Should "Original" tracks be removed from GT?

[j8mie]

And maybe in GT mode as well, but only in practice, etc.? That would make sense to me. If I played GT4 as much as James did, I might actually feel the same way.

Sounds fair enough to me. Just so long as we aren't forced to race on them in GT mode.

 

[James2097]

***Offtopic***

So what do they do all day long? Probably downloading Manga porn all day

At least there aren't any RAV4s in the PD carpark (if you can get the joke, don't say it... ).

***/Offtopic***

The main thing that really annoys me about trial mountain, is that stick that dangles just over the track. Just really pisses me off for some reason. Its always there, that branch never seems to fall down.

 

[a6m5]

The main thing that really annoys me about trial mountain, is that stick that dangles just over the track. Just really pisses me off for some reason. its always there, that branch never seems to fall down.

Is that the one the people were talking about in GT3? There was some sort of ape sitting on it?

 

[j8mie]

Is that the one the people were talking about in GT3? There was some sort of ape sitting on it?

Yeah I thinks thats the one. Stupid ape/monkey is still sat there grinning at you. I was sad enough to stop once and take a look...........the shame of it.

 

[SkylineObsession]

Fantasy/made up tracks offer far greater opportunities sometimes to have an exciting course layout, incredible scenery and a track of any length. Another bonus is that they could use any location on earth. You can't normally get that sort of freedom with real life circuits.

They can also be a lot of fun to race around; look at RRVS, GVS, Opera Paris etc. All look great and are awesome fun. In my opinion Opera Paris is one of the best street courses in the entire GT series.

I do not think any tracks should be removed at all. They aren't usually unrealistic to the point that they'd never be able to be constructed in real life, don't usually have excessively high jumps or anything and you mostly get the feeling that it could be a real track you're racing on.

There's that and the fact that people (like me) keep moaning when they remove/don't include tracks from previous games. The only way to quiet these people is simple...

 

[LOonIE]

well, i would really like to see / drive some new real tracks in GT5 ( Bathurst, Zandvort, ... ), but i don't want to loose the "original" tracks.
many of my favorite tracks are "originals". ( Deep Forest, Trial Mountain, El Capitan, Grand Valley, ... ) these tracks are a part of GT's history and just have to be in the new versions, too.

and think about this: even if GT becomes more and more realistic, it's just a game.

driving real racetracks don't have to be a bigger fun than driving the "originals". just compare Fuji 2005 or Tsukuba with El Capitan or Deep Forest....

 

[TheCracker]

Sometime ago when I joined this forum, I got upon my soap box and stood up for mirrored tracks. Some wise cracker on here ranted at me, saying driving on a mirrored track was like driving on a fantasy track in the clouds, and they had no place in the GT series. Fair point.

Who was this 'wise cracker' who offered such words of wisdom?

For some reason I remembered that conversation this morning, and it got me thinking again about this point. If the GT series is really trying to be the "The Real Driving Simulator" then I think it's about time those "original" tracks were consigned to GT's past. Surely all their is room for is real World tracks, or real World location courses like New York or Paris.

It would be a shame to lose El Captain or Deep Forest Raceway, but I don't really think they have a place anymore . With some luck PD might then include some of the more interesting tracks from around the World in an effort to fill the gap left by some of these firm favourites. I appreciate that losing these tracks will take something from the game, and racing on real life race tracks can be a bit boring, but that shouldn't stop PD creating a few more city based tracks, with character that so many modern race tracks lack.

Anyone care to view their opinion on this matter?

Whilst i must agree with that wise sage that mirrored (reversed) real-life tracks are pointless - i would hate to lose all the great 'made-up' tracks that PD have come up with over the years. Real life tracks, especially those modern GP tracks are built with too many constraints to have any real character. Older tracks, especially those built in crazy locations like in the middle of a mountain range (stand up The Ring and Spa ) have plenty of character and are therefore usually considered as great circuits. The made-up tracks in GT are generally great fun to drive (sit down 'Special Stage Route Whatever') they usually flow much better than their real-life counterparts and are a perfect venue for a computer game.

 

[Badsight]

SSR11

it needs to be in - & never removed

wtf were they thinking

 

[Mt. Lynx]

But I must argue that there are so many great RL tracks out there, that a total loss of the original tracks wouldn´t be so bad. I could easily see El Capitan replaced with Spa-Francorchamps, Trial Mountain with Bathurst, Grand Valley with Imola, High Speed ring with Monza and so on.
And an inclusion of something like Mille Miglia and/or Isle Of Man TT track, would seriously hamper the need for any original tracks at all!
At least we can expect Valencia in the next GT installment!

