Grand Valley Review - From a long term fan

[Suzuki-Cara]

I'm getting GRID 2 vibes with the redesigned GVS. Minus the yeeting the car off the hills that is.

 

[Dave A]

I guess an interesting thought exercise could be what if Grand Valley Highway was the OG design, which was then replaced by Speedway in GT7?

You'd probably get a lot of people saying that they miss the beautiful California scenery and how it's just been turned into another generic racetrack, something along those lines...

This isn't me saying the OG circuit is a crappy design BTW, it isn't, it still rules - just saying how nostalgia can heavily affect our perception on things.

You absolutely would, but the argument isn't that either track is bad, it's that expectation has been set that fans of the orignal will be able to race on it again only to find it's similar in name alone when it arrives. So yes, you are definitely correct, if you reverse this scenario people would still complain because the complaint isn't that the track is good or not, that's up to beholder, it's that they've changed a classic well liked track rather than come up with an all new track instead.

So right from the off I'm loading up the new Grand Valley dissapointed because it's not what I expected rather than just thinking "this new track looks great" and it is a decent track, it's got faults definitely, but it looks great and for the most part drives well enough. It's just not the Grand Valley we know from past games.

It's very much nostalgia baiting, generating excitement through nostalgia only to deliver something very different to what was expected. That doesn't make it automatically a bad thing, but you do create uneccessary barriers that could have been avoided if you just said "here's this new thing".

 

[super_gt]

I don't like it at all.

 

[MidnightRun85]

When I was younger I honestly never cared too much for these tracks, I was more obsessed with tracks like Seattle, Citta di Aria, Red Rock Valley (obviously)... Something about them just stuck out to me, very unique circuits.


EDIT: Of course, now I replay these games with much better driving skills, I appreciate these foresty OG tracks A LOT more, don't get me wrong!

I'd LOVE for them to remodel Seattle and get it into GT7. I spent so much time on that circuit. The jumps were awesome fun!

 

[NJ72]

I'd LOVE for them to remodel Seattle and get it into GT7. I spent so much time on that circuit. The jumps were awesome fun!

Nah, if they modelled Seattle it would probably be relocated to Kent in the UK lol

 

[Keef]

I've been thinking about why PD does what they do when nostalgia seems to be so strong amongst fans and the only think I can really think of is the demographics of the developers themselves.

I'm 34 and GT2 came out when I was 11, twenty three years ago. What are the chances that any of the original developers even work at PD anymore? Even the youngest developers, perhaps fresh out of college, would be in their 40s by now, and despite PD's longevity it is rare in that industry to stay at the same company for very long. The burnout rate is high especially with their notoriously difficult work schedule. Chances are high that Kaz is literally the only person at the studio who has been there since the original games were developed 25 years ago. And their current developers, many of them probably straight out of college, may never have even played the games until they started working at the company and therefore have no sense of nostalgia about them at all.

Overall I think the game and the two tracks of Deep Forest and Trial Mountain have been pretty good interpretations of GT but I do wonder how many people at PD have a true understanding of the original games and aren't simply following a set of guidelines. Surely somebody at the PD round table stood up and said, "No, the big blue bridge has to stay." Virtually all of us OG players would agree with that statement which suggests to me that virtually none of the developers are OG players.

 

[Bilu]

I didn't like the textures of the mountains, it looks clay.

 

[FluxWildly]

The problem I have is regarding the layours of these remodelled classic circuits is that they just seem obsessed with strethcing them to make them longer. That doesn't equal making a track better unfortuantely. this one goes further than that though and changes a lot more.

How is GV stretched out? It only 100-200m longer than thi older versions so not that much really.
GT1-6 - 4.94km
GT7 - 5.10km

 

[NJ72]

How is GV stretched out? It only 100-200m longer than thi older versions so not that much really.
GT1-6 - 4.94km
GT7 - 5.10km

The weird thing is that the original GVS is probably the only circuit that was well laid out for the newer games. Most of them have been extended to accommodate a longer pit lane for a larger grid of cars, but GVS had an ample one

 

[Blitz24]

Didn't expect that to be Grand Valley. Looks more like an ocean view than a valley. The track is nice and flowing but the name feels off. Grand Ocean Roadway feels more appropriate for the track. Definitely not getting valley vibes and most certainly doesn't feel like a speedway.

 

[Dave A]

How is GV stretched out? It only 100-200m longer than thi older versions so not that much really.
GT1-6 - 4.94km
GT7 - 5.10km

You've answered that yourself, it's longer, you provided the proof.

