GT Series track list is getting STALE

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I’m one of those who prefers more tracks over more cars. Me and I imagine most people only drive a small percentage of all the cars for the most part. Sure I try the most awkward ones, but for my own enjoyment and online racing I only need FR, MR and RR cars for example. I always avoid FF and AWD cars whenever I can. But I’d love to have in GT as many tracks as PC2 had. I dream of the day I can race around Sonoma Raceway in a GT game. Or around Autordromo do Algarve.

If I had to choose between 1 can and 50 tracks or 50 cars and 1 track I wouldn’t even blink before giving an answer. Tracks add more longevity and replay ability to racing games than car rosters do imo. I mean some people drive for months with a single car in some racing leagues. That’s more like the real world too. As long as there’s variety, I’ll be happy.

Not seeing a single 100% new track to the series in GT7 is very concerning, especially given the fact GT7 is basically being held down by the PS4 already, so large grids, something pretty simple but which could add a lot of fun to any race on any track with any car, is off the table.

Sonoma Raceway was in GT4, though it was called Infineon back then. I'm fond of Sonoma but that's probably because its the closest circuit to me IRL. I never really loved the layout and it kind of lacks character IMO. I wish they had put the track on the south side of the mountain/hill its built into, rather than the north. That way you would actually get views of San Francisco Bay, Marin county, and off in the distance, the San Francisco and Oakland skylines. As it is now, it feels like it could be anywhere...kind of a missed opportunity IMO.

 

[05XR8]

I think since there is no life to some of these circuits, they become stale. The road/street circuits should have a traffic mode.
At the completion of Mission challenges, we get the closing film. Video of the film crew driving on Tokyo Expressways at night. If PD added that option, even just for that Tokyo location, it’d add more value to its inclusion.

As for all new circuits, they’re ALL “new”, for the first time ever, in Gran Turismo 7.

 

[zzz_pt]

I'm with you on caring way more about track count than car count but AWD cars are the best! The classic GT1 era showdowns between Lancers and Skylines are legendary. (Not to mention the 3000GT and Impreza) Those 4 cars are what I think of when I think of Gran Turismo.

Ah yes, those few exceptions plus the Suzuki Escudo, Audi S1 Quattro and Cusco Subaru. But whenever I have the option to choose a rear wheel drive car instead of an AWD I go for it.

Sonoma Raceway was in GT4, though it was called Infineon back then. I'm fond of Sonoma but that's probably because its the closest circuit to me IRL. I never really loved the layout and it kind of lacks character IMO. I wish they had put the track on the south side of the mountain/hill its built into, rather than the north. That way you would actually get views of San Francisco Bay, Marin county, and off in the distance, the San Francisco and Oakland skylines. As it is now, it feels like it could be anywhere...kind of a missed opportunity IMO.

Completely forgot about Infineon tbh. I think the visuals of PC2 made it more memorable (also due to the technological advantage of the PS4 vs PS2). I wouldn’t mind a return after 2 console generations/3 games without it. A lot of people never played GT4.

As for all new circuits, they’re ALL “new”, for the first time ever, in Gran Turismo 7.

True. 😃 Point still stands.

 

[ShiftingGears]

Isle of Man would be crap lol just think of how many times you get stung with a penalty for brushing a wall at Tokyo East, then multiply it by 100, then factor in that you won't be able to pass anyone.

Theres plenty of older style tracks that would be better suited to GT, such as Chimay, Spa, Rouen, Reims, Charade, old Sachsenring, Schleizer Drieck etc

There's nothing stopping them from designing an old fashioned circuit besides their inability to show restraint with gimmicks and trying to make tracks that are all things to all people

 

[Monkey Man]

These guys and others said,

I’m one of those who prefers more tracks over more cars.

Give me less cars but more road to drive on.

Count me in as another. I tend to pick a favourite car early on in the game and stick with it. Track variety is what brings corners and I love corners; that's where all the fun is for me at least.

 

[Magog]

Isle of Man would be crap lol just think of how many times you get stung with a penalty for brushing a wall at Tokyo East, then multiply it by 100, then factor in that you won't be able to pass anyone.