As for the SSR tracks - How about Long Beach and Macau instead?

 

[JohnBM01]

Oh, here we go with the "forced to race" comment. I personally dislike racing this course, but are you forced to race Nürburgring Nordschleife? Some of you make just these fictional tracks like they are just as bad as too many "clones" of a certain car. I usually think racing these courses are more of challenges away from real tracks. Most original courses (including rally and city courses) should be an oppurtunity to test your racing skills on courses other than real ones. Best original city course has to be Tokyo R246. I can actually imagine maybe Super GT may actually race. I don't think there's ever been a temporary street course in Japan's history. Surely this course is beautiful and quite fun to race. This is a track I really enjoy racing on. There are only two challenging corners to the track- the first turn and the hairpin at the southeast end of the track. Other than that, enjoy high-speed racing on the streets of Tokyo. Special Stage Routes 5 and 11 are both worthy challenges. Just because a track is fictional doesn't mean that it can't be enjoyable.

* I'm not real fond of Trial Mountain myself, but I'm not easily ticked off about the tree or the monkey perched on the tree. Do you actually think the tree will break or the monkey will be on the race track and cause trouble? This is one of the times in which "it's just a game" actually means something. Some of you think a bit too much about realism to the point that the littlest insignificant detail can mean a whole lot. And I don't think PD is going to come off with animals on the race track for you to hit them and kill them. How dumb must you be? * Opera Paris is probably the worst street course in any GT game. There is no realistic or fun areas of the track. This course isn't the worst street course in a game. Remember Canberra in "Pro Race Driver?" That track PURELY lacked momentum or sane corners. You should be thankful this course wasn't in a GT game. It's horrible. That's even worse with the thug AI in PRD (which most of you seem to condone for some dumb ass reason). * I'm fine with a mix of real and original tracks, and I'd love to see Long Beach myself. Macau is a challenging nightmare of a track. It's about as worse (no disrespect) as Monte Carlo. I think many of the narrow roads will frustrate most racers, especially when away from the high-speed areas.

Original tracks are as exciting as real courses if done right. I don't really race real courses too much. GT4's Extreme Hall has something many of you will appreciate, that "Real Circuit Tours" which features only real courses. But again, originality is something I admire. I'd still want to see more real courses, but don't want to see original courses go. Go ahead. Make your own tracks in addition to real ones. Forza did it. The ToCA Race Driver series did it. What makes GT any different?

 

[Jim Prower]

Nay.

Let's not forget PD's fantasy "LM edition" Race cars, not to mention the Formula GTs. Get rid of the Original tracks, you get rid of those cars as well. and I'm not sure how many of you wanna give up your Formula GTs.

 

[LastHours]

I have a simple way to fix this. Instead of giving us the same tracks in the same configurations, add weather to them. That's it. Rain, snow, and fog. Also add different times. Day, night, sunrise, and sunset. I would love to play Trial Mountain on a snowy night. You can always play them like the original track they always were, or mess around with the weather and time of day. I think that would spice it up a little. What do you think?

 

[Kylehnat]

Original tracks are as exciting as real courses if done right.

Yes. Grand Valley, Autumn Ring, SSR11, Costa di Amalfi, Citta di Aria, Opera Paris...all excellent fake tracks. Why? Because they seem like they could be real. I'm most miffed at tracks like High Speed Ring, Apricot Hill, and Midfield becuase they seem too arcade-ish. They're 100 feet wide, and don't have any interesting features. This was fine in GT3 and before, but with the VAST improvement in GT4 in the quality of tracks, these older tracks just seem lame and sterile by comparison. And for the love of God, NO MORE RACES ON THE TEST COURSE!

Edit:

Let's not forget PD's fantasy "LM edition" Race cars, not to mention the Formula GTs. Get rid of the Original tracks, you get rid of those cars as well. and I'm not sure how many of you wanna give up your Formula GTs.

To be quite honest, I really wouldn't care if the LM cars and Formula GT were removed. I loved the LM cars in GT3, but since GT4 raised the bar and included many more interesting race cars, the LM cars seem, yes, lame and sterile. The Formula GT is real, in a way, but I really didn't drive it much in GT4. The variety of F1 cars in GT3 made their inclusion interesting. Having just one in GT4 is a bit of a letdown.

 

[the_matt]

I'm gonna say no.. I understand how some people want to move towards realism, but for me you just can't beat something fast around Deep Forest Reverse Such a fast-paced and interesting track when you drive it backwards, and there's that bump as you enter the tunnel halfway round that sends you flying the first time you drive the course Gotta love it..

