licensed car, they don't expect it to behave like a car in Ridge Racer. In a sense, that would be breaking Ridge Racer's unrealistic illusion! I've seen several reviews of Ridge Racer that say "the cars don't handle like any real car would" - as if it's a fault... when it's obviously the intent. Perhaps that was the result of the cars looking too realistic
and the person being stupid
With that, my preference would be for fictional cars, but i'd take a new Ridge Racer where you drove around in a cardboard box over nothing!
How fictional are they really? They're probably based on something real (I'm not a car guy so i wouldn't know what exactly). Those car designs were always cool, but a lot of their charm is in the livery, which you could really slap on anything. That's where Ridge and Daytona cars get most of their personality from. It seems these days that it'd just be easier and safer (but maybe not cheaper?) to use licensed models. It's not like a futuristic racer, which can have designs not bound by reality - so how much different to real life cars can they make them look, really? What if the Ridge Racer cars were designed by an actual car manufacturer for the game only - is that then licensed or fictional?
The Ridge Racer car designs are generally not minor alterations on real world vehicles. The majority of them are original Namco creations that mix and mash up multiple car designs together to create some visually interesting vehicles. Some of there designs were pretty out there too...
The Ridge Racer car designs are generally not minor alterations on real world vehicles. The majority of them are original Namco creations that mix and mash up multiple car designs together to create some visually interesting vehicles. Some of there designs were pretty out there too...
Whilst that's definitely true for some Ridge Racer cars (only a handful per game I'd argue), most of the others do typically resemble real road cars, with a few moderations. It really is the liveries that make the cars in games like Ridge Racer and Daytona USA stand out.
For example, here are some cars in Forza Motorsport skinned to resemble cars from Type 4:
A new Ridge Racer game wouldn't really lose much (if anything) from using licensed cars skinned to the classic teams. It wouldn't really gain anything either however.
A bit off topic but my dream racing game is non-licensed cars were we can build our own cars and i mean everything from the engine block to the headlights design to the chassis and wheel base
Whilst that's definitely true for some Ridge Racer cars (only a handful per game I'd argue), most of the others do typically resemble real road cars, with a few moderations. It really is the liveries that make the cars in games like Ridge Racer and Daytona USA stand out.
For example, here are some cars in Forza Motorsport skinned to resemble cars from Type 4:
A new Ridge Racer game wouldn't really lose much (if anything) from using licensed cars skinned to the classic teams. It wouldn't really gain anything either however.
Ridge Racer needs it's own fantasy brands, a lot of them are reoccurring throughout the series and the crazy designs are fun. It's much better for series like this to be free of license issues too, they can basically re-release the game many years from now without hassle.
How fictional are they really? They're probably based on something real (I'm not a car guy so i wouldn't know what exactly). Those car designs were always cool, but a lot of their charm is in the livery, which you could really slap on anything. That's where Ridge and Daytona cars get most of their personality from. It seems these days that it'd just be easier and safer (but maybe not cheaper?) to use licensed models. It's not like a futuristic racer, which can have designs not bound by reality - so how much different to real life cars can they make them look, really? What if the Ridge Racer cars were designed by an actual car manufacturer for the game only - is that then licensed or fictional?
I don't really know half of half the cars in a licensed game anyway, so they may as well be fictional to me. Driveclub has a stack of cars that wouldn't look out of place in Ridge Racer. In essence, the stats and feel of a car is what matters to the gameplay, and that can be applied to any car model - so people shouldn't care about licences at all. But they do - they simply like driving "real" cars even if they have no idea whether the feel matches the real car at all. The licenses help with the illusion of realism, and with the majority of racers favoring realistic gameplay, that makes the most sense. 2 otherwise identical realistic racing games, one with licenses, one without - the without is going to look cheaper to a lot of people (a bit like Fifa/PES) - the cars would feel like knock offs.
In true arcade racers, where the gameplay isn't very realistic, the game needn't have an association with real cars. It might even be to it's detriment really - when people see a highly accurate licensed car, they don't expect it to behave like a car in Ridge Racer. In a sense, that would be breaking Ridge Racer's unrealistic illusion! I've seen several reviews of Ridge Racer that say "the cars don't handle like any real car would" - as if it's a fault... when it's obviously the intent. Perhaps that was the result of the cars looking too realistic
and the person being stupid
With that, my preference would be for fictional cars, but i'd take a new Ridge Racer where you drove around in a cardboard box over nothing!
I really miss racing games that have a completely unique and wild roster of cars, like Ridge Racer or Burnout. All the modern racing games have licenced cars which makes the line-up predictable and boring. Come on, one of the best things about games is a detachment from reality.
This is EXACTLY how I feel. I do not care about car licensing at all. Nothing wrong with having licensed cars, but I really miss the unpredictable, imaginative cars and tracks from older racing games like Daytona 2, F-Zero and Ridge Racer. Another dead genre unfortunately.
It depends on the game, but anything which wants to do great crashes should forgo licensed road cars. Nothing annoys me more about the recent Need for Speed games than the fact the crashes, based on the same tech as those in Burnout Paradise, look half as good as they did many, many years before.