Theres plenty of older style tracks that would be better suited to GT, such as Chimay, Spa, Rouen, Reims, Charade, old Sachsenring, Schleizer Drieck etc

There's nothing stopping them from designing an old fashioned circuit besides their inability to show restraint with gimmicks and trying to make tracks that are all things to all people

Not to mention they could scan and design 5+ normal sized tracks with those resources.

 

[tonybarnaby]

How about something never before seen in a game(that I know of)

Brainerd international raceway. It features the longest straightaway on a track in North America at 5200 feet . I would also love the old Hockenheim that F1 used in the 90s.

 

[dacc10]

If I had to choose between 1 can and 50 tracks or 50 cars and 1 track I wouldn’t even blink before giving an answer. Tracks add more longevity and replay ability to racing games than car rosters do imo. I mean some people drive for months with a single car in some racing leagues. That’s more like the real world too. As long as there’s variety, I’ll be happy.

I wouldn't choose neither of those games, as neither would give me any longevity. 50 cars is too small of a number to begin with. GTS had 160 or so, and it still felt short. Then I wonder, if there was to be a game with 1 car and 50 tracks, which car would be chosen in the first place. Being "like the real world" isn't really a benefit. Most (if not all) car guys in the world, would love to have multiple cars, and they don't because they can't afford them. GT being a game, allows players to do things that they can't in real life.

Anyway, if there are games that already do the "more tracks/less cars" thing, why should GT (and Forza) become like those games, and get lost in the crowd? There's no reason for them to stop being in the "racing games with huge car count" genre. No other game does that.

And then, the ratio of resources required to model a track or a car, is not 1 to 1. It's probably somewhere between 5/10 to 1 (cars to track ratio). So a much more realistic comparison (taking into account the resources needed) is 1 car and 50 tracks, or 250 cars and 1 track. And do we even know if the people who model cars, are the same who model tracks? If they are not the same, there's no argument really.

 

[Samus]

I wouldn't choose neither of those games, as neither would give me any longevity. 50 cars is too small of a number to begin with. GTS had 160 or so, and it still felt short. Then I wonder, if there was to be a game with 1 car and 50 tracks, which car would be chosen in the first place. Being "like the real world" isn't really a benefit. Most (if not all) car guys in the world, would love to have multiple cars, and they don't because they can't afford them. GT being a game, allows players to do things that they can't in real life.

Anyway, if there are games that already do the "more tracks/less cars" thing, why should GT (and Forza) become like those games, and get lost in the crowd? There's no reason for them to stop being in the "racing games with huge car count" genre. No other game does that.

And then, the ratio of resources required to model a track or a car, is not 1 to 1. It's probably somewhere between 5/10 to 1 (cars to track ratio). So a much more realistic comparison (taking into account the resources needed) is 1 car and 50 tracks, or 250 cars and 1 track. And do we even know if the people who model cars, are the same who model tracks? If they are not the same, there's no argument really.

You realise it was a hypothetical situation/question, right?

 

[zzz_pt]

I wouldn't choose neither of those games, as neither would give me any longevity. 50 cars is too small of a number to begin with. GTS had 160 or so, and it still felt short. Then I wonder, if there was to be a game with 1 car and 50 tracks, which car would be chosen in the first place. Being "like the real world" isn't really a benefit. Most (if not all) car guys in the world, would love to have multiple cars, and they don't because they can't afford them. GT being a game, allows players to do things that they can't in real life.

Anyway, if there are games that already do the "more tracks/less cars" thing, why should GT (and Forza) become like those games, and get lost in the crowd? There's no reason for them to stop being in the "racing games with huge car count" genre. No other game does that.

And then, the ratio of resources required to model a track or a car, is not 1 to 1. It's probably somewhere between 5/10 to 1 (cars to track ratio). So a much more realistic comparison (taking into account the resources needed) is 1 car and 50 tracks, or 250 cars and 1 track. And do we even know if the people who model cars, are the same who model tracks? If they are not the same, there's no argument really.

 

[Magog]

I wouldn't choose neither of those games, as neither would give me any longevity. 50 cars is too small of a number to begin with. GTS had 160 or so, and it still felt short. Then I wonder, if there was to be a game with 1 car and 50 tracks, which car would be chosen in the first place. Being "like the real world" isn't really a benefit. Most (if not all) car guys in the world, would love to have multiple cars, and they don't because they can't afford them. GT being a game, allows players to do things that they can't in real life.

