Reason for poor track selection?

[polizei]

Aside from the resources required to scan and tweak a track for release, are there any reasons not obvious as to why many racing games have limited track selections?

Do tracks charge a large licensing fee?
Is scanning tracks super expensive?
Do PD (and other game developers) change game engines so often that they can't reuse track assets?

It just seems really odd to me when i think about how the GT series really helped some smaller car companies like TVR get much better recognition internationally, as well as educating people on the Nissan GTR and other vehicles that may not be available in all markets. So when a series like GT has had a material impact on brands i would think race tracks would be DYING to have their tracks used in the game. Is this not the case?

If I managed a well known track that wasn't in a racing game i would seriously consider laser scanning it and providing it to game developers for free or dirt cheap to help increase my brand awareness.

I imagine that once you get the track data the hardest part is fleshing it out to make it look like the real thing with trees, support vehicles, grandstands, etc. etc. But with the quick rise in procedurally produced worlds a lot of the filler material should/could be relatively fast and easy to create, imo.

 

[TheAdmiester]

Only one I can answer is about licencing. The only answer I have is that it seems that some do, in particular I've heard that Suzuka charges ridiculous amounts for western developers to licence the track, which is the reason PCARS doesn't have a licenced version.

 

[Crazy Taylor]

Some tracks might also have exclusivity rights to game devs as well. Kinda like when EA had rights to porsche.

 

[MatskiMonk]

If I managed a well known track that wasn't in a racing game i would seriously consider laser scanning it and providing it to game developers for free or dirt cheap to help increase my brand awareness.

How would you expect a return on investment?

 

[polizei]

How would you expect a return on investment?

It really depends on how much a basic scan costs. A cost that could be passed on to track days and events. There's so many tracks in important series that have never been in any game/sim or are seriously underrepresented. Assuming the cost is not exorbitant I could see many facilities advocating for inclusion in as many games/Sims as possible.

 

[MatskiMonk]

It really depends on how much a basic scan costs. A cost that could be passed on to track days and events. There's so many tracks in important series that have never been in any game/sim or are seriously underrepresented. Assuming the cost is not exorbitant I could see many facilities advocating for inclusion in as many games/Sims as possible.

From a gamers point of view, I agree. From a circuits point of view, I don't see how the additional exposure translates to money in the bank. If the cost isn't unreasonable it'd be a nice thing to do, but I can understand why they don't bother.

 

[TonyJZX]

There's so many tracks in important series that have never been in any game/sim or are seriously underrepresented. Assuming the cost is not exorbitant I could see many facilities advocating for inclusion in as many games/Sims as possible.

Here's the thing... tracks should not rely on monies from licensing as anything but a mere top up to advertising. Its a small fraction of the actual yearly revenue intake.

Now back to the topic... clearly it seems like the GTS engine is different enough to the GT6 engine that stuff cannot be merely ported over.

It would make sense to me that EVERY track in GT6 and EVERY premium car could be slab moved to GTS assuming the licensing is ok but I suppose the move from the CELL to the x86 platform was probably a factor since the PD tracks like Deep Forest still havent made it.

 

[StuntmanRich]

I know it’s not strictly related to the discussion but it does to the title of the thread; Why on earth did they decide to put the fake Italian track in the ALL JAPAN GT thing when they just added Tsukuba circuit? I’d love to sit down with the devs and ask them why they make certain decisions.

 

[queleuleu]

IMO, they changed something in 2016. When GTSport was unveiled in May 2016, tracks looked so poor, unfinished. The first trailer was almost disappointing for a GT.

Now, we have ten new cars every month with gorgeous trailers. I'm surprised that they can't reuse the same datas for Silverstone, Red Bull Ring or Midfield... Engines incompatibility between GT6 and GTSport?

 

[Sergio18]

I'm sure you're avoiding the mistakes of the past, and the new circuits are now super premium, just look at the details! In addition, the fact of getting into track little by little makes the pilots get used and can be competitive

 

[polizei]

I'm sure you're avoiding the mistakes of the past, and the new circuits are now super premium, just look at the details! In addition, the fact of getting into track little by little makes the pilots get used and can be competitive

IMO, the tracks don't look all that great. Very sterile, nothing you notice at speed anyways, just grey and green with curbing in between. I wouldn't describe the tracks as "super premium". Maybe you were being sarcastic?

 

[fastone371]

Why wouldnt PD include the old favorites like Trial Mountain, Grand Valley, Deep Forest, High Speed Ring, Test Track, Red Rock Valley, etc??? I dont think any of these are real life tracks and you would think they could use some of the design they have invested into those tracks but I am not a computer guy so Im a little (a lot) slow in this area. But I think it would be great to have some of the PD classics included. It makes no difference to me if I am racing on real life tracks or pretend tracks, its not like I am preparing to go race on them in real life. I would also happily pay for track and race packs, if it means a better product I dont mind spending a few extra bucks. If PD thinks it would piss players off having to pay extra for tracks release them a month or 3 early to those willing to happily pay then release them for free to everyone after a pre-selected time, at least they get some return back on investment that way and they could possibly be encouraged to produce more tracks.

 

[vxr58]

I'm still furious that they wasted their time developing 3 x rally stages. Could they replace the gravel with Tarmac? Fisherman's ranch would be fantastic.

 

[Sergio18]

IMO, the tracks don't look all that great. Very sterile, nothing you notice at speed anyways, just grey and green with curbing in between. I wouldn't describe the tracks as "super premium". Maybe you were being sarcastic?

No.

 

[Draggon]

But I think it would be great to have some of the PD classics included.

I would also happily pay for track and race packs, if it means a better product I dont mind spending a few extra bucks.

I'd definitely pay for Red Rock, Grindlewald, El Capitan, Hong Kong, and maybe others. I really don't like some of the Maggiore versions. 4 months into the game it's ok and I enjoy the variety, but 3 years from now I expect to be sick to death of them.

 

[sumbrownkid]

I know it’s not strictly related to the discussion but it does to the title of the thread; Why on earth did they decide to put the fake Italian track in the ALL JAPAN GT thing when they just added Tsukuba circuit? I’d love to sit down with the devs and ask them why they make certain decisions.

Because these current incarnate of Super GT Cars are gonna be overkill for a little track like Tsukuba. Lago Maggiore is a brilliant track that I wish was a real one.

 

[StuntmanRich]

Because these current incarnate of Super GT Cars are gonna be overkill for a little track like Tsukuba. Lago Maggiore is a brilliant track that I wish was a real one.

They race at SUGO, that’s pretty small.

 

[sumbrownkid]

SUGO is almost twice the size of Tsukuba, even if SUGO is small at roughly 2.3 miles.