Support NeoGAF

[Lukas]

If you guys wanna see some awesome cars play Rallisport 2.

The cars look very realistic and have awesome reflections and lighting effects. Its simply beautiful in motion, GT4 nor Forza or PGR2 have anything on the car models in RSC2, let alone the environments.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

See this doesn't make any sense. Why would you make the game play realistic if you don't want it to look realistic. You really think that this team doesn't want the game to look realistic?

Makes sense to me. I can't see how it's wrong. It's a decision made on the part of the team, perhaps. Who cares. Video games don't have to look real if they're shooting for realistic gameplay elements. Obviously, no game is going to be completely real. So why should the look be completely real? Why is it a requirement of doing its own thing in its own way? So, it's no GT. Only GT is GT. FM is trying to be FM -- something in the same genre, but distinct and individual. Why would someone want to make a game completely like another (in one aspect) when they can be their own game?

 

[bob_arctor]

If you guys wanna see some awesome cars play Rallisport 2.

The cars look very realistic and have awesome reflections and lighting effects. Its simply beautiful in motion, GT4 nor Forza or PGR2 have anything on the car models in RSC2, let alone the environments.

No, let's leave RSC2 out of this conversation. It's much too great to be dragged into these type of pedestrian, copy/paste GA arguments. Instead, let us all just bow our heads in reverence. Ah, that's better.

 

[SolidSnakex]

"So why should the look be completely real?"

Why would you want it to play so realistically then? If you don't want it to look realistically obviously you shouldn't care about it playing realistically either.

" Why would someone want to make a game completely like another (in one aspect) when they can be their own game?"

Even with the way they're doing now it still looks like other games like Sega GT and Apex so they arne't doing anything unique. This looks more like alot of games that try to look realistic but just don't. It doesn't look like a design decision.

 

[Gattsu25]

Yeah. Not everyone wants to replicate reality in all ways. Why would we be playing video games if that were the case?

in the case of racing sims, to drive as cars we would never normally drive and race on tracks we would never normally touch...all the while, simulating exactly what it looks and feels like?

 

[DarienA]

The corvette in the video looks MUCH better than these screenshots... some really nice reflective work going on.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

"So why should the look be completely real?"

Why would you want it to play so realistically then? If you don't want it to look realistically obviously you shouldn't care about it playing realistically either.

" Why would someone want to make a game completely like another (in one aspect) when they can be their own game?"

Even with the way they're doing now it still looks like other games like Sega GT and Apex so they arne't doing anything unique. This looks more like alot of games that try to look realistic but just don't. It doesn't look like a design decision.

That doesn't make a damn bit of sense to me, man. Does Hot Shots Golf have to look realistic because it's doing a fairly realistic game of golf? My point is, realistic gameplay and realistic visuals don't have to go hand in hand. FM is plenty real-looking...but it's just not as real-looking as GT. Does that mean it is lesser, somehow? I suppose, for some it would mean it's a lesser title by default, then. If it controls, moves, and behaves realistically, then that is the most important part in a sim-style game. The real look shouldn't be a requirement, IMO.

 

[mashoutposse]

Yeah. Not everyone wants to replicate reality in all ways. Why would we be playing video games if that were the case?

I don't have access to 500 different cars.

I don't have the time or resources to fly around the world to different race tracks.

I don't want to thrash my own personal car.

I don't want to kill innocent people trying to get home from work.

I want to keep my driver's license.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

I don't have access to 500 different cars.

I don't have the time or resources to fly around the world to different race tracks.

I don't want to thrash my own personal car.

I don't want to kill innocent people trying to get home from work.

I want to keep my driver's license.

Sure, but does the real look actually have anything to do with what you've just typed? What if it looked just like FM, but was exactly like GT4 in options and gameplay?

 

[SolidSnakex]

"That doesn't make a damn bit of sense to me, man. Does Hot Shots Golf have to look realistic because it's doing a fairly realistic game of golf?"

HSG has always been kind of like a sim and king of like a arcade game in terms of gameplay. It's nothing like Forza where it's striving to be completely realistic. So that's a bad comparison. Can you think of a game that's trying to be completely realistic in terms of gameplay, but not trying to be completely realistic in terms of visuals?