 

[Swift]

I have a simple way to fix this. Instead of giving us the same tracks in the same configurations, add weather to them. That's it. Rain, snow, and fog. Also add different times. Day, night, sunrise, and sunset. I would love to play Trial Mountain on a snowy night. You can always play them like the original track they always were, or mess around with the weather and time of day. I think that would spice it up a little. What do you think?

I think that's not a very "simple" way to fix it. It's actually extremely complex

 

[HACKr]

I think that's not a very "simple" way to fix it. It's actually extremely complex

Are you a programmer too?

 

[SkylineObsession]

You're crazy John (), the reason i find Opera Paris as one of the best street courses in a GT game is simply because i could see it being constructed like that in real life.

The fact that it still has the rises and dips (to aid rainwater flow into the gutter/kerbs) and bumps etc actually make it seem a lot more realistic and it kinda reminds me of a couple of street courses race cars in Dunedin use. I find the street tracks which are basically level (not including rises and dips) with no camber on them to be less of a challenge and thus less fun.

But of course it is your opinion.

 

[a112]

I don`t like Opera Paris very much,it`s a good course but i don`t like it,btw. im`just driving 95 laps of Opera Paris

 

[ImprezaAddict]

Original tracks. In one point of view they should be removed because, well how you said, its the rea driving simulator. They remove it, make it feel more real, or perhaps gaining reality to the game.
But on the other point of view, they should not. These tracks are how they are named, original. they are unique to the GT series and PD probably. I guess its just an answer really hard to explain.
P.S: they should bring back Grindelwald and Tahiti Road

 

[Mt. Lynx]

I like Opera Paris too, for the very same reasons! I even like George V and Hong Kong. The only "original" citycourse I have a grudge with, is Seattle. The "jumps" and the railroadcrossing has to either go, get rerouted or smoothed out. Especially if damage is to be included in GT! Narrow, low speed citytracks is great fun in my book (a LMP around Aria is just a big woohooo!), so Macau would be a treat.

As for getting rid of the FGT, I would not mind at all. I hardly use it at all, since there are a lot more interesting cars in GT4. The so called "dream cars" can go too, as long as PD gets their act together and recognizes the fact that the Zonda exists as a racecar, and nowadays, the Ford GT does too. But if PD drops these fantasycars (Fairlady Z LM, GT-R LM, RX-7 LM etc) they better bring in the much depated race modification.

 

[AmericanRacer]

I say dont delete anything and add more, more, more... i don't care if their krappy cars, tracks or whatever. i just want it available..

Courses i wish could be added or would be a good addittion are from what the Big NASCAR boys race on.. they are: Watkins Glenn, Sears Point, i think Pocano would be kinda cool to race on and the Daytona Road Course that held the 24 Hour event earlier this year and maybe even the Speedway itself

 

[j8mie]

Who was this 'wise cracker' who offered such words of wisdom?

I really don't know, it was a year or so back now

...Some of you make just these fictional tracks like they are just as bad as too many "clones" of a certain car...

The difference is, and it's a massive one, you don't need to use all of these cloned cars. Where you must race on every track. Where as most of those cars are at least real, these tracks are not. Yes they may be very believeable, but at the end of the day they don't really belong in a racing simulator. Sorry folks.

...Some of you think a bit too much about realism to the point that the littlest insignificant detail can mean a whole lot...

Yes some of us do get carried away with these smaller details, but sometimes it's the little things that can make a big difference. For example, PD made the Ford Lightning a 4WD instead of a FR pick up. I've seen several threads moaning about this on GTP, but I don't feel the need to comment as others feel this is important, and fair play to them.

...What makes GT any different?

At the moment not very much. But if they wanted to they could make it the best and most relistic racing game to date on any format. At present it's a very long way off that, and one positive step is to remove original tracks from the GT mode of the game to add to the realism. I know it won't happen as PD don't have the balls, but it would help them create a better simulator.

...Let's not forget PD's fantasy "LM edition" Race cars, not to mention the Formula GTs. Get rid of the Original tracks, you get rid of those cars as well. and I'm not sure how many of you wanna give up your Formula GTs.

Excellent point. Yes they should be ditched as well. I'd much rather PD put some real single seater open wheeled cars in the game.

..And for the love of God, NO MORE RACES ON THE TEST COURSE!

LOL!!! I'd be happy to never race on that ever again.



It seems the general feeling is towards keeping the original tracks, with a few hardcore simluator lovers in favour of only racing real World tracks, or at least real World locations. I know people will say "it's only a game", and you'd be right. But don't forget it does say "The Real Driving Simulator" on the box and if PD really want this to hold true, they need to make a few unpopular desicions about the direction of GT5 and future titles.

