Course Maker in/for Gran Turismo Sport?

[citroengt1]

NOTE: I 've searched the GT official site, the GTPlanet Forums, and other media coverage and i couldn't find any information on whether would Gran Turismo Sport feature a Course Maker.
So i am asking here.

With the Course Maker in GT6 being a bit of a let down (i mean you need precision when you are making a track, how are you suppose to be precise in a touchscreen) what can we look forward to?
Anyway, what i hope is that they introduce a better Course Maker in Gran Turismo Sport or a future title,
in which the Course Maker will be inside the game, not only on a separate device.

But the question is, if the PD is maybe thinking of adding the Course Maker to Gran Turismo Sport,
would they add the same one we had for Gran Turismo 6 or an even better one?

 

[Johnnypenso]

Given the tight focus of this game I highly doubt you'll see the CM come to GTSport.

 

[coryclifford]

I hope it's announced it's not so we don't have to read two years worth of cry baby posts about it again.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I hope it's announced it's not so we don't have to read two years worth of cry baby posts about it again.

Why would they announce something that's not coming? If they don't say it's going to be part of the game then it isn't part of the game.

 

[coryclifford]

I dunno, it was just pretty annoying reading all that stuff. Something like, Course Maker will not be in GTS, right on the front of the box.


At least it panned out in the end, sort of.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

Personally I doubt we'll see a course maker in GT Sport because I don't think it fits into the direction this game seems to be heading.

On a more positive note we have already seen a companion app. for GT Sport, and as we know GT6's CM is not in-game but done via an app. on tablets.
But saying that, what we've seen of GT Sport's app. so far are images of the app. working on a mobile phone.

 

[Samus]

I hope it's announced it's not so we don't have to read two years worth of cry baby posts about it again.

I love how customers that bought a product with a promise of content that didn't arrive for two years are 'cry babies'. Companies must love customers that don't give a damn if they get what they paid for or not.

 

[MisterWaffles]

Unless you can somehow get FIA judges to approve your track, not going to happen.

 

[GTvsForza]

I think it would only be available in Arcade Mode.

 

[daus26]

Along with b-spec and other missing prominent features, this game, or maybe even the GT franchise from now on, may be a thing of the past, as they focus on this FIA competition thing. It's like they're forcing people to participate. Had we have a full career mode, course maker, and other stuff, many people may ignore it and such. They want people that buy the game to really get on this FIA thing. That's what it seems like to me.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

Unless you can somehow get FIA judges to approve your track, not going to happen.

I see no reason why the FIA needs to approve every track.
It's not as if the official FIA events will be held on someones personal design.
That obviously gives clear advantage.
Also, there are other modes besides 'Sports Mode'.

In fact it's questionable why the FIA needs to approve any track.

 

[GordonS]

Unless you can somehow get FIA judges to approve your track, not going to happen.

I think it's quite safe to think that FIA will approve only "straights, apexes'n corners" based on real world tracks.
I hope we'll see the C.M. coming as an update at some point.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

I think it's quite safe to think that FIA will approve only "straights, apexes'n corners" based on real world tracks.
I hope we'll see the C.M. coming as an update at some point.

It depends a bit on how you look at it.
I think the FIA approved tracks during the GT6 era were based on additional things such as accuracy of the circuit, run-off areas, etc.
The 'virtual' accuracy when replicating the real world circuits.

The only thing I would say is that the significance of that seems to have faded.
We've heard nothing since.
My feeling is that it was more aligned with the approach of PD to get the FIA on board with GT Sport than anything else.
Oh, and some marketing for both parties.

I struggle to see why a 'virtual' FIA event needs to be run on a 'virtual' track approved by the FIA.
Equal cars running under the same conditions is surely the first, and almost, only priority.
I mean it has to be questionable that Tokyo Expressway somehow fits into FIA regulations.
And yet we saw them running that track for the inaugural event.

So I don't think the FIA is in any way a deciding factor on a course maker for GT Sport.

 

[GordonS]

It depends a bit on how you look at it.
I think the FIA approved tracks during the GT6 era were based on additional things such as accuracy of the circuit, run-off areas, etc.
The 'virtual' accuracy when replicating the real world circuits.

The only thing I would say is that the significance of that seems to have faded.
We've heard nothing since.
My feeling is that it was more aligned with the approach of PD to get the FIA on board with GT Sport than anything else.
Oh, and some marketing for both parties.

I struggle to see why a 'virtual' FIA event needs to be run on a 'virtual' track approved by the FIA.
Equal cars running under the same conditions is surely the first, and almost, only priority.
I mean it has to be questionable that Tokyo Expressway somehow fits into FIA regulations.
And yet we saw them running that track for the inaugural event.

So I don't think the FIA is in any way a deciding factor on a course maker for GT Sport.