Anyway, if there are games that already do the "more tracks/less cars" thing, why should GT (and Forza) become like those games, and get lost in the crowd? There's no reason for them to stop being in the "racing games with huge car count" genre. No other game does that.

And then, the ratio of resources required to model a track or a car, is not 1 to 1. It's probably somewhere between 5/10 to 1 (cars to track ratio). So a much more realistic comparison (taking into account the resources needed) is 1 car and 50 tracks, or 250 cars and 1 track. And do we even know if the people who model cars, are the same who model tracks? If they are not the same, there's no argument really.

I think modeling a car probably takes 2% of the time and manpower of modeling a real life track and maybe 5% of the effort of an original one.

 

[kjb]

I love the track selection of PC2 & PC3 and I like an abundance of tracks as well as diverse selection of cars to drive. I like GT7 track list so far but I feel they can always add more tracks. VIR is about an hour away from so I would love to see it. I love real life tracks but I also like the fictional tracks as well. Hopefully they will have some DLC tracks in time

 

[dacc10]

You realise it was a hypothetical situation/question, right?

I do, and his conviction was already clear without him using that example. What I don't get is why people keep trying to imply that modeling one track takes the same time and resources as modeling one car, which is something I've seen more than once, whenever the cars vs tracks debate comes over.

The whole cars vs tracks thing is pointless anyway, as both require different levels of resources, and are likely worked on by different people.

Are the tracks in GT getting stale? 100%, because they lack variety and they are the same, game after game. The only way to give some replay value to the existing tracks, is by having more cars to play with, more racing classes and the ability to create our own events to allow unique track/car combos. As for new tracks, they are welcome, specially if they show some variety compared to the existing roster. A proper city track, Monaco, Pikes Peak, something unique really.

I think modeling a car probably takes 2% of the time and manpower of modeling a real life track and maybe 5% of the effort of an original one.

Don't know if those values are correct or not, but even giving a conservative estimate of 10 to 20%, it's still a big difference. The point stands, that modeling cars is easier than a track. And given the resources required for both, PD are more likely to please the players with 10 new cars, rather than one single track, which some players will like it, some won't.

 

[Imari]

There's nothing stopping them from designing an old fashioned circuit besides their inability to show restraint with gimmicks and trying to make tracks that are all things to all people

This is definitely something I'd like to see more of - tracks designed for specific purposes. Spa and Monza are great - for faster cars and big fields. Lime Rock and Tsukuba are great - for slower cars and smaller fields.

Are the tracks in GT getting stale? 100%, because they lack variety and they are the same, game after game. The only way to give some replay value to the existing tracks, is by having more cars to play with, more racing classes and the ability to create our own events to allow unique track/car combos.

A cheap way to enliven the existing tracks would be to make variants. Imagine if every returned track came with at least one new layout, using part of the existing track and adding a new section. Suddenly everyone is excited to try these "new" tracks, and it's cost Polyphony a fraction of the modelling time as creating an entirely new track from scratch.

Don't know if those values are correct or not, but even giving a conservative estimate of 10 to 20%, it's still a big difference. The point stands, that modeling cars is easier than a track. And given the resources required for both, PD are more likely to please the players with 10 new cars, rather than one single track, which some players will like it, some won't.

If I recall from GT5 the estimated values were 6 man months for an average car, 3 man years for an average track. 6:1 feels about right, and while graphics have improved so have tools so I'd be surprised if that has changed substantially.

There's definitely a balance to be struck, but I think you'll find that most players will get bored of not enough tracks before they'll get bored of not enough cars. That's why open world games have become popular, because there's an enormous amount of "tracks" that can be made even with a relatively limited number of roads available.

 

[ShiftingGears]

This is definitely something I'd like to see more of - tracks designed for specific purposes. Spa and Monza are great - for faster cars and big fields. Lime Rock and Tsukuba are great - for slower cars and smaller fields.

Indeed, the club circuit offerings are pretty limited in the game. It could use tracks like Lakeside which are short, quick and lively, which is what Trial Mountain and Deep Forest were in the original GT games.