"FM is plenty real-looking...but it's just not as real-looking as GT. Does that mean it is lesser, somehow? "

So you're admitting that it's trying to look realistic? That's the entire point while it's trying to look realistic, it just doesn't. There's nothing wrong with that as very few racers that are trying to look realistic actually do come out with that look. It's what seperates the top graphic artists in the industry from everyone else. Not everyone can achieve that look.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

"That doesn't make a damn bit of sense to me, man. Does Hot Shots Golf have to look realistic because it's doing a fairly realistic game of golf?"

HSG has always been kind of like a sim and king of like a arcade game in terms of gameplay. It's nothing like Forza where it's striving to be completely realistic. So that's a bad comparison. Can you think of a game that's trying to be completely realistic in terms of gameplay, but not trying to be completely realistic in terms of visuals?

"FM is plenty real-looking...but it's just not as real-looking as GT. Does that mean it is lesser, somehow? "

So you're admitting that it's trying to look realistic? That's the entire point while it's trying to look realistic, it just doesn't. There's nothing wrong with that as very few racers that are trying to look realistic actually do come out with that look. It's what seperates the top graphic artists in the industry from everyone else. Not everyone can achieve that look.

I'm not admitting anything...it's not my game. From my observation, it's trying to look fairly real-looking, yes. Are they shooting for GT4 real looking? I don't know, do you?

 

[mashoutposse]

That doesn't make a damn bit of sense to me, man. Does Hot Shots Golf have to look realistic because it's doing a fairly realistic game of golf? My point is, realistic gameplay and realistic visuals don't have to go hand in hand. FM is plenty real-looking...but it's just not as real-looking as GT. Does that mean it is lesser, somehow? I suppose, for some it would mean it's a lesser title by default, then. If it controls, moves, and behaves realistically, then that is the most important part in a sim-style game. The real look shouldn't be a requirement, IMO.

It is ridiculous to defend the game by going as far as to suggest that the Forza developers aren't trying to replicate reality graphics-wise.

The cold, calculating attention to detail of the PD team in the development of ALL aspects of the game is what makes GT the gold standard. GT is a game obviously created by true, die-hard car fans that obsess over the smallest of details. That's the group that I want making a car simulation game.

GT was started by a group of guys with an insane love of cars. MS has been looking to crack the GT formula, hence PGR and now Forza. In-game, the difference is clear, IMO.

 

[mashoutposse]

Sure, but does the real look actually have anything to do with what you've just typed? What if it looked just like FM, but was exactly like GT4 in options and gameplay?

That would be acceptable, but why would I go for this option when there's a game out there with both the realistic feel AND look?

 

[SolidSnakex]

"Are they shooting for GT4 real looking? I don't know, do you?"

In interviews they say they're trying to make the most realistic sim ever. If you're going for this then you're going for making it not only play realistic but look realistic also.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

That would be acceptable, but why would I go for this option when there's a game out there with both the realistic feel AND look?

That's cool and understandable. Thing is, FM is doing racing sim in a different way, that much is obvious from the comprehensive tuning, engine building, detailing, car damage, customization yadda yadda yadda... It's not GT, and as such, will offer many things that GT doesn't...as GT will offer things that FM doesn't. They're both aiming as a similar experience, but with different ways of going about it.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

"Are they shooting for GT4 real looking? I don't know, do you?"

In interviews they say they're trying to make the most realistic sim ever. If you're going for this then you're going for making it not only play realistic but look realistic also.

OK, if this game offers all the things the team is saying it will, even if it looks as it does now, compared to GT4, does that mean its not the most realistic sim ever compared to GT4? I mean, all of the gameplay options and elements stated to be in the game sound far more realistic than what I know of GT4.

 

[bob_arctor]

The cold, calculating attention to detail of the PD team in the development of ALL aspects of the game is what makes GT the gold standard. GT is a game obviously created by true, die-hard car fans that obsess over the smallest of details. That's the group that I want making a car simulation game.

GT was started by a group of guys with an insane love of cars. MS has been looking to crack the GT formula, hence PGR and now Forza. In-game, the difference is clear, IMO.

I don't think PGR is in any way an attempt to "pull a GT". They aren't even remotely close, game-play wise. Really, the biggest beef anyone has w/ the game is the framerate. Otherwise, it's apples/oranges. Forza is of the same ilk and should be compared directly but it seems to be doing a lot of innovative things that should pique the interest of any sim fan.

That's the group that I want making a car simulation game.

