Sound Off! Track Variety

  • Thread starter Thread starter JohnBM01
  • 54 comments
  • 1,760 views
JohnBM01

JohnBM01

21 years!
In Memoriam
Messages
26,911
United States
Houston, Texas, USA
Messages
JMarine25
GTPlanet, here's something that concerns me as a GT fan. Track variety. You know, being able to tell one track from another. But since I don't know people as much as I think I do, I came to ask about track variety.

This is not a topic reporting on new tracks... I just want to communicate with the whole of GT fans around the world. Here was a comment that kind of helped spark my making of this topic:

"The track is nothing special. It's only mildly interesting because it's real Paris streets. It looks so much like the New York track. I'm looking forward to seeing some new interesting courses." -donbenni, in response to the GT4 video featuring Paris (the city, not Hilton, Famine :))

So tell me, then... when it comes to track variety, what qualifies as different types of tracks? What validates a track as being different from others? What would GT4 have to be (in terms of tracks) to provide just enough distinction of one track to another? I mean, your concern has me creating this topic. So sound off about track variety. And this isn't what you think this topic is about.
 
Not a big deal, but one thing that sticks out in my mind everytime I play GT3 is the perfect (and identical) road surface in every track. I think varying "road texture" would bring a whole new feel to the series. Like if Grand Valley had VERY warn/broken asphalt and then a nice patch for the bridge/lookout area.
 
Enough of the city based tracks.
We now have Paris, Tokyo, New York, Las Vegas, Monaco (although i understand the need for this one) Possibly Seattle.
Now they may look very nice and provide a challenge for PD to provide great visuals, but they are just a maze of crash barriers 90 degree corners and long straights, they are not conducive (sp?) to high speed racing, as any sort of error in a turn means contact with the wall with little room for errors and im not very fond of racing that mostly involves slamimng hard on the throttle in a sprint to the next turn ,then hard on the brakes, turn 90 degree bend then repeat.
Personally I think that is enough city bsed tracks as these are least likely to provide great individuality due to the nature of road layouts, mostly they feel to much the same with just a fancy new bit of scenery.

A max of 4 Tarmac rally tracks like CITTA and Amalfi, as they will most likely feature a max of 2 cars racing, citta while providng a good exciting drive, but will mostly be fun for time trialing not racing.

Then of course GT previous fanatsy tracks are most likely to appear, some of which are great, others merely average, yet mostly provide different challenges, It will be great to see the simple yet high speed challenge supplied by HSR, just hope that Autumn ring, Grindleward, and Red Rock will reapear, as these were Great Tracks with some great challenging aspects, which have not appeared in most other tracks, mostly these aspects revolve around elevation change.

Finally The real life tracks need to come from a wide variety of motorsport venues, there are many many tracks around the world that provide great racing, but Gt will have to provide locales for Cars covering a wide range of classes.
Take lemans as an example, it would be great for lm cars, but terrible for Kei cars.
So Pd need to make sure there is a good mix of track styles, and lengths.

Overall, Individual choice will determine what makes a great track to them, it will be dependant on many personal influences.
For me I want a wide variety of tracks, look good, that are well laid out, feature different kinds of curves, & length of straights throught the course, to have some elevation change, & some to be flat, id like the oval from super speedway, even a couple of city tracks, as long as they each have there own individual traits yet still manage to flow, ill be happy.

I hope this is the sort of thing you were referring to in your Q, John.
 
Hiya! :D :O :lol:

From the experience of GT3, I felt that the number of tracks in the game was short and kinda repetitive. I know GT4 is adding lots of tracks in this one now! :O Onto variety now...:O What I really think that makes other tracks different is the curves and straights of course:O But I would also include the scenary as making the course different. Scenary to me is what can keep my eyes from being bored from seeing the same racing pavement and pads of grass on every track or most. I wasnt very entertained that much when I started to try to enjoy the scenary while racing on GT3. Only thing that kep me entertained was the race. I want GT4 to really excite me when it comes to scenary of the track and that's to me will give a different feeling for each track! :O :lol: Oh also in GT3, there are different scenary in each track but they just look like cardboards =/. :crazy: :O :lol:
 