 

[zzz_pt]

I do, and his conviction was already clear without him using that example. What I don't get is why people keep trying to imply that modeling one track takes the same time and resources as modeling one car, which is something I've seen more than once, whenever the cars vs tracks debate comes over.

The whole cars vs tracks thing is pointless anyway, as both require different levels of resources, and are likely worked on by different people.

Are the tracks in GT getting stale? 100%, because they lack variety and they are the same, game after game. The only way to give some replay value to the existing tracks, is by having more cars to play with, more racing classes and the ability to create our own events to allow unique track/car combos. As for new tracks, they are welcome, specially if they show some variety compared to the existing roster. A proper city track, Monaco, Pikes Peak, something unique really.


Don't know if those values are correct or not, but even giving a conservative estimate of 10 to 20%, it's still a big difference. The point stands, that modeling cars is easier than a track. And given the resources required for both, PD are more likely to please the players with 10 new cars, rather than one single track, which some players will like it, some won't.

I didn’t say or imply tracks take the same amount of time and resources to make as cars do. I know they don’t. But that doesn’t take anything away from the fact that many people, like me, would prefer PD to bring more tracks (new and old) to GT7. Again, we are getting zero (0) new tracks for GT7. Nothing, at least from what we’ve seen so far in official documentation and trailers. All we are getting are 2 old tracks with a makeover and the return of HSR and Daytona. That’s very poor imo.

IRacing for example has around 100 tracks and over 350 configurations. But “only” has around 100 cars too. The difference between the cost of a track and a car is 0 to 25%. ACC has 12 circuits and is focused on GT3 with around 30 cars.

GT7 comes out with nothing new to offer in terms of tracks except 2 redesign classics, which are nice, but very disappointing considering the AAA status of PD.

And let’s not even mention the 20million cars that a lot of people never touched or drove even though they would love to. I’m one of those. If I knew I wouldn’t be able to own those cars, I’d prefer to have a new track instead.

Sure they could add tracks and not a lot of people would like some of them, but I’m pretty sure there’s dozens of cars in every game you don’t like or drive for different reasons. I avoid FF and AWD cars more than anything but even though I don’t particularly like Alsace, I’ve had some great moments in there. One of them was actually with the Audi TT, a car I don’t like, with TRL_Lightning, just the two of us on a lobby and me trying to not look too slow behind him.

 

[Samus]

Good thing you’re not a real racing driver. Those lot have to race the same tracks every year for their career. Maybe one or two new tracks once in a while.

They race them once a year though, maybe twice. They're not doing races on them every few days like you are in a game.

 

[05XR8]

They race them once a year though, maybe twice. They're not doing races on them every few days like you are in a game.

That’s not the tracks’ fault though. We comment all the time, about knowing fun can be had with one track, but customising the races with the proper tools.
I would like new tracks. It wouldn’t change the game play in GT. Chase the rabbit, no variable weather, no qualifying, start from 16th. That’s GT from the last 11 years.

We got Autopolis, Interlagos and Barcelona, as new to the series. Maybe a brand new track comes as DLC, in GT7. If we got new tracks on debut and no Trial Mountain, HSR and Deep Forest, we already know the outcry on March 4.

PD do surprises well. We’ll see.

 

[Samus]

That’s not the tracks’ fault though. We comment all the time, about knowing fun can be had with one track, but customising the races with the proper tools.
I would like new tracks. It wouldn’t change the game play in GT. Chase the rabbit, no variable weather, no qualifying, start from 16th. That’s GT from the last 11 years.

We got Autopolis, Interlagos and Barcelona, as new to the series. Maybe a brand new track comes as DLC, in GT7. If we got new tracks on debut and no Trial Mountain, HSR and Deep Forest, we already know the outcry on March 4.

PD do surprises well. We’ll see.

Well, true. Just saying you do need more variety in a video game compared to real life. Lewis Hamilton for example has raced at Interlagos only 14 times in his entire life, as a gamer you could do 14 races there in a week. So they're going to get stale quicker.

 

[Magog]

Well, true. Just saying you do need more variety in a video game compared to real life. Lewis Hamilton for example has raced at Interlagos only 14 times in his entire life, as a gamer you could do 14 races there in a week. So they're going to get stale quicker.

He trains at all those tracks in simulations constantly. Same with every f1 driver.

