- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
delete
Dull?
I'd much rather have this than Spa.
RACECARThats just mean
I was at Bathurst yesterday watching the 12 Hour race, so this thread certainly sucked me in - I'd certainly love the track to be in GT5 more than any other in the world.
Now as Nissan has decided to rejoin the V8 Supercars Championship, I think that Bathurst has moved a lot closer to becoming part of GT5.
Because it will help raise the interest in V8 Supercars out side Australia, especially in Japan and with Bathurst being the most famous track, it would be the obvious choice
Mac KFair enough, I just can't see how somebody can find a track like that boring or dull... To each their own though
Lucky you! Bathurst rocks!!!
SnaeperI like Bathurst and I want to be able to race on it... that being said though I just can't see it working out very well as an online racing track. Narrow sections on the mountain, high speeds with lots of terrible passing, high speed corners that'll encourage leaning and all that jazz.
I want the track, but I'm just not looking forward to racing on it very much. We'll see, though.
Note: If it was DLC, I'd buy it, but I'd much rather wait for it to be a part of GT6.
I like Bathurst and I want to be able to race on it... that being said though I just can't see it working out very well as an online racing track. Narrow sections on the mountain, high speeds with lots of terrible passing, high speed corners that'll encourage leaning and all that jazz.
I want the track, but I'm just not looking forward to racing on it very much. We'll see, though.
Note: If it was DLC, I'd buy it, but I'd much rather wait for it to be a part of GT6.
Yeah i like all tracks, but it just doesn't float some peoples boats... :/
The biggest problem would be wall riding all the way down the mountain and cutting across the top IMO.
FroudeybrandI am not a fan The nurburgeing if I am honest but the rest of real life tracks arebresonable.
ScaffThe AUP doesn't say that you can't use acronym's at all, what its says regarding grammar and spelling is:
I don't see anything saying acronym's can't be used. Text speak is banned, but not acronym's, quite different things.
Please see above, we expect the use of capital letters.
Its already been pointed out in this thread that the AUP is not optional, please stop treating it as such.
Scaff
NicoLoebDid you mean "it's"?
Amaroo Park and Lakeside Park are my favoured Aussie tracks.
Can you imagine the Dipper online... straight to the scene of the accident
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0RLwKFrtCM&feature=related
Then again this Lotus Pilot must be teflon coated... Last time I saw that many clean passes, Brazil were playing football.
Scaff
The AUP doesn't say that you can't use acronym's at all, what its says regarding grammar and spelling is:
I don't see anything saying acronym's can't be used. Text speak is banned, but not acronym's, quite different things.
Please see above, we expect the use of capital letters.
Its already been pointed out in this thread that the AUP is not optional, please stop treating it as such.
Scaff
iracing has laser scanned tracks so those are 100% accurate. On the other hand, all tracks in GT5 have at least one major flaw and corners are not perfectly done, suzuka being the best example.
Also there's the fact elevation changes and bumps are very badly done or not present in every single track, even in the nordschleife.
Topography is always as accurate as the man working on them. they raise 3 or 4 points in a square meter (if lucky) and connect them... those 3 or 4 points are correct but the rest is just a guess. Lazer scan or any other technic doesnt only give the X or Y (latitude and longitude) but also the Z (height)
Lazer Scanning its pretty accurate (as accurate as the amount of points they measure) and its the most accurate way of measuring topography.
I've been a Surveyor for more than 10 years and now I work at a dealership of surveying instruments (GPS and optical), we also sell 3D laser scan equipment.
Laser scanning is NOT the most accurate way to measure topography.
You DO get the highest density of points.
But optical total stations are still the most accurate.
The problem is that the points that are measured are interpretation of the surveyor. (Let three surveyors measure a hill and you'll get three different maps)
Still I think scanning is the way to go in this case, the problem is stitching the scans together, So the most accurate way would be to define the coordinates of the scanner position in the classical way and scan the track details.
Still quite costly and time consuming.
Just my 2 cents.
Nowadays You can get cm level accuracy with a correction signal.GPS is the least accurate of all the surveying instruments (at least the ones I used were off by a few meters)... Ive helped doing some topographic measurements/surveys in Angola (africa) (Im an Architech) but I never worked with lazer only with optical total stations (the topographer worked with it because I only grabbed the stick ) But as it is a rather old tech I assumed Lazer was more accurate if not than the Iracing marketing is ********....
Its funny because I usualy say the same thing as you... (Let three surveyors measure a hill and you'll get three different maps) when I want to measure and draw an existing building... but with me its even worst because I usualy say... I can (the same person) measure and draw this building 3 times and I always get 3 diferent buildings (slight diferences of course)