They're not babysitting your kids, man! There's room for everyone as long as it's well done.

 

[SolidSnakex]

It might be the most realistic playing but not looking. It's very obvious that they want GT's fanbase so going for anything other than a realistic look makes no sense considering GT's fanbase is spoiled on a certain look.

"I don't think PGR is in any way an attempt to "pull a GT". "

PGR wasn't trying to be like GT that's for sure. But MS did say before PGR2's release that their goal was to make that series their "GT" (in terms of sales). That obviously didn't work.

 

[mashoutposse]

They're not babysitting your kids, man! There's room for everyone as long as it's well done.

Maybe I should say that I'm much more likely to devote the majority of my playtime to a game made by such people.

 

[bob_arctor]

Maybe I should say that I'm much more likely to devote the majority of my playtime to a game made by such people.

Well, sure, they've earned trust, obviously. But that doesn't mean Polyphony always had that trust. They too were once "noobs", just like the Forza team.

 

[Blazing Sword]

Wow. Bitch however much you like about how the cars are done, the draw distance in those videos is fucking insane.

It's sad that, even now, we can't have a FM thread without people going to great lengths to derail it. The game looks wonderful at this point, with the various pros and cons that come with being in development. What amazes me is how half of you sit there and plainly call the graphics "shit." Folks, you'd be lucky if 1/10 of the games coming out had so much time and skill put into the visuals. Give it a rest. Can 1 new racing sim come out without making you feel threatened? Are you scared it's going to draw attention away from GT4 or something (~_^ wouldn't happen in a million years)? Yeesh. I'm all for comparisons (Fightforfreedom makes an EXCELLENT point, btw) but some of you are acting like ignorant fanboys--taking any opportunity you can to sling shit at this game. Yeah, the most recent pics aren't that impressive to me--I find the colors to be TOO washed out, personally. but I've got some ugly-ass pics of GT4's gameplay we could discuss, too. Not many internet captures really tell the story of the game in motion, and not every capture is going to be a good one.

I realize that with these types of games, often, it's a tradeoff. Forza is not unlike pretty 3d render; incredibly clean, technically well designed, and sharp, sharp, sharp--but it's missing that element, that singular spark that would lend it to true photorealism. GT4, on the other hand, is more like a beautiful painting--step back and you SWEAR its a photograph, such is PD's expertise; but get in close and the strokes and flaws start to show. You people are arguing between 2 different design philosophies, and instead of expressing which one you might prefer, some of you are trying to declare 1 better than the other. And that's just dumb

Well said. Besides there are several months of development left or more if they delay the game to 2005. The graphics could change significantly by then.

 

[Grizzlyjin]

How about just waiting until both games are out...then we will know what the deal is.

 

[jett]

(although GT1 was made with just 6 people).

No it wasn't. Have you ever though about looking up your GT1 manual to see if this bullshit you read somewhere was true?

 

[SolidSnakex]

No it wasn't. Have you ever though about looking up your GT1 manual to see if this bullshit you read somewhere was true?

Tell Kaz its bullshit then:


How many of those were involved with creating the original Gran Turismo?

The first Gran Turismo was made with six people. All of them are still at Polyphony.

http://uk.playstation.com/features/featureStory.jhtml?storyId=103709_en_GB_FEAT&linktype=SSL

 

[mr2mike]

It's an impossibility:

You dont make a realistic game and think: Wait, let's not do photorealistic graphics, but instead, let's just use realistic desings but make it bland instead!

I'm sorry, but if they thought they package a realistic sim with unrealistic graphics, it'd look like NFS:U or SRS or Burnout, not a Gran Turismo with cars carved out of soap bars.

 

[bob_arctor]

How about just waiting until both games are out...then we will know what the deal is.

The deal is this: GT heads will play Forza, perhaps even like it, but in the back of their minds, they're thinking: This ain't GT (bad). Others of us will play it, perhaps even like it, thinking: Hey, this ain't GT! (good). Or it could be a pile of crap, GT notwithstanding, though I doubt it at this stage of racing-sim overpopulation. You'd have to be really terrible to not even make a serviceable sim at this point.

 

[jett]

Tell Kaz its bullshit then:


How many of those were involved with creating the original Gran Turismo?

