Alot of GT news has been coming from gamescom.It was announced that not all cars will have damage and alot of fans were disappointed.For me,I don't really care about the damage thing but to have a feature functional in some part of the games and dysfunctional in the other part makes the game feel incomplete and not full.They might as well take out the damage feature from the whole game but that's for the Developer to decide and we are not here to discuss that.

PD have been know for there perfection.Crashes happen in racing,so crash damage is important for GT as all other racing games have it and as it is known as the best driving simulator,it should have it too.

In racing games there are various bonuses that we get after completing a challenge and new cars with improved features.Now GT doesn't pay for licenses to car companies as it is very popular and they let their cars to be used GT games for free as advertising.Now when PD wants to add the damage features,some car companies are not allowing it and wanting PD to pay them as all the other developers do when they add the damage feature in their games.These few companies are only the elite car companies like Ferrari,Lamborghini,etc.Most of them are racing car companies.

So in games,all the cars are classified into different sections according to their type and various bonus features.Most of the other companies are allowing damage so they should make categories including cars which allow damage and they should make an elite or racing car category which offer a feature that those cars are damage resistant.That will help the game to appear full and not half and the reason some cars that do not have damage will just be that they are very tough to endure damage.

Makes perfect sense. Wonder why they aren't paying said companies, however.

Damage isn't absent because they aren't paying the companies, it's absent because they don't have the time to damage model 1000 cars. Honestly why the fuck does everyone care so much about damage.

There has never been damage in a GT game and quite frankly I think it ruins the experience. Just look at Forza. If you run into a wall at 200 MPH you get a minor scratch on your car. If they are going to put damage in the game make it realistic and not just so you can say "look, we have damage!"

they start paying one companies,other companies will also start demanding.That way there development cost will go up

+ 1 to Bobo012893. Agree 100% with that.

I never cared for damage in GT (still dont). Its only fanboys complaining that FM has damage so GT should (which i think it doesnt need it).

No you don't know what you're talking about. They don't have to pay companies so that they can damage model their cars. Look at Forza. They have Porsches, Lamborghini's, and ferarri's with damage and I doubt that they paid and Polyphony didn't. It just comes down to whether Polyphony had the time to damage model al the cars and they didn't.

They had to model 1000 cars and 60 tracks to perfection. GT5 is pretty much a beta test for PD in terms of damage. They just want to see how everyone responds to it. If they like it, i'm sure they will invest more time into GT6 and have it fully damage compatible for all cars.

All racing game developers pay car companies for license to get their car in their game,with this they also get to include crash damage according to their license.PD doesn't have to take license because GT series is very popular and it is a free way for for car companies to advertise their cars so they let them be used in GT games for free.Earlier GT games didn't include damage so there was to problem but PD wants to include crash damage for GT5.Most of the companies allowed them to include damage to their car in games but a giant like Ferrari doesn't want their cars to get damaged.So their choice to pay them like other developers or be left without it.

You can do a simple google search to see article on this conflict

No, as i stated before, you don't know what you're talking about. I know that PD has to pay to have a license to display other companies' vehicles in their videogames. Damage was an issue in the past but in this new generation of videogames it isn't the case. Forza 3 has damage modeling on Ferarri's. GT5 could also have damage modeling on ferarri's if PD chose to make that a high priority.

But unlike Turn 10, PD would rather take their time to refine gameplay elements that are already in past GT installments to insure their perfection rather than blindly waltz into unfarmiliar territory. As I said before, I view GT5 as a beta test for GT's (as a franchise) damage.

No publisher specifically pay's for crash damage to be included in their games.When they pay to license cars for their game,they have the freedom to do whatever they want to do with those cars in the game.All games like NFS,Forza,etc have to pay for licenses.GT doesn't have to license,they just get it for free but without the freedom to add damage to cars.

What the fuck are you talking about (Sorry)? So you're saying that GT5 doesn't have damage because PD wouldn't pony up the cash for it? Firstly, PD can do whatever the fuck they want and car companies can't do shit about it because they are PD. If they wouldn't allow PD to support damage in their game then PD would just remove their cars from the game and they would lose brand exposure to more than 50 million people worldwide (estimated).

Secondly,  GT as a franchise sells over 10 million copies with every installment. I'm pretty sure that the reason that most cars don't have damage in GT5 isn't that they are short on cash. It is because they didn't want to spend the majority of their time modeling damgage on over 1000 cars.

Edit: I also never stated that companies have to pay for crash damage. When I addressed it I was talking from a theoretical point of view. I meant to say that IF they had to pay to have crash damge in their game, then they would have, just like Turn 10.