Original Track Redesigns - Good or Bad? [READ OP]

[BrunusCL82]

I am very happy with the return of the classic original circuits. I don't see a problem with the circuit's layout innovations. The aim is obviously to make twenty cars compatible with online competition.

But...

Not to be strict, but the "arcade" look of Trial Mountain really bothers me. The Trial Mountain runoff area could look similar to Dragon Trail, instead of boulders and trees at the edge of the track. There will certainly be invisible walls that will prevent the cars from crashing into the rocks and trees. This to me is unpleasant.

It would be great if Trial Mountain kept a short runoff area, especially right after the first tunnel and straight after the second tunnel. I believe that the forest landscape, with trees and rocks could still be maintained.

About the High Speed Ring, I didn't like the modification of the second turn. At first I thought the curve was very tight, probably made in second gear, the track narrow and without runoff area. The fact that there is no runoff area will be a very serious problem. It may be similar to the Maggiore dive.

 

[05XR8]

.

 

[ScottPuss20]

Not even defending PD, but Trial Mountain's hazards are like classic tracks. Spa didn't have all the barriers it has now. Look at Bathurst, cars went over the edge. The famous rock that Dick Johnson hit exiting Forest's Elbow. It's not about FIA safety here. I'd place it more about some excitement, knowing cars are inches from being totaled. Anyway, there will probably be invisible walls at some points of the circuit.

Putting the "trial" back into Trial Mountain.

 

[MIE1992]

I might've said it before, but I'll say it again anyway: there's (almost) no such thing as "too much" when it comes to redesigning tracks, especially when you see it all the time in the real world. The most obvious examples being Spa-Francorchamps, Fuji Speedway, Le Mans, and Interlagos. If anything, I'd say that re-designing original courses adds to GT's verisimilitude and immersion. The only GT-original course that I think is relatively perfect as-is, is Apricot Hill.

Now, not counting courses set in real locations - such as city courses, Dragon Trail, or the Circuito de la Sierra - I'm hoping that Grand Valley and Deep Forest return alongside their variants, like the Grand Valley east and west layouts. However, I admit this is hardly an original thought. As for something relatively less popular, I'd say the return of Autumn Ring would be nice, as well as the aforementioned Apricot Hill. And I think the Special Stage/Clubman Stage routes have been essentially replaced with Tokyo Expressway, though I'd love to see more Tokyo Expressway layouts - especially a "West" and "North" layout.

 

[mwoodski]

I might've said it before, but I'll say it again anyway: there's (almost) no such thing as "too much" when it comes to redesigning tracks, especially when you see it all the time in the real world. The most obvious examples being Spa-Francorchamps, Fuji Speedway, Le Mans, and Interlagos. If anything, I'd say that re-designing original courses adds to GT's verisimilitude and immersion. The only GT-original course that I think is relatively perfect as-is, is Apricot Hill.

Apricot Hill needs a lengthening. Scale the whole thing up about 25% but then make the racing surface the same width as it it currently. Lap times are too short tbh.

-------------------------------------

I personally do not like the change to HSR, as it's the track I'd 100% build in real life if I won the big lotto, but we'll see how it affects racing.

 

[ThePotatoKing]

Apricot Hill needs a lengthening. Scale the whole thing up about 25% but then make the racing surface the same width as it it currently. Lap times are too short tbh.

-------------------------------------

I personally do not like the change to HSR, as it's the track I'd 100% build in real life if I won the big lotto, but we'll see how it affects racing.

I don't think Apricot Hill needs any major modifications really-apart from widening the last chicane and the hairpin before it-since it is one of the most "realistic" out of all the fictional circuits, along with Grand Valley, plus it already went through a major overhaul in GT6, so it seems kinda pointless to me that they would remake it completely from scratch again.

Then again, High Speed Ring had nothing fundamentally wrong with its layout and PD changed Turn 2 out of the blue for no reason so who knows?

 

[Tenacious D]

I've wanted all the classic Gran Turismo tracks brought to life again since the days of GT4. Three of my much desired locations are

• Grindelwald
• Red Rock Valley
• Circuito de la Sierra

Grindelwald is kind of like a rally track, with lots of tricky turns and elevation changes, but it was a blast.

Red Rock Valley is usually considered redundant with Midfield around, but it's such a cool variation that I don't see as much overlap as others do.

