- 860
- Longueuil
Circuit de la Sierra would be nice indeed. They would need to invest a lot of time upgrading it but it would be their Nordschleife
On PS6 releasing at 2027 for example ? "Sorry guys you have to buy a 2006 🤬 box to experience these locations because people like ivann didn't feel very nostalgic so we didn't add them"
Or we can have both like we did during 1999-2016 and everything run smoothly .if it means having dozens of new maps,
I was wondering when the exaggeration was gonna come .gran turismo 10 on ps6 with following map list:
-trial mountain (16K remaster with 4D trees)
-high speed ring
-cape ring
-midfield
-deep forest
-seattle
+ 6 real world maps
Wait what i wasen't aware the older GT games are available on PS now .and to add, for experiencing old censored boxes they invented PS Now and emulators
The only system able to play all the previous titles is the Fat PS3 (which is a ticking time bomb) i wasted almost 1.000 € on these 🤬 so no thank you.backwards-compatibility,
My current laptop costs 750€ and it can't run anything beyond PS1 so i doubt you could find a PC costing less than a PS5 to run anything beyond that perfectly.and emulators on PC
I have read that it's not damaged beyond repair, but rather the cost of repar comapred to the demand to use that circuit make it not worth reparing. That's according to people who have supposedly been and raced on the other layouts on the interweb, but as it's the interweb you never really know how true those comments are.It's fairly common knowledge that the oval is damaged beyond repair, while the road course is still totally functional.
jesus, you sound like you want ALL the maps in gt7...Or we can have both like we did during 1999-2016 and everything run smoothly .
why do you live in the past? stop being nostalgic.
if all those old maps came, they would be interesting for 2 weeks...
I would rather like 10 completely new original maps.
if you want old maps, fire up old games and thats it.
Lets hope its not at the cost of getting real circuits added.
Sure, the Special/Clubman Stage tracks and Tokyo R246 also deserve a comeback, I feel these two are more likely.
Seattle is a very requested one too, but in real life the same area the circuit was built is now totally different, so if Seattle returns, it'll be just the name basically.
I explained a while back that the layout isn't possible, even in an altered state. The road system is incredibly complex and won't allow a for similar layout. You can walk the old route but you can't drive on it. That being said, the layout could be shortened so that it doesn't go around the stadiums.
Is there a rule that says that they have to use the layout of a city as it is now? I hadn't seen that.
The Rome course would have to be changed too if that is the case, as they have been working on the road in front of the Colosseum for a new Metro line, and I don't think it is finished yet. It is no longer as straight as it used to be. Not sure how accurate Paris was, because it was so long ago since I have seen it. It was not a track I enjoyed though. Same with the London track, that seemed pretty accurate, but not enjoyable.
More like whatever i can get but if its possible to get everything back why not?.jesus, you sound like you want ALL the maps in gt7...
Really ? Because your initial comment shows the exact opposite .guess what, me too. so does everyone.
Thats was my point from the beginning.compromise has to be made.
Yes, Apricot Hill, Midfield Raceway or Autumn ring are always welcome !
With a PS5 quality, city tracks like Seattle, Tokyo R246 or even the Old Rome (GT3) could be amazing.
More like whatever i can get but if its possible to get everything back why not?.
Really ? Because your initial comment shows the exact opposite .
This is spot on IMO, some of the old tracks are great fun (but not all of them) and would be more than welcome to return. If an old track is still fun to race on why not include it? Why does it have to all new tracks or all old tracks? Why can't/shouldn't PD provide us with a mix of new and old?If tracks return it should be because they're good race tracks, not purely nostalgic.
Some old fictional tracks were good for racing, others were not, albeit they looked nice.
That's what made Seattle fun though. It wasn't trying to be realistic and didn't take itself too seriously. It was, as you said, silly.If tracks return it should be because they're good race tracks, not purely nostalgic.
Some old fictional tracks were good for racing, others were not, albeit they looked nice.
Take Seattle. Certainly an iconic early track but would it make for good realistic racing? I doubt it. The first corner is pretty tight for clean passing, same for the mid sector. Into the corner at the Kingdome is really the only good passing place.
Remember, how we drove in those days against AI with no damage is not how you race for real.
It doesn't make up for it with any particularly challenging corners either, except for the silly jumps throwing you off.
Because they are much better tracks than the new ones. The last worthwhile track they created before Dragon Trail Seaside was El Capitan. Everything between them is total junk. That is why we want the old ones back. They are just better that's all.why do you live in the past? stop being nostalgic.
if all those old maps came, they would be interesting for 2 weeks...
I would rather like 10 completely new original maps.
if you want old maps, fire up old games and thats it.
The oval was damaged beyond (probably reasonable) repair in the 2011 earthquake.
This shouldn't matter for Polyphony though, they have scans of the track that they should be able to make a decent render and keep the track alive and usable in the game. With any luck anyway.
Trust me they’re sorely missed. Eiger, Matterhorn and the other Swiss tracks are some of the beat to race on because of the scenery alone.
It was sublime backwards.As much as I love a lot of the classic Gran Turismo tracks, I've always hated, hated, hated R246. I just have. Dreadful track, horrible to race on.
No, because this game was basically made BECAUSE the fanbase wanted classic content back (remember how GT SPORT tried to "burn everything down")You hate the fanbase because they actually have differing opinions? They aren't just one single group-think entity?
So you know compromises have to be made and it is definitely not happening/possible?jesus, you sound like you want ALL the maps in gt7...
guess what, me too. so does everyone.
but its not happening.
compromise has to be made.