The first Gran Turismo was made with six people. All of them are still at Polyphony.

http://uk.playstation.com/features/featureStory.jhtml?storyId=103709_en_GB_FEAT&linktype=SSL

What can I say, he lied, or didn't really know how many people were involved with GT. Nevermind that just the musical aspect of the game involved more than 6 people(original OST of the JPN version).

Look in your freaking GT manual(unless you're a buttpirate): 3 people invovled in course design, 7 other people involved in car design, 2 for Data management, 1 main programmer, 1 guy in charge of simulation algorithm, another on visual effects programming, and yet another on tool programming. There's also a trouble shooter, Prodcuer(Kaz), and a couple of other producer position. The people responsible for the sound is missing in the credits listed in the manual. And I distintcly remember the ending credits in GT lasting nearly 5 minutes too.

Yeah, he bullshitted.

 

[Lukas]

i think forza is gonna bomb in sales

the xbox is flooded with racers

nfs
midnight club
midtown madness
motogp
project gotham
rallisport

and now forza? the only way this game will sell for Microsoft and be their "GT" series is if they advertise it right but I dont see that happening when its coming out supposedly 1 month after Halo 2

 

[Flatbread]

after reading this entire entertaining thread I can say that some of you really like this sim genre and are neck deep in its nuances. After looking at both screen shots they both look great, I would say that GT4 has better backgrounds while forza looks sharper in its edges.

But the differences are pretty minimal, especially when you consider that you wont be noticing much once your driving at 150 mph heahahaha. When it comes to driving games gameplay is king, and graphics are for fanboys. Many of you probably wont argue with me on that one. So we will see, my guess is GT will reign supreme, unless they are in a rut and wont make changes that make sense.

One of my buddies who plays racing games said that if you hit walls, or ride on walls you actually go faster in GT, anyone experience that in any of the gt games?

 

[Lukas]

after reading this entire entertaining thread I can say that some of you really like this sim genre and are neck deep in its nuances. After looking at both screen shots they both look great, I would say that GT4 has better backgrounds while forza looks sharper in its edges.

But the differences are pretty minimal, especially when you consider that you wont be noticing much once your driving at 150 mph heahahaha. When it comes to driving games gameplay is king, and graphics are for fanboys. Many of you probably wont argue with me on that one. So we will see, my guess is GT will reign supreme, unless they are in a rut and wont make changes that make sense.

One of my buddies who plays racing games said that if you hit walls, or ride on walls you actually go faster in GT, anyone experience that in any of the gt games?

ROFL yea, its like that in Sega GT 2002 also

 

[Flatbread]

i think forza is gonna bomb in sales

the xbox is flooded with racers

nfs
midnight club
midtown madness
motogp
project gotham
rallisport

and now forza? the only way this game will sell for Microsoft and be their "GT" series is if they advertise it right but I dont see that happening when its coming out supposedly 1 month after Halo 2

alot more racers than that on the xbox, there has to be at least 30.

It comes out 1 week after halo 2, then again I dont see halo syphoning off realistic sim.

 

[Lukas]

forza doesnt look like its ready to be released this year

they should wait for gt4 to release, learn from any mistakes made in that game, and then release forza in summer 2005 and fix those damn car models, they look worse than PGR2, much worse

atleast in PGR2 they resembled metal, in forza they look like plastic

 

[XboxGamers]

Can't wait to bolt on some turbos in Forza!

 

[Shinobi]

I'd just like to know which courses it'll have. I wish it could include Mosport, which I think is about an hour east of Toronto and was the former home of the Canadian GP. Many drivers who've driven it rank it among the best courses in the world, yet the only game it probably exists in is GP Legends. Such a travesty.

 

[FightyF]

People bitching about 3D rims in GT should kill themselves after seeing those Forza shots....

I think I'm the only one who commented on it's rims, and I didn't "bitch" about them, I just said it looks horrible.

GT4 is much further along development than Forza. If any PGR2 and RSC2 are anything to go by, it will have full 3D rims with the always excellent reflection mapping that many Xbox games have.

One reason why the cars may not look metallic is because there is little reflection mapping done on the body of the car, while it's evident on the window portions of the car. On the other hand it may look too much like glass if it were too shiny. I expect these kinds of tweaks to be made from now until the day it goes gold.

 

[Mooreberg]

It's sad that, even now, we can't have a FM thread without people going to great lengths to derail it.

Just like virtually every GT thread. Welcome to GA.