GTXLR
Enough of the city based tracks.
We now have Paris, Tokyo, New York, Las Vegas, Monaco (although i understand the need for this one) Possibly Seattle.
Now they may look very nice and provide a challenge for PD to provide great visuals, but they are just a maze of crash barriers 90 degree corners and long straights, they are not conducive (sp?) to high speed racing, as any sort of error in a turn means contact with the wall with little room for errors and im not very fond of racing that mostly involves slamimng hard on the throttle in a sprint to the next turn ,then hard on the brakes, turn 90 degree bend then repeat.
Personally I think that is enough city bsed tracks as these are least likely to provide great individuality due to the nature of road layouts, mostly they feel to much the same with just a fancy new bit of scenery.
Click to expand...
Totally agree and already said it several times in this forum. 👍

Variety comes essentially from different track width, corners radius, camber and elevations. It's essentially the infinite combination of these variables that you have to play with to make a good and challenging track.

As McLaren'sAngel said, different pavement characteristics also helps a lot, but I'm not counting with that in GT4.

While racing, the scenery is of little importance I guess.
 
I'm also getting a little bored of the street course variety the GT series has been bringing and will continue in doing so come GT4, then again I know that when I get 'out there' on the Nurburgring everything is going to be all right.
 
I did feel the tracks in GT3 were a bit samey. And it must be tough when creating tracks for any driving game, to try and make sure they are different enough to keep the player intreseted.

I'm glad there are some city based tracks and really look forward to racing around the streets of Paris and New York. However we do need a wide range of track including tight and technically challenging tracks. Also a few race courses as well added to the mix really help to break up any kind of boredom. Also add to that the lap length. We know that the Nurburgring will be in the final game and this will really add another diminesion to racing. With so many corners looking the same, adn with such a long lap it's not just about speed, but knowing your car and how it handes.

Cheers

Jamie
 
I really like the variety that is in GT4, and Gt3...although as many mentioned, there are a lot of city tracks in the game. But i think PD will come up with a great variety for the final version of the game...yeah we're seeing a lot of the city tracks now, but there are probably a lot of other tracks that aren't cities that we'll end up seeing later on. Either way, it will be fun.
 
I liked the tracks PD came up with. I'd like more of them. Imagination normally comes up with better than real life.

PD tracks normally feel totally different in reverse, giving 2 good tracks for the price of 1. New York and Paris will feel pretty similar one way or the other. 90 degree turns are 90 degree turns whichever way you go round the course.

I don't like the move towards more real life city tracks. Leave that to Project Gotham.
Seattle was good though because of the elevation changes. Tokyo was OK because of the long straight, good for drafting. Monte Carlo was good for the novelty value.

I'd like more rallycross like tracks. Some of the course on gravel, some on tarmac, and maybe a wet section to catch people out. If the differences between the surfaces was pronounced enough, tyre choice would be a serious factor in the outcome.

All the grass on the edge of the tracks shouldn't be as grippy as it is. It should be harder to cut corners.

I can't think of anything else at the moment. :)
 
I agree with most of you on the track variety topic. GT need to have more tracks that differ quite a lot from each other.

DiabolicalMask
Variety comes essentially from different track width, corners radius, camber and elevations. It's essentially the infinite combination of these variables that you have to play with to make a good and challenging track.
Click to expand...

You took the words out of my mouth :D

I would also like to see diffrent pavement texture like Civicbus said. But they have started to acomplish this idea (Nurburgring's wide corner). Let's just hope Kaz checks out this Forum from time to time :)
👍
 
I love Monaco, love the challenge.

For tracks I'd like to see Road Atlanta and Mosport. Every lap is a challenge and if done in the game correctly you can really feel the elevation changes.
 
I'm also bored of the city tracks. All that racing between walls :yuck:

The way the're going with the Nurbürgring and Sears Point is perfect imo however.

Give me a GT4 with those 2 tracks, Tsukuba and Autumn Ring Reverse, and the possibility to race against my ghost cars and I'm happy for a few months :)

As for off-road tracks, some real world courses/tracks, like Pikes Peak or European rallycross tracks would be the way to go for me.
 
So based on what you all are saying, mostly the street courses seem too redundant. You say some of the road courses are a little redundant as well.