It's the least elongated of the trio of Deep Forest, Trial Mountain and Grand Valley, but to be more specific rather than the overall length, they've lenthened specific sections of the track and shrunk others and overall made it slightly longer.

 

[DK]

It's more than that, though, as it's no longer a wide race track and now a narrow(er) highway which, even if it was a carbon copy with elevation changes etc. but with other scenery it would still be a different circuit.

I'm not looking forward to its esports debut.

 

[breeminator]

wanting something fresh

The thing is, though, a lot of the reason why people want the original tracks in the game is for the nostalgia. The fresh new (when they were released) tracks like Dragon Trail are great, but they don't satisfy the desire to experience again what was in the original game.

Maybe they could release a remaster of the original GT game some time that leaves the track designs untouched and just brings the graphics up to modern standards.

 

[Dave A]

Maybe they could release a remaster of the original GT game some time that leaves the track designs untouched and just brings the graphics up to modern standards.

That's a nice thought but never going to happen due to licensing. There's a reason games with real brands rarely get remastered let alone games with hundreds if not thousands of real brands.

 

[Betty blue]

They have absolutely wrecked a classic !

 

[FluxWildly]

Despite being beautiful due to its location, I feel that the new version of GVS is generic and lazy in terms of the structures of a racing circuit. The look is great, but the absence of kerbs, walls, run-offs, fences, bleachers, all very raw, disturbed my sense of reality.

I love the new layout, especially the elevation changes but yes this is my one criticism of the new circuit. It would be nice to see some racing structure installed like rumble strips/kerbs, concrete barrier and fences to really give it a racing circuit feel. It's not completely unrealistic either as this is what they do when they modify city streets to turn them into city circuits.

You've answered that yourself, it's longer, you provided the proof.

Come on... 200m over a 5km circuit is insignificant. I can understand this criticism at somewhere like Trial Mountain where the elongation of the straights is significantly noticeable, but not here.

So right from the off I'm loading up the new Grand Valley dissapointed because it's not what I expected rather than just thinking "this new track looks great" and it is a decent track, it's got faults definitely, but it looks great and for the most part drives well enough. It's just not the Grand Valley we know from past games.

Ok, lets say as a though experiment that the track was released as is with new scenery and with a different name but was the same map and layout as the Grand Valley of before. Do you think we would still get people saying 'It's not the Grand Valley that I remember' even though its the same track layout but with different scenery and name?

 

[Dave A]

Come on... 200m over a 5km circuit is insignificant. I can understand this criticism at somewhere like Trial Mountain where the elongation of the straights is significantly noticeable, but not here.

I did elaborate in the part of the post you didn't quote.

Regardless, 200m longer is still longer, there's an argument it makes little difference, but no argument that it isn't stretched.

Ok, lets say as a though experiment that the track was released as is with new scenery and with a different name but was the same map and layout as the Grand Valley of before. Do you think we would still get people saying 'It's not the Grand Valley that I remember' even though its the same track layout but with different scenery and name?

Possibly because people are nostalgic beggars, but they're would be fewer complaints than changing both the scenery and the layout.

As I said before, that's not to say this new one is a bad track, it isn't, but why not just ditch calling it Grand Valley and make it even better, created with added freedom and at the same time not mess with expectations by tapping into nostalgia.

 

[Pizzicato1985]

Agreed. It has its own positive qualities, and overcoming some of those abrupt elevation changes into corners at a really quick pace will be a challenge.

But it doesn't feel like the old Grand Valley...

 

[adam thompson]

So, having given both versions a bit of a shakedown as a long time fan with many many hours spent on the old GVS I thought I'd type up my views for discussion.

Firstly, I actually really like the track, but it doesn't feel like the GVS of old unfortunately. It feels like a track that has been re-designed for no other reason than the provide some eye-candy for the PSVR2 buyers.

It has all the ingredients for a great track, much like their other original circuits, and will take a long time to master across road and race cars; but the overwhelming feeling is that it would have been better to just have made a new track in this setting. It seems to me to suit road cars and Gr.4; Gr.3 and above - certainly on the South course - feel a bit much.

It's a gorgeously pretty track, no doubt, and the tunnels and vistas look great without PSVR, so I suspect they'll look amazing in that too. I did find myself recognising some corners as I went, but in that uncomfortable uncanny valley way, rather than the nostalgic way Trial Mountain or Deep Forest manage.