Sierra was such a hoot to race on, and extremely long. I miss it a lot.

Honestly, I want all the tracks redone for GT7. Most likely they would be modernized, but I'll take whatever Team Polyphony gives us to play with. Here's a call for the return of the Course Maker, and Race Builder too. I've only wanted a full featured Race Maker, including an entire racing season with championship, since GT5.

 

[mwoodski]

A modernized Red Rock would rule.

Cut the banking a bit so you'd have to lift, and tighten up the two switchbacks to add passing areas and it would be a blast.

 

[05XR8]

.

 

[ShiftingGears]

Not even defending PD, but Trial Mountain's hazards are like classic tracks. Spa didn't have all the barriers it has now. Look at Bathurst, cars went over the edge. The famous rock that Dick Johnson hit exiting Forest's Elbow. It's not about FIA safety here. I'd place it more about some excitement, knowing cars are inches from being totaled. Anyway, there will probably be invisible walls at some points of the circuit.

Yeah but then they throw in giant tunnels which throws any period specific realism out of the window

Its also pretty hard to identify a more poorly designed chicane in motor racing history than their reimagined last corner

 

[05XR8]

.

 

[Slurm]

I personally would've chosen not to revive original circuits. We all know the result of re-designs (which, let's face it, are necessary to bring them into today's game) will most likely be duller versions of an arcade-style fantasy track, which perhaps we loved back then, but is not suited to how GT is played now.

I still think the fantasy aspect of GT is a key piece of it's DNA, and the original tracks were have always been part of that, but would WAY prefer to see this carried into the next game(s) by re-thinking what is now possible with new ideas.

 

[ThePotatoKing]

Its also pretty hard to identify a more poorly designed chicane in motor racing history than their reimagined last corner

Abu Dhabi says hi!

 

[BrunusCL82]

I'm going to say a heresy here:

I wanted to see Red Rock Valley with one more inner ring. Originally there is only one looped ring, but I wanted to see two looped rings. In this way, the circuit would be longer and would provide enough space to hold sixteen or twenty-four cars (in the future), in addition to providing a time in excess of a minute and a half.

Like this:

 

[Samus]

I'm going to say a heresy here:

I wanted to see Red Rock Valley with one more inner ring. Originally there is only one looped ring, but I wanted to see two looped rings. In this way, the circuit would be longer and would provide enough space to hold sixteen or twenty-four cars (in the future), in addition to providing a time in excess of a minute and a half.

Like this:

Tracks that just repeat themselves several times over are rarely good to drive.

I think tracks like that they've essentially forgotten about and won't bring back, preferring to model new original tracks, but if they did I don't think it needs any extensions, nothing wrong with short tracks and the straight is pretty long already.

 

[ShiftingGears]

I'm going to say a heresy here:

I wanted to see Red Rock Valley with one more inner ring. Originally there is only one looped ring, but I wanted to see two looped rings. In this way, the circuit would be longer and would provide enough space to hold sixteen or twenty-four cars (in the future), in addition to providing a time in excess of a minute and a half.

Like this:

Why don't you just drive two laps of it

The track has a 1km long straight with 70 second lap times for GT1 cars, it is easily fit for purpose for track size as is

 

[Phaceless_Ph]

I think a few people might have already said this, but if you look at the Original Circuits that came via PS1-PS3 releases (a lot of PS3 versions of the tracks were remasters and not rebuilds of PS2 versions), you will probably notice quite a few scaling issues with things such as track widths and kerb sizes.

Also, you do have some sections of track where in a more realistic physics engine, a lot of cars with stiffer, lower suspension and/or heavy aero-dependence might not even be drivable on such as the bumps on the final corner exit at OG Trial Mountain, the jump on the first corner of Deep Forest Reverse and some of the bumpier sections of El Capitan.

 

[tankuroded]

I think a few people might have already said this, but if you look at the Original Circuits that came via PS1-PS3 releases (a lot of PS3 versions of the tracks were remasters and not rebuilds of PS2 versions), you will probably notice quite a few scaling issues with things such as track widths and kerb sizes.

Also, you do have some sections of track where in a more realistic physics engine, a lot of cars with stiffer, lower suspension and/or heavy aero-dependence might not even be drivable on such as the bumps on the final corner exit at OG Trial Mountain, the jump on the first corner of Deep Forest Reverse and some of the bumpier sections of El Capitan.