Mmm, "realistic", "good race tracks", "Some old fictional tracks were good for racing, others were not". Anything that is not a scanned real life race track is not realistic, and away from the tracks PD have made up based on real locations, any semblance of realism gets further away from 'real life'. People seem to have enjoyed racing on the old tracks because they are still talking about 5, 10+ years later. There are some tracks which rarely get mentioned, but some that are talked of again and again. Do you think people just want them to look better!If tracks return it should be because they're good race tracks, not purely nostalgic.
Some old fictional tracks were good for racing, others were not, albeit they looked nice.
Take Seattle. Certainly an iconic early track but would it make for good realistic racing? I doubt it. The first corner is pretty tight for clean passing, same for the mid sector. Into the corner at the Kingdome is really the only good passing place.
Remember, how we drove in those days against AI with no damage is not how you race for real.
It doesn't make up for it with any particularly challenging corners either, except for the silly jumps throwing you off.
Here's a thought with regards to a Seattle circuit returning. If jumping to far or high can damage the cars, you have to slow down, same with sharp turns, chicanes, curbing that is too high, you take that part of the track the wrong way and it could be game over. Now that is simulation. It would just another thing that needs to be managed in a race. And if a track is never going to be used in FIA events (should that link carry on) or 'daily' races online, then if people enjoy the track, as some have said they have in the past, then why not have it, if people want it!Aaw man imagine the return of seattle. I don't think the air-born jumps in Seattle will be viable anymore(samir you are wrecking the car!) but a nice rescale of a steady climb to that infamous 90⁰ right hand corner would still be really cool. The tight city tracks really were amazing no room for major errors. It's on those tight blind cornered street circuits do you get a really good sense of speed of just how fast you are going.
Older models of tracks like Autumn ring and the Rome track from GT2 could still make an appearance. PD could just limit the number of cars to a maximum of12 on those tracks or something. They would be really cool for N class battles, one make races and track day lobbies.
Again, how do you know. If they released GT7 with every track that has ever been in a GT game to this point, then any new track from release would be new. That would be a draw, if they do DLC, that every new track would be new. It would also buy them some time if they plan DLC as there would be a huge number of tracks for people to get stuck into, and people wouldn't be asking for this old track or that old track. People could, and probably would, ask for more new tracks of course, but if there has been no history of Donnington, Kyalami, Paul Ricard or whatever, people in numbers wouldn't by asking for them, and so any new real world tracks would be a surprise, as would any new PD designed tracks.because if you get everything back, you dont get anything new.
theres your compromise
Deep Forest and Tokyo R246, since PD have shown interest in reviving them:Grand Valley is by far the best racing circuit. It is a perfect combination of fast, slow, uphill, downhill turns. You can only have good racing on it.
El Capitan and the Cathedral rocks routesDeep Forest and Tokyo R246 are in GTS data from 2018, with Trial Mountain, that's three of the old tracks.
I think London would look stunning on PS5. Besides, it would be perfect for Formula E. I would be very happy if that track came back.
And before you say they have limited resources, I would agree if you can give me details of how you know this. They should have enough money to hire the people they need to get whatever they need done. 8m+ game sales, added to money generated from all the associated PS+ subscriptions, and there has been a lot of money generated for lack of resources not to be a thing imho.
The New York track can and should come back in it's original state.It was a terrible track in GT4, but I'd like to see a complete redo of the New York City track. Actually use the elevation change and curving roads in the city, like on the FDR drive, and not focus so much on passing by big landmarks like Times Square. Something around lower Manhattan.
It doesn't change my opinion.I thought London and Madrid were terrible. Awful for racing. London in particular was almost never picked in GT5 lobbies.
For those railing against the return of original tracks against those, such as me, who say that there's no reason to exclude them, I'm not literally saying that every previous track should return.
Firstly, the idea of old tracks returning is not the same as zero new content.
Secondly, there were some terrible tracks. And we'll all disagree on which ones were good and bad.
It doesn't have to be in the base game. I hate base games with add-on content but let's flag down a taxi and head for Real Street; that's exactly how it's going to be. You could have, let's say... three or four returning tracks as part of the base game (Grand Valley, Midfield and Apricot Hill) on top of whatever original tracks are carried over from GT Sport (haven't played it so don't know).
The rest could be added as part of a themed DLC bundle called "Originals" or something similar.
And I will reiterate that I do want the Complex String to return but not as part of any race or championship in career mode.
Have it as a fun mythology gag where you can still use it to free runs, testing and such. Maybe even the option to have private or arcade races on it, if you so wish.
AgreedAlso you can tell who's been playing the games since the beginning vs the newer players based on the whole "who cares about old tracks" comments.
Imagine we had the max drivers on these oval circuits lolI literally spent time to actually investigate this and here's what I found just based on pit boxes and grid lines:
Blue Moon Bay - 50
Northern Isle Speedway - 70
Special Stage Route X - 40
The real point for the fandom is that those people should just accept it, suck it up, that the old contents are all only "good" because of nostalgia, which would mean they're all actually bad without rose tinted glasses. They are only good at their time but present day has changed, the standards have been different now the old ones are just bad compared to the current new ones. GT Sport has lack of content by burning everything down but GT7 has to add much more that are all new, completely unrelated to the now-bad old games.No, because this game was basically made BECAUSE the fanbase wanted classic content back (remember how GT SPORT tried to "burn everything down")
and now a shocking amount of people are complaining that they should focus on new content instead of bringing back old stuff.
You sure you saying the old ones being better aren't merely influenced by nostalgia filter? They could be actually as total junk as the rest without it.Because they are much better tracks than the new ones. The last worthwhile track they created before Dragon Trail Seaside was El Capitan. Everything between them is total junk. That is why we want the old ones back. They are just better that's all.
Nope. It was not damaged. It just needed a safety check after the earthquake but they didn't want to pay for it as there was only one more Indycar race to run so they ran that on the normal track instead.