But in talking about the street races, let's not get on the stereotyping side. As I said in my "Cities in Gran Turismo" topic, GT4 will not become PGR2 as long as street courses are added. GT4 will become PGR2 is more emphasis is on speedfreaking on city streets and competing on city streets involve cones and God-knows-what challenges. Gran Turismo is just the essence of road racing. I mean, it doesn't hurt whether racing is done in Laguna Seca or even New York. If you ask me, if Los Angeles was in GT4, L.A. is different from New York. New York is different from Paris. Paris is different from Tokyo, and so on. In fact, I can't think of any tracks that seem the same. Grand Valley is no different from Apricot Hill. Heck, you'd might as well say that all the F1 races seem the same. In Europe, maybe, but not in Brazil, Malaysia, China (coming soon, I think), and lovely Suzuka in Japan.

So people, I want you to tell me what is considered as race tracks being "the same." I mean, California and Michigan seem very alike. Pocono and Nazareth seem the same, only not as fast. I mean, I don't know any tracks that seem the same. So, tell me how you all can make the distinctions, and maybe I'm missing them. I mean, each track is different in my view. And one more question- how do you think PD will pull off 50+ tracks in which all of them are different in style from one another? Educate John-boy here.
 
I thought the variety was fine in GT3. Also, how many ways can you have a street course? Most corners in cities are 90 degrees, you can't change that. Changing scenery and elevation is basically all they've got. Also, you don't want city courses to look to much like track courses.
 
JohnBM01
New York is different from Paris. Paris is different from Tokyo, and so on. Grand Valley is no different from Apricot Hill.
Click to expand...
This makes no sense to me John.

Think about what I said before:
Variety comes essentially from different track width, corners radius, camber and elevations. It's essentially the infinite combination of these variables that you have to play with to make a good and challenging track.
Click to expand...
Look at the majority of the city based courses. Camber and elevations are essentially null. The radius of the corners changes, but the angle between the two straights before and after the corner is most of the times 90º. Just look at their maps and you'll see what I mean.
I think that it's quite obvious that all these tracks will feel the same.

And that doesn't happen with race tracks.
They might seem the same, but rarely do they feel the same.

And if you want to have fun with normal street cars, there's nothing better than courses like Autumn Ring, Trial Mountain, Grindelwald, Deep Forest, Citta D'Aria, etc etc.
Have you noticed how varied (width, corners radius, camber and elevations) these tracks are??
 
I dont think city based tracks are too similar to each other. I love to race in GT3´s Tokio track, but I didn´t like too much of the NY track. From the videos i saw, Paris track seems to provide more fun in racing it then NY do.

I like most of the city tracks, although i prefer circuit races. In Prologue the track I play the most is Fuji Speedway, and the second is Citta di Aria.
 
Based on DiabolicalMask's reply to my most recent post, let's do street courses. I'm going to go on experience here. Monaco is very different as it features several elevation changes. It has more than maybe Bathurst, and more often as well. And right. There are a lot of 90 and even 180 degree corners. I don't use terms like camber, off-camber, radius, and such (since I am not SERIOUSLY experienced as I should be), but when I race Deep Forest and Trial Mountain, the tracks are very different. I don't know if I'm answering my own question about sameness with this sentence, but the persistent lefts and rights of Deep Forest almost feel like the persistent lefts and rights of the beginning of Trial Mountain. Both are similar in the sense of having little to medium runoff. The only difference between the two is that after Deep Forest's Esses, it ends with a sharp hairpin; Trial Mountain's esses end with a not-so-sharp hairpin. They FEEL the same. Did I answer my own question?

So let's do more talk about track variety. Here is an extra question for discussion- when GT4 is released, do you think Fuji and Tsukuba might feel the same? I don't think so, but just something to throw out for discussion.
 
I think there are 2 problems with the 'city street' circuits. Firstly - due to their general narrowness and the fact that most corners are of the sharp right-angle kind they give little scope for taking different lines, sometimes you can make good time on a computer car by taking a different line and getting a better run to the next corner - there is little scope for this on a street circuit. Secondly - and i think a lot of others feel this way as well - the fact that since there is no run-off and only barriers surrounding the track means that any slight mistake can ruin a race or even a championship. These circuits lend themselves to a more careful style of driving that can become more than a little monotonous. The computer cars, for some reason, tend to be quicker on these tracks and since their AI is rubbish you can often find yourself pushed into a barrier with little chance to catch back up. I know this is the way street tracks are in reality, but in the world of GranTurismo where we have little penalty for hitting a wall or another car a race at a street circuit can become boring.