It just keeps throwing my back to "why change it so much?" as GVS was, for me at least, the most well rounded original circuit in the games. And the only answer I can find is PSVR...

I'm not whining, as it's really a great track pair and I really enjoyed driving it, but feel as though calling it Grand Valley and making it that layout specifically closes a door that I know won't ever be opened - the GVS I knew and loved won't make a return.

I totally agree I do like the new track looks cool fun to race on but my nostalgic heart is saddened and wish we got the original track. I’m going to play GT6 later on and race the original.

 

[KKHN]

I've mixed feelings. Yeah, it's not Grand Valley anymore BUT I'm in love with the track. It's unique, fun with low PP cars and visually gorgeous.

 

[NevilleNobody]

I am not a long time fan, last GT I played before SPORT was GT3. Looking at this track as a stand alone piece of road, not a fan. Seemingly always in a corner and switching left/right/left etc, makes for poor racing. I think it's be a great track for thrashing my 997 around IRL but as a gaming racing track, nope.

 

[sumbrownkid]

I think we have to keep in mind the OG tracks got "lengthened" because they were originally designed for 6 cars in mind. With 20 cars it can maybe feel a bit cramped.

I'm of the opposite opinion and think Grand Valley really fits the back drop PD put it in in GT7. Regardless, it's still a fantastic track to drive on.

 

[Keroyon]

I think we have to keep in mind the OG tracks got "lengthened" because they were originally designed for 6 cars in mind. With 20 cars it can maybe feel a bit cramped.

I'm of the opposite opinion and think Grand Valley really fits the back drop PD put it in in GT7. Regardless, it's still a fantastic track to drive on.

OG Grand Valley Speedway did not need any of that though as the pitlane was big enough

Although the new one is longer it felt way shorter when I drove it, can not really figure why

 

[Dave A]

I think we have to keep in mind the OG tracks got "lengthened" because they were originally designed for 6 cars in mind. With 20 cars it can maybe feel a bit cramped.

I'm of the opposite opinion and think Grand Valley really fits the back drop PD put it in in GT7. Regardless, it's still a fantastic track to drive on.

An interesting take, however they handled 16 cars in GT6 well enough. I think they've redesigned Trial Mountain and Deep Forest in particular, to better accommodate the faster cars in the game personally. They were more suited to high performance road cars and mid performance race cars in the older games.

 

[Pulsar-NX]

With the possible exception of HSR, none of the old GT tracks feel like their OG counterparts to me anyway. And that's a loose familiarity for HSR at best.

I did three of the Grand Valley races this morning and had a great time, enjoyed the track and scenery, and was able to recognize features from the GV of old.

I'm happy with it.

 

[Coiler]

It's not bad but they could put any new name on it and I couldn't d tell. So now can we get Grand Valley back please?

 

[ShiftingGears]

I've been thinking about why PD does what they do when nostalgia seems to be so strong amongst fans and the only think I can really think of is the demographics of the developers themselves.

I'm 34 and GT2 came out when I was 11, twenty three years ago. What are the chances that any of the original developers even work at PD anymore? Even the youngest developers, perhaps fresh out of college, would be in their 40s by now, and despite PD's longevity it is rare in that industry to stay at the same company for very long. The burnout rate is high especially with their notoriously difficult work schedule. Chances are high that Kaz is literally the only person at the studio who has been there since the original games were developed 25 years ago. And their current developers, many of them probably straight out of college, may never have even played the games until they started working at the company and therefore have no sense of nostalgia about them at all.

Overall I think the game and the two tracks of Deep Forest and Trial Mountain have been pretty good interpretations of GT but I do wonder how many people at PD have a true understanding of the original games and aren't simply following a set of guidelines. Surely somebody at the PD round table stood up and said, "No, the big blue bridge has to stay." Virtually all of us OG players would agree with that statement which suggests to me that virtually none of the developers are OG players.

This isn't on anyone else except Yamauchi.

 

[sixty4half]

Does this version feel like PD just mashed Watkins Glen and Road Atlanta together, to anyone else?

 

[Blitz24]

Does this version feel like PD just mashed Watkins Glen and Road Atlanta together, to anyone else?

That MIGHT have been the initial plan for GVS because the track does look a lot like Watkins Glen as is. Then again, it's not as obvious as HSR = old Fuji and Apricot Hill similar to Suzuka.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Does this version feel like PD just mashed Watkins Glen and Road Atlanta together, to anyone else?

No.