Please keep the views coming.

 

[Dave A]

Courses i wish could be added or would be a good addittion are from what the Big NASCAR boys race on.. Sears Point

Sears point was in GT4.

 

[Kylehnat]

Sears point was in GT4.

...and even in the NASCAR configuration.

I like the idea of Daytona...the road course would be cool, and the superspeedway could replace Test Course races.

 

[James2097]

Oh, here we go with the "forced to race" comment. I personally dislike racing this course, but are you forced to race Nürburgring Nordschleife? Some of you make just these fictional tracks like they are just as bad as too many "clones" of a certain car. I usually think racing these courses are more of challenges away from real tracks. Most original courses (including rally and city courses) should be an oppurtunity to test your racing skills on courses other than real ones. Best original city course has to be Tokyo R246. I can actually imagine maybe Super GT may actually race. I don't think there's ever been a temporary street course in Japan's history. Surely this course is beautiful and quite fun to race. This is a track I really enjoy racing on. There are only two challenging corners to the track- the first turn and the hairpin at the southeast end of the track. Other than that, enjoy high-speed racing on the streets of Tokyo. Special Stage Routes 5 and 11 are both worthy challenges. Just because a track is fictional doesn't mean that it can't be enjoyable.

* I'm not real fond of Trial Mountain myself, but I'm not easily ticked off about the tree or the monkey perched on the tree. Do you actually think the tree will break or the monkey will be on the race track and cause trouble? This is one of the times in which "it's just a game" actually means something. Some of you think a bit too much about realism to the point that the littlest insignificant detail can mean a whole lot. And I don't think PD is going to come off with animals on the race track for you to hit them and kill them. How dumb must you be? * Opera Paris is probably the worst street course in any GT game. There is no realistic or fun areas of the track. This course isn't the worst street course in a game. Remember Canberra in "Pro Race Driver?" That track PURELY lacked momentum or sane corners. You should be thankful this course wasn't in a GT game. It's horrible. That's even worse with the thug AI in PRD (which most of you seem to condone for some dumb ass reason). * I'm fine with a mix of real and original tracks, and I'd love to see Long Beach myself. Macau is a challenging nightmare of a track. It's about as worse (no disrespect) as Monte Carlo. I think many of the narrow roads will frustrate most racers, especially when away from the high-speed areas.

Original tracks are as exciting as real courses if done right. I don't really race real courses too much. GT4's Extreme Hall has something many of you will appreciate, that "Real Circuit Tours" which features only real courses. But again, originality is something I admire. I'd still want to see more real courses, but don't want to see original courses go. Go ahead. Make your own tracks in addition to real ones. Forza did it. The ToCA Race Driver series did it. What makes GT any different?

Yep, we know all that.
I think you're taking the trial mountian tree branch comment just a whisker too far than originally intended...

Btw John, use paragraphs. Please.

Yes, original tracks CAN be as good as real tracks, obviously the whole point of them being fictional is so they can be made MORE fun than real tracks, which many would argue, is NOT the case in GT4.
I've enjoyed the real tracks MUCH more than the fictional ones, and I'm sure most would agree with this feeling, if not all.

Hence, PD can't do original circuit designs as well as the best real world circuits, thus they should get rid of them. I're not debating the potential virtues of fantasy tracks (I really like El Capitan - which is actually based in Yosemite national park for those who don't know, making it about as "real" as the New York track), just the removal of the very old ones in the GT series (the overly arcadey ones from GT1/2).

My reasoning is that all the real world circuits in GT4 were much more fun and felt much more realistic, add to the fact I'm bored to death with the same old circuits time and time again.

Yes, its just my opinion (mind you a very well considered one), but the reason more new tracks don't get in is basically dev time and the lack of it, and the comparitive ease of updating existing courses. "NEW TRACKS" are generally regarded as a good selling point for a game.

The game sells to such a number of people. With the hardcore fans of GT being a smaller subset of these people, ALL NEW tracks would be more exciting for the general populace and the overall sales of the game. People generally like content that looks new. That includes me.

Certain people on this forum seem to be of the opinion that you can have as many tracks as you like (umm no you can't, dev time is sacred), or should just be happy with what PD do, whatever it is. If this is the case you must have a universe full of pure apathy. I'd like to think we all want a new and exciting game in as many ways as possible.

 

[JohnBM01]

Instead of "Dream Cars" (for example: Subaru Impreza Super Touring Car, Mitsubishi FTO LM Race Car, Honda S2000 LM Race Car (which I actually like), etc.), would you rather want to build your own Dream Car than have ready-made versions available? The worst LM Race Car of all time was the Honda del sol LM Car, which I kept spinning out with in GT1. That's even considering this "Dream Car" is mid-RWD apart from its front-FWD configuration.

