I think theres a lot of misunderstandings.
- I tried to say, that the list of missing tracks as it is or was is too much complicated, so i was trying to say to differentiate missing curcuits more. I want to help you to relieve this thread as it is one of the most important thread around here!
I know you perfectly know where is something in your OP, but for person who is only a guest it looks too overcomplicated in terms of easy to read, easy to understand.
Its basically for educational purposes. After watching some tracks that were hidden repeatedly and comparing it to its final version, I've noticed some significant differences
Remember those other threads
like this one? Or even
this one. These possible tracks are marely a suggestion to PD that they can widen the spectrum of their current (archieved) tracks. Quite different from the regular wish list tracks
- I know its different. I absolutely LOVE this idea especially Grand Valley possible tracks, but this class of tracks (possible variations of existing tracks) deserves their own thread or at least their own post. Not to mix them in existing tracks.
- That makes your thread hard to read, hard to understand for guests and therefore no one is here, which is bad!
So why PD implemented it within the deep confines of the game? If its not a missing track, then why PD should've deleted it in the first place before releasing it as the final build?
- I dont think PD left them on purpose. It just wasnt necessary to lose time with erasing them on demo CD or even on Full version.
- Especially Grindelwald is interesting. But again i say, those circuits (deleted, unfinished and/or unused versions of tracks) deserve their own class (different from Possible variations class) and own thread or at least their own post.
That would make your thread more clear to understand in my eyes.
Care to explain it to me in detail? I tried to make my OP as concise as i possibly can to show the readers it purpose.
- I forgot to say that i meant to hide those big pictures and videos to only html text links. - > it saves space in the long posts - > more clear to understand.
I added the <R> format simply because it shows not all tracks have reverse configurations
- All real life tracks would not have reverse version and all original tracks could have reverse (even if some havent).
- > It is not necessary to add even this little text to a big post.
Again, my notes is only to make the whole thread easier to read and get bigger amount of visits and posts.
Have you looked at these different maps very hard? There are significant differences (especially when you watch at these videos), and since I've played every GT game (except GTC, GT2000, GT4P, GT2 demos & GTHD Beta) I really can tell each track oddities no matter the physics and graphics. I got the '90s/'00s format from GT4 on its Fuji Speedway variations.
- I get and agree why you decided to have it that way and i know very well 'bout slight varies of some original circuits.
- But this also can make some people uncertain what they are reading. And i think that this is the problem with visits.
Unclear design - > less interest in going through the whole thing - > less visits and posts...
- For them its perfectly enough to list these tracks as one.
example of my thinking
MISSING CIRCUITS
Midfield Raceway = thats all
Or
MISSING CIRCUITS
Midfield Raceway
(versions) GT2/GT3/GT4 - thats all, with clickable links to permanent maps with GT2/GT3/GT4 note in the picture)
Seattle Circuit
GT2
Seattle Circuit Short
GT2
Fuji Speedway 80's
GT4
Fuji Speedway 90's
GT4
Fuji Speedway 2005
GT4> this has to be clickable to see map of circuit in respective game.
I tried to create a separate thread on
World Circuits but I got so much hate posts on it and it got closed within 24 hours. I don't want to repeat the same outcome ever again!
- Its obvious why they closed that thread down, you must not make a sole thread of missing REAL circuits as it is not going to be any more than another wishlist thread. -> "I want that track in the game now".. "no no i want that track more".. bla bla bla
On real life locations, its evident that I have to give credit to these places on which they were based from, it somewhat makes more sense (like that travel feature on GT5P)
- I disagree. Cant see a point in having to give credit to some city or place in the world before the "oficial" name of respective track in GT series.
> This also can make some people uncertain what they are reading. And i think that this is the problem with visits.
Just note at first place name of track (London, Rome) then place (UK, Italy), but im not sure if it is necessary at all. It doesnt change the subject which is missing circuits.
[GT1 (demo) / GT1 / GT2 (early demo) / GT2 (demo) / GT2 / GT2000 / GTC / GT3 / GT4P / GT4 / VGT / TT / GTHD (beta) / GTHD / GTPSP / GT5P / GT5 (demo) / GT5 (videos) / GT5]
- Nice at first look, but for me its too overcomplicated or how to say it..dont know the right word now
- Eventually when i encounter these signs i dont read them at all. Maybe they are too small.
- What is VGT?
I'll take your comments at heart, and seems like I'm the only person whose actively participating here. I will conclude this thread with my final edition, and will migrate this thread to Blogspot.
Please don't, how can you be so sure that on blogspot it will be better in terms of visits?
My notes are only to make the whole thread easier to read and get bigger amount of visits and posts.
I dont tend to critisize your list of tracks itself, only the looks of the list could be more clear.
Good night, not sure about time at Philippines
What game is it on and how can i get?!
I would travel all the way to europe just to get my hands on that game!