 

[05XR8]

Well, true. Just saying you do need more variety in a video game compared to real life. Lewis Hamilton for example has raced at Interlagos only 14 times in his entire life, as a gamer you could do 14 races there in a week. So they're going to get stale quicker.

Yes. I’m with everyone, but I don’t find the list stale. The racing is stale to me.
It’s always the “why” with PD. We don’t have concrete answers from them. I don’t know why we don’t see the track list of PC2/3 in GT. PC2 and ACC haven’t gone stale with me.

Why do we not have all the layouts of Suzuka? Why’d we miss Motegi and it’s layouts? Ascari? All the tracks mentioned in this thread? So many racing tracks missed, in a heavily “racing is life” GT game. Guess that’s part of the frustration or concern with some players.

 

[Samus]

He trains at all those tracks in simulations constantly. Same with every f1 driver.

As his job. Not for fun. And still not as much as someone regularly playing a game.

Yes. I’m with everyone, but I don’t find the list stale. The racing is stale to me.
It’s always the “why” with PD. We don’t have concrete answers from them. I don’t know why we don’t see the track list of PC2/3 in GT. PC2 and ACC haven’t gone stale with me.

Why do we not have all the layouts of Suzuka? Why’d we miss Motegi and it’s layouts? Ascari? All the tracks mentioned in this thread? So many racing tracks missed, in a heavily “racing is life” GT game. Guess that’s part of the frustration or concern with some players.

Indeed, that's the frustration with PD in general, they don't ever explain anything unless it's coerced out of Kaz in an interview, and even then he's usually vague and/or confusing.

It's a mixture for me I guess. The single player format is absolutely stale no matter what the tracks are, agreed, but even with that format you can get a bit of fun out of a new track because it's still new. It just wears off quite quickly. Those new tracks in GT6 were fun when I started the career but 25% of the way through the format was boring and no amount of new scenery would help that, so I never finished GT6.

 

[zzz_pt]

He trains at all those tracks in simulations constantly. Same with every f1 driver.

Always with the same car.

 

[05XR8]

Casual players wouldn’t like it anyway. Too sim like.

 

[zzz_pt]

Casual players wouldn’t like it anyway. Too sim like.

What wouldn’t casual players like? More/New tracks in a new game?

 

[05XR8]

What wouldn’t casual players like? More/New tracks in a new game?

No, man. The simulation part.

 

[Scuderia Paul]

I can understand people feeling that the circuit offering can feel stale in GT. While the series has many wonderful circuits, I do feel that the real world selection is poor in that it is always the same ones. There is a huge number of fantastic circuits that PD could include. Adding Sebring, Sepang, or COTA for example would feel like a big addition. There are also many lesser known tracks that could make the list feel fresh.

 

[Magog]

I can understand people feeling that the circuit offering can feel stale in GT. While the series has many wonderful circuits, I do feel that the real world selection is poor in that it is always the same ones. There is a huge number of fantastic circuits that PD could include. Adding Sebring, Sepang, or COTA for example would feel like a big addition. There are also many lesser known tracks that could make the list feel fresh.

Sport added so many new tracks both real and fictional that was one aspect of it I think they got right and all those and more are going to be in GT7. Kaz has already stated they are going to continue that tradition so track variety isn't something I'm worried about. Would love the return of the track editor for sure though.

 

[Samus]

Sport added so many new tracks both real and fictional that was one aspect of it I think they got right and all those and more are going to be in GT7. Kaz has already stated they are going to continue that tradition so track variety isn't something I'm worried about. Would love the return of the track editor for sure though.

An added track 2-12 months later isn't much use to people completing the career mode on day one though, is it? They're done with it by then. Do we sit and wait in hope they add more? I mean it's no problem for me, I just won't buy the game at launch but that's not good for PD if millions choose that route.

 

[Magog]

An added track 2-12 months later isn't much use to people completing the career mode on day one though, is it? They're done with it by then. Do we sit and wait in hope they add more? I mean it's no problem for me, I just won't buy the game at launch but that's not good for PD if millions choose that route.

They added to career mode in Sport with every update and they could do so in 7 as well. Career mode is long. It's not like anyone is going to beat it over a weekend. For me I liked that they added more over time as it kept the game feeling alive.