Dear God, help me in saying this, but... if you could replace Test Course with a more interesting high-speed course, I'd probably go with Talladega. We need the Test Course for high-speed testing, but I do think that no real races should be run on it. If you replace Test Course with Talladega, then you'll have about 2.66 miles of high-speed frenzy than the 5 or 6 miles of Test Course. Test Course's oval is mostly like the kinds of tracks people use to test out the high-speed capabilities of cars. It was the kind of course in which the Dodge Ram SRT-10 was tested in being the world's fastest, commercially-available pickup truck. Just don't make Test Course available for racing. That would be my recommendation. Talladega would be a nice tradeoff for high-speed testing. In fact, Talladega used to be a track in which high-speed time trials were performed at back in the 1970s, I believe. But I'd trade Test Course for Talladega, or just keep Test Course as a testing course and not a racing event (though I'm okay with the "Like the Wind" event in GT4. At least GT4 didn't overabuse Test Course like GT3 did. I heard GT3 had a Toyota Vitz race at Test Course. Had to be dull).

Are you mad? I DO use paragraphs. Keep all the original tracks except one- Beginner's Course. I don't know why that track exists. It's boring, challenge-less, and horrible... even for a beginner-level track. I'd trade Beginner's course with something like Mallory Park or whatever.

 

[LeadSlead#2]

Sears point was in GT4.

now hold on. are you sure? My dad, being a NASCAR fan, thinks this is a new course to NASCAR, something just added a few yrs ago, or less. but I guess he could be wrong. I wouldnt know, as I usually don't watch

 

[LeadSlead#2]

This really should NOT be about wether or not you like the tracks, people. Yes, you ARE forced to race them. Yes, they are fake. but everybody likes at least one or two right? (just about anyway) not everybody likes real tracks either. I'm constantly forced to race on Suzuka, and Motegi. I hate those tracks. but that's real life. that's real racing. some drivers hate some tracks. others hate other tracks.
Until GT gets more realistic in other areas, there's really no point getting rid of 'em. cause then you'll just say, "they got rid of all those tracks, but the SVT lightning is 4WD" and "there's still fake cars" and, "wheels come in cycles".
Fact is, this should be one of the lowest priorities in a game that could do many, many more things to add realism, and satisfy customers.

I say, eventually? Yes. but let's fix everything else first.

 

[throttlehappy]

I'm completely and entirely bored up to the nostrils with trial mountain et all. The real life tracks are MUCH better fun.

Any excuse to force PD to get off their lazy bums and create some new content can only be good. There are so many fantastic real world racetracks with amazing layouts and historical pedigrees, I've no idea why PD need to invent utter ****e like Opera Paris.

Bin all the original tracks. All of them. I want GT to feel just a TINY bit fresh, it's staler than a year old sandwich left in Lister's laundry basket. It's all well and good to feel sentimental, but for God's sake just play the old games if you want old tracks. It's like you're all assuming the new tracks that would hypothetically replace the old-timer tracks wouldn't be waaay better, which they SURELY would be, since just about every single real life circuit that is worth including IS waaay better anyway.

Are you people TRYING to limit GT's evolution as a series? You don't come up to a completely grey wall and say... "Hmmm, I think I might paint that... grey..."

I don't know about most of you, but I'm incredibly tired of playing the exact same tracks in every GT game. Most of the old tracks have a kinda PS1-era arcadey aesthetic that just doesn't work anymore. GT has completely outgrown those old tracks. I would not miss them at all. I basically only play the Nurb these days because it is painfully better than every other track in the game by about a thousand degrees.

i couldnt agree more 👍

 

[Mt. Lynx]

now hold on. are you sure? My dad, being a NASCAR fan, thinks this is a new course to NASCAR, something just added a few yrs ago, or less. but I guess he could be wrong. I wouldnt know, as I usually don't watch

Sears point is nowadays effectively known as Infineon Raceway.

The Testcourse is used a great deal by some of us. We set up cars to run for the 300 mph mark at that track, and Talladega would not cut it. I would much rather see something like Nardo instead.

And I must admit that a lot of setup testing are beeing made at both Midfield and Deep Forest, not only by me, but by several others here at GTP, so if these tracks are to be canned, RL tracks of the same dignity (Midfield=highspeed cornering, Deep Forest=a bit bumpy, somewhat technical, both tracks are fairly short) has to be added. Maybe Silverstone and Nürburgring Südschleife or Mt. Panorama (Bathurst)?