But there are no FIA tracks in GT6. FIA approval starts from GTS. ** I was wrong here. I remebered they will be approved **

 

[Tassie_tiger]

Without getting into semantics and the words I used in my post, it's my understanding the FIA officially certified four tracks as they stood in GT6.
Silverstone, Brands, Suzuka, and Bathurst.
There was no "if you just fix this we'll certify them for the next game." They were certified, as they stood. In GT6.

Not really the point I was targeting though.

 

[GordonS]

Without getting into semantics and the words I used in my post, it's my understanding the FIA officially certified four tracks as they stood in GT6.
Silverstone, Brands, Suzuka, and Bathurst.
There was no "if you just fix this we'll certify them for the next game." They were certified, as they stood. In GT6.

Not really the point I was targeting though.

My bad. It is just the way you said about those FIA GT6 tracks.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

All's good. 👍

 

[ss3]

I don't know how it would work out being mostly online!.

 

[GBalao888]

I highly doubt it because if we had the Course Maker and/or B-spec again, it could be an extra one and a half years (or maybe even two years) of development which would be almost all of us ranting like zoo animals about it again (even with B-spec), which would result in an incomplete game again, like we had to wait for them in a game update for almost a year and a half. Probably GT7 or future games, but they shouldn't repeat that same mistake if that were the case.

 

[Ameer67]

I highly doubt it because if we had the Course Maker and/or B-spec again, it could be an extra one and a half years (or maybe even two years) of development which would be almost all of us ranting like zoo animals about it again (even with B-spec), which would result in an incomplete game again, like we had to wait for them in a game update for almost a year and a half. Probably GT7 or future games, but they shouldn't repeat that same mistake if that were the case.

Why would the course maker have to be redeveloped though? Why would they spend (at least) 2 years making a feature that wouldn't be usable a few years later? This is obviously an assumption but I really don't think Polyphony would do that. (Then again, PD does make some pretty silly choices.)

 

[Neomone]

Why would the course maker have to be redeveloped though? Why would they spend (at least) 2 years making a feature that wouldn't be usable a few years later? This is obviously an assumption but I really don't think Polyphony would do that. (Then again, PD does make some pretty silly choices.)

Then again, we never saw the original course maker from GT5 again. That one could have happily coexisted beside the GT6 version, and would have been a welcome filler while we waited.

 

[Streeto]

Not until the next game, 99% certain about that.

 

[Castrol96]

With a 2 year delay no way for GT SPORT.

 

[cjr3559]

Not until the next game, 99% certain about that.

With a 2 year delay no way for GT SPORT.

This thinking could spell good news for fans of the CM on GT6. Maybe they'll keep the servers up longer or figure a way to work a method to keep it active even after other GT6 online features and updates are shut down...

Otherwise the GT6 CM as we know it will have a short lifespan of 1 year (and maybe a few extra months) after GTS is released this November. Because as per historical evidence shows, PD only kept GT5 online features active for about 5 months after GT6 became active.

Time will tell.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

This thinking could spell good news for fans of the CM on GT6. Maybe they'll keep the servers up longer or figure a way to work a method to keep it active even after other GT6 online features and updates are shut down...

Otherwise the GT6 CM as we know it will have a relatively short lifespan of 2 years after GTS is released this November. Because as per historical evidence shows, PD only kept GT5 online features active for about 5 months after GT6 became active.

Time will tell.

Five months after GT Sport's release would put the GT6 TPE barely over the 18 month mark, sadly.

I do wonder what the plan is, long-term, for the TPE. It obviously took a long time – longer than some full games – for PD to develop. I really hope they aren't judging its long-term viability off of the response it received from the GT6 player base: with the game selling so much less than other full GT titles, and the TPE showing up almost two years into the game's lifecycle, I don't think it was really given a fair shake.

 

[MMX]

Five months after GT Sport's release would put the GT6 TPE barely over the 18 month mark, sadly.

I do wonder what the plan is, long-term, for the TPE. It obviously took a long time – longer than some full games – for PD to develop. I really hope they aren't judging its long-term viability off of the response it received from the GT6 player base: with the game selling so much less than other full GT titles, and the TPE showing up almost two years into the game's lifecycle, I don't think it was really given a fair shake.

Agreed. By the time the TPE came out, I had already been bored with GT6 for a few months. TPE didn't stand a chance for me. I made a few tracks, but a week or two later, GT6 was back to collecting dust. I haven't played it in close to a year. This coming from a die hard daily online GT racer since GT5P, that just got tired of the same old stuff.

I'd like to see the TPE come back, with improvements, like being able to adjust elevation.

 

[cjr3559]

Five months after GT Sport's release would put the GT6 TPE barely over the 18 month mark, sadly.

I do wonder what the plan is, long-term, for the TPE. It obviously took a long time – longer than some full games – for PD to develop. I really hope they aren't judging its long-term viability off of the response it received from the GT6 player base: with the game selling so much less than other full GT titles, and the TPE showing up almost two years into the game's lifecycle, I don't think it was really given a fair shake.

Funny I rechecked my math while you were replying. Heck, it hasn't even been a year yet.