To be quite honest - i'm so bored of the SSRoute tracks that when one of these tracks comes up in a championship i feel like gouging my eyes out with hot tea-spoons just to releave the boredom.

I think the Rome night track from GT2 was an exception to this, and of course Monaco can be excused because of its history, but please PD drop some of the others!

Tracks like Tokyo R246 would be great if taken out of the city and given some run-off - how good would that double righthander (at the brow of the hill about 3/4 way round) be if it had some run-off? - i think it would be one of the most challenging sections of any track. As it stands its merely satisfying to not hit one of the walls.

Sorry about the rambling - i've been trying to finish the post for the past hour and lost my train of thought many times
 
I feel that a slight problem is that most of the city tracks are modelled on American cities...

This being a problem because American Cities have two type of corner... Right 90 degrees... Left 90 Degrees...

Base a course on a UK city and you won't be worried about 90 degree turns!!! We hardly have any of them... and most of our cities are also built on non-flat ground so you would have a lot of variation... I would like to see a race track on some old fashioned english country lanes... then you would understand what the pleasure of driving is!!

I would also like some more hill climbers... imagine blasting a TVR up the side of the Alps... All those winding bends and sharp hairpins... all in 2/3rd gear... MMMmmmm Lovely!!

C.
 
Yeti - didn't Brum hold a F3000 and touring car race on its city streets in the 80's?
 
yeti
Base a course on a UK city and you won't be worried about 90 degree turns!!! We hardly have any of them... and most of our cities are also built on non-flat ground so you would have a lot of variation... I would like to see a race track on some old fashioned english country lanes... then you would understand what the pleasure of driving is!!
Click to expand...

I second that. Some B road action would be awesome and a real challenge.

There are even some roads around here that might make a good tarmac rally.
 
TheCracker
Yeti - didn't Brum hold a F3000 and touring car race on its city streets in the 80's?
Click to expand...

Er... I really don't know... I've only lived in Brum since 98!!

Was in the Gloucestershire countryside before then (Where I learnt to drive (and crash!!))

MMMmmm B roads!! (and hedges!)

C.
 
Can't say that I'm untouched by this subject.

The city tracks we've seen so far look a little bland, such as the George V. (Paris) track and New York City. In Prologue, NYC was a big dissapointment for me. The replays look stunning, but when you race around the track from an angle designed to see the road, all you see is the gray bits of the track. It's the same way with Tokyo R246, except it has some green plus some high speed corners, and as a result of that, is far more exciting.

I don't mind SS5, as it gives its ooh's and aah's through its scenery. Altough I understand that someone might want to replace it, it's great just for a quick spin, as a lap doesn't take much time. SS11 on the other hand is just "blergh". It would be better if the completely redesigned it so we get to drive on that bridge in the background.
I also find Seattle a fun track to race on, because it isn't monotone. It has a fair share of fast and tricky corners, level and sloped streets, high speed stretches and slaloms. It always gives me a smile when I race on that track.

As for a comparison between Fuji and Tsukuba, you can't really compare them. Fuji is an extremely fast track and even Kei cars can reach relatively high speeds on it, most of them hitting the rev limiter on the long straight. Tsukuba on the other hand is narrow, tricky and short, and focuses more on manouvering rather than accelerating (except the last straight and corner combo before the finish line). Unlike Fuji, Tsukuba is a great track to race <70hp vehicles on. You can put it like this: Fuji is for the fast cars, while Tsukuba is for the slow cars.
 
talking about track variety i can only say just wait until whenever gt4 will hit the shelves. you will finally be able to take a car to the nordschleife. that will give you all the variety you´ll ever need. about the city courses, i like most of them although i have to admit that nyc is by far the most boring one of them yet. a nice addition would be the inclusion of some of the classic uk tracks like thruxton, brands hatch or the fast and flowing assen in holland. what i really don´t want to see are all the "new" f1 tracks like bahrain and china. most of these modern tracks don´t seem too challenging opposed to those classics that have grown into their surrounding counrtyside. one final thing though, they should change monacos layout a little bit to replicate the track as it was used in this years gp, making for less frustration.
anyway i´ll love the game - even if they include every nascar track ;)
 
What makes tracks different? To me, a number of things.