Kaz brought up the scaling issues in this interview.

 

[Rangeraus]

I'm going to say a heresy here:

I wanted to see Red Rock Valley with one more inner ring. Originally there is only one looped ring, but I wanted to see two looped rings. In this way, the circuit would be longer and would provide enough space to hold sixteen or twenty-four cars (in the future), in addition to providing a time in excess of a minute and a half.

Like this:

As implied earlier Red Rock Valley is a bit over 4km long so is not exceedingly short as-is. If that is too short then you could just lengthen the main straight and the T1-2 straight, then increase the T1 corner radius.

It doesn't really have any big braking zones so I am not sure how good the racing will be there for a few categories. Seems pretty similar to the modern High Speed Ring to be honest.

That being said it would be good if it returned, not the highest priority track on my GT originals wishlist though.

 

[LeGeNd-1]

I'm going to say a heresy here:

I wanted to see Red Rock Valley with one more inner ring. Originally there is only one looped ring, but I wanted to see two looped rings. In this way, the circuit would be longer and would provide enough space to hold sixteen or twenty-four cars (in the future), in addition to providing a time in excess of a minute and a half.

Like this:

Reminds me of the old Interlagos:

I think RRV is fine as it is btw.

I think a few people might have already said this, but if you look at the Original Circuits that came via PS1-PS3 releases (a lot of PS3 versions of the tracks were remasters and not rebuilds of PS2 versions), you will probably notice quite a few scaling issues with things such as track widths and kerb sizes.

Also, you do have some sections of track where in a more realistic physics engine, a lot of cars with stiffer, lower suspension and/or heavy aero-dependence might not even be drivable on such as the bumps on the final corner exit at OG Trial Mountain, the jump on the first corner of Deep Forest Reverse and some of the bumpier sections of El Capitan.

We still have giant tall kerbs in GT Sport. The whole of Kyoto Yamagiwa+Miyabi is like this. Doesn't stop people jumping them because the physics in GT is always very forgiving over bumps.

Addressed the second point in OP. A few people have ported or made these tracks in Assetto which has even more realistic physics, and lowered/stiff race cars drive them just fine. Nordschleife is a lot bumpier and also has points where cars regularly leave the track (e.g. Flugplatz, Pflanzgarten), and GT3 cars race there just fine.

 

[05XR8]

.

 

[mwoodski]

Its also pretty hard to identify a more poorly designed chicane in motor racing history than their reimagined last corner

No one has raced it yet to know if this is true though. Things that look a bit wonky via photos or a map can actually be pretty good to drive.

 

[05XR8]

.

 

[05XR8]

.

 

[LeGeNd-1]

View attachment 1094290
Must have been an accident in pit lane. How are cars getting through that?

It doesn't matter because the cars teleport straight to their pitbox

 

[twitcher]

I clicked the first option, but I don’t want them “modernized” too much. I think the argument that a fictional track needs to meet FIA this or that is stupid, and like OP says, Dragon Trail points a big middle finger at that concept.

To me, when we say “modernized”, I would prefer if they made the fictional tracks “make sense”.

If we look at tracks like Deep Forest, Trial Mountain, Alsace, St Croix, and many more….they make zero sense. What road networks are these roads part of? Why is there intersections that go to nowhere? Why is there a loop of pavement running through a forest with absolutely no connection to anything outside the forest?

St Croix has some nice “country road” sections to it, but if you drive the track slowly and look at the intersections, and where the various roads lead, it’s completely nonsensical.

SSR5 had this same issue. It’s a freeway loop in a city that doesn’t seem to connect to anything. The version in GT5 & 6 addressed this a little bit, but it’s still pretty nonsenscle.

Apricot Hill is a great example of a fictional track that works. It makes sense.

Tracks like Grand Valley or Midway, I’m fine with how they are, since they’re not supposed to be circuits on public roads.

But Trial Mountain, Deep Forest, St Croix, etc etc, please make these circuits actually make logical sense with proper road markings, proper intersections and junctions with roads that appear to actually go somewhere (eg, on Alsace, there’s an intersection with a cross road that literally ends 10 feet away from the circuit…wtf??)

 

[05XR8]

.

 

[LeGeNd-1]

Bathurst is not a fictional track tho. Unless you're one of those people who think Australia isn's a real place

 

[05XR8]

.

 

[05XR8]

.