 

[AlphaSnake]

So basically your saying GT isn't and never will be an actual driving simulator at all. And if cars did recieve actual damage to put them out of a race like real life, then maybe we would actually play against people online who don't turn it into nothing but a bump fest to get ahead, and instead actually DRIVE the cars with skill.

So basically, you're an asshat. The point of GT has always been a "real driving simulator" and PD has stressed that themselves many times. It isn't a racing simulator. It isn't a real life physics simulator. The point of GT has always been to simulate individual car physics, not the impact the environments could have on them.

 

[Kiriku]

The cars "only" look decent, something's just off. Maybe it's the lighting? And I mean, in a genre that keeps growing in popularity and games, one would assume the developers are striving to make the best-looking game possible. Should we be satisfied with what we see? Perhaps, but it's still not as good-looking as quite a lot of other racing games, at least not when it comes to the cars. And that's probably a selling point among people. Who's going to turn their head towards this racing game if it doesn't feature great graphics, if they haven't heard about it?

 

[Minotauro]

So basically, you're an asshat. The point of GT has always been a "real driving simulator" and PD has stressed that themselves many times.

But isn't damage a major part of driving? Meaning, you slow down when coming up to a turn so you don't ram into a wall and completely destroy your car. This balance between speed and caution is what makes the best racing games the best in my opinion.

Personally, I've never liked the GT series. The racing itself is just so slow and boring that it doesn't interest me. To me, the most important thing in a racing game is that it's thrilling. The Need for Speed series has this. The Rallisport series has this. I don't see how anyone who isn't completely obsessed with cars and the tech that goes with them can get any enjoyment of the GT games. The actual racing is just so uncompelling. I was hoping, with the supposed physics improvements that this would change with GT4 but after some time with Prologue, I can say this isn't the case.

 

[kaching]

People tune cars; it's relatable to actual experience and thus relevant to the game.

First, the comments of mine you responded to in the first place were only intended to clarify the Forza situation regarding damage modeling and to correct BS's faulty assumptions about the PS2's abilities. Your basically missing the point of what I was asking and why I was asking it.

Second, SOME people tune cars. But to do it on the scale depicted in a game like GT or Forza would require time, money and skills beyond the reach of most people. The several MILLIONS who have bought sim racing games like GT and Forza certainly don't fit the bill for the most part. These people are therefore no more versed in how to properly tune a specific model of car than they are in how damage affects that car.

It's sad that, even now, we can't have a FM thread without people going to great lengths to derail it.

Let's dispense with the general slap on the wrist here: Blazing Sword, the topic starter defined the course of this thread by being first to start the GT comparisons and make other statements unrelated to Forza that he couldn't support in any meaningful way.

 

[AlphaSnake]

But isn't damage a major part of driving? Meaning, you slow down when coming up to a turn so you don't ram into a wall and completely destroy your car. This balance between speed and caution is what makes the best racing games the best in my opinion.

Personally, I've never liked the GT series. The racing itself is just so slow and boring that it doesn't interest me. To me, the most important thing in a racing game is that it's thrilling. The Need for Speed series has this. The Rallisport series has this. I don't see how anyone who isn't completely obsessed with cars and the tech that goes with them can get any enjoyment of the GT games. The actual racing is just so uncompelling. I was hoping, with the supposed physics improvements that this would change with GT4 but after some time with Prologue, I can say this isn't the case.

Driving is driving. Driving doesn't include damaging your car and seeing how it would react thereafter. Racing, on the other hand, does. GT is a driving simulator with races. It doesn't simulate real life racing.

 

[AlphaSnake]

Let's dispense with the general slap on the wrist here: Blazing Sword, the topic starter defined the course of this thread by being first to start the GT comparisons and make other statements unrelated to Forza that he couldn't support in any meaningful way.

And with that thread the GT haters feel even dumber.

 

[Blazing Sword]

So basically, you're an asshat. The point of GT has always been a "real driving simulator" and PD has stressed that themselves many times. It isn't a racing simulator. It isn't a real life physics simulator. The point of GT has always been to simulate individual car physics, not the impact the environments could have on them.

ooh, you threw an insult at me. That totally changed my outlook on the entire situation. Because of your personal and childish attack against me, I am now convinced that GT will never be outclassed by another driving game.