The track surface is something I've yet to see represented realistically, with grip levels where I actually notice a difference. I personally couldn't tell if I was cornering at Monaco or Laguna Seca most of the time, when in reality the grip difference would be far from negligible. Having some different texture for the roads would be a nice step too.

Scenery... Who cares, you shouldn't be bored enough to be even noticing it.

I think racing tracks are changing in the real world and I hope this will be reflected. We used to have absolutely huge circuits made from back roads along hills, and they were great really. As we've moved towards more and more professional circuits the level of interest has declined because they're more monotonous and less challenging. Give people a direct choice to go to Albert Park, Melbourne, Australia or Spa Francorchamps, Belgium and I think I could safely say 99% of people will go Spa. Why? It's just more interesting, and I think a large part of what makes that is the elevation changes. Look at new circuits like Sepang Malaysia, Bahrain - they're starting to feature elevation changes more and more to make the racing a bit more varied. Compare that to Magny Cours - boring, flat circuit.

We need tracks with different surfaces, different corners in terms of camber, style, speed, different track widths is a big one for me. One thing I want is long circuits. If I'm trying to beat the record lap at Laguna Seca, missing even one gear shift is enough to cost me the tenth I'll need to beat Sough. Meanwhile, on something like the Nordschleife, you could probably spin the damn car and still be in with a shot at a reasonable time because there's so much track to make it up on. I always find longer tracks more interesting because they offer a more sustained challenge.

I'm not fed up with the city courses. I find Tokyo ok, I love SSR11, I don't really care about SSR5 but it was nice in the wet, Monaco I inevitably adore, when you look at the amount of tracks in the game they're not consuming more than 1/5th or so so it's not too bad. I'd like to see the designers go nuts and come up with some cool new circuits like Tilke pumps out these days. I want some actual variety in the rally stages because they feel pointless atm. You know what else might be good? Increasing the number of anti-clockwise tracks always throws a spin on things, we have a few atm (Super Speedway, Test Course, Laguna, Trial Mountain, Deep Forest, SSR11, SSR5 - maybe..., boy this list's actually longer than I expected).

I'd personally prefer more tight tracks like the Nordschleife or Monaco to more wide ones like Midfield, it forces you to think more about your passes. I'm going to bed, I'll post something coherent tomorrow perhaps.
 
i agree with the general, we have enough city tracks vibe... what we need more of is real racing circuits duplicated into GT from all over... F1 tracks, Champ Car tracks, WRC's, Le Mans, etc...
 
Where's the champ car event at an airport, Portland? That'd make for a cool circuit.

We need to get some more tricky, challenging and wide or narrow circuits happening. Malaysia has a minimum track width of 16m. Things like that add a bit of variety as you explore more than one possibly racing line.
 
So what about track variety in terms of RALLY courses? Sound off, again.
 
On a side note to your topic John... you want to talk about Rally courses...

What about Rally Co-Drivers... do you reckon we should have pace notes in our rallies?

Or do you think that you should learn the tracks for yourself?

Or maybe you could add your own pace notes for a rally if you wanted too?

C.
 
Something that's not generic dirt would be nice.

Pace notes, no, not if it's still rally cross style lap tracks, it'd get irritating and pointless. Actually let's just not bother with pace notes at all, I know they're a part of real racing but they're something else cluttering up the HUD and irritating people. We can easily get by without.

Seriously all the rally tracks were pretty generic in terms of their surface, they were all fast and flowing with the odd tight chunk, except Maze of course, and don't tell me I just described every course on Earth either. When you look at the WRC you have the 2000 turns of Corsica's asphalt, through to the giant rocks of Greece, Turkey and Africa. There's the fast flowing gravel of New Zealand, the hard, dry marbles of Australia, the mud of Britain, the snow of Sweden... Let's have some of these to mix things up.
 

Latest Posts

Back