Give me a break and grow up. REAL DRIVING involves the REAL POSSIBILITY of crashing. Something GT has never had. I love GT as much as anyone, but even I know its still FAR from realistic. Do the cars handle like they would in real life? maybe. But how can you tell when you just keep the damn thing at full throttle and use other cars and walls to help push you along the track. After all, all that matters is the fastest time right?

Now I know you'll say:

"I don't play the game that way, you asshat. Yuck yuck. Dad will be proud of me for that one..yuck yuck."

But ALOT of people do, ESPECIALLY ONLINE. Frankly I would much rather have some punk who crashed into me and ran me into the wall to get by, have his car totally screwed and put out of the race. Serves him right.

 

[Minotauro]

Driving is driving. Driving doesn't include damaging your car and seeing how it would react thereafter. Racing, on the other hand, does. GT is a driving simulator with races. It doesn't simulate real life racing.

Oh, for Christ's sake. "GT is a driving simulator with races"...this is one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever read on GAF. The game is a racing game. That'd be like me saying that Mario is a walking simulator with platforming.

 

[SolidSnakex]

"But ALOT of people do, ESPECIALLY ONLINE. Frankly I would much rather have some punk who crashed into me and ran me into the wall to get by, have his car totally screwed and put out of the race. Serves him right."

You do realise that with real crash physics that if someone rams you at a high speed that there's just as good of a chance that you're going to be out of the race too, right?

There's alot that racing developers are going to have to figure out to make correct online races. GT's penalty system isn't going to stop it and neither is real crash physics. They're going to have to figure out something. For now the best thing to do is just get people that are serious about racing. That way you don't have to worry about bumper carts. Luckily there are enough GT fans here that we're going to be able to get alot of proper online races going when its released.

 

[Doom_Bringer]

Looks much better than Gran Turismo 4!

Sony should just cancel GT4 on PS2 and remake it for PS3 with damage modeling

 

[thorns]

GT4 looks good in photos and screenshots because well, the game has photos for textures and backgrounds so everything looks photorealistic in stills.. But in motion, the bump mapped tracks / accurate reflections/shadows on cars can make a HUGE difference.

Forza DOES look realistic, everyone who doesn't agree is just being extremely anal.

 

[Kiriku]

But isn't damage a major part of driving? Meaning, you slow down when coming up to a turn so you don't ram into a wall and completely destroy your car. This balance between speed and caution is what makes the best racing games the best in my opinion.

I agree to a degree, but when playing racing games I don't think people slow down because they're afraid of destroying their car. It's because they're afraid of losing valuable time, falling behind. They don't care about the actual car being damaged, they care about racing as efficient as possible. Thus, ramming into a wall is obviously bad, but driving outside the road is too, for example.

 

[AlphaSnake]

ooh, you threw an insult at me. That totally changed my outlook on the entire situation. Because of your personal and childish attack against me, I am now convinced that GT will never be outclassed by another driving game.

Give me a break and grow up. REAL DRIVING involves the REAL POSSIBILITY of crashing. Something GT has never had. I love GT as much as anyone, but even I know its still FAR from realistic. Do the cars handle like they would in real life? maybe. But how can you tell when you just keep the damn thing at full throttle and use other cars and walls to help push you along the track. After all, all that matters is the fastest time right?

Now I know you'll say:

"I don't play the game that way, you asshat. Yuck yuck. Dad will be proud of me for that one..yuck yuck."

But ALOT of people do, ESPECIALLY ONLINE. Frankly I would much rather have some punk who crashed into me and ran me into the wall to get by, have his car totally screwed and put out of the race. Serves him right.

You're denying your asshat state and that hurts me deeply. You've spewed some pretty trivial drivel in this thread that I've had to mop up. Your asshatness knows no limits and I am here to put an end to it! If you get crashed into online and there's damage involved, you're getting your ass kicked out of the race too. Then what happens? We have a legion of illogical dorks like you continuing their GT bitch fest -- PD just can't win with gamers like you. So what's the best way PD can punish aggressive racers? Simulate a crash and lift control of the vehicle for a very brief time.

 

[AlphaSnake]

I agree to a degree, but when playing racing games I don't think people slow down because they're afraid of destroying their car. It's because they're afraid of losing valuable time, falling behind. They don't care about the actual car being damaged, they care about racing as efficient as possible. Thus, ramming into a wall is obviously bad, but driving outside the road is too, for example.

Exactly, speed and caution already go hand in hand when you're trying to achieve desired results in order to advance.