I think the GTbyCitroen was an awesome move. I was disappointed when it came out that they wouldn't be able to put it into production.
The Tomahawk is not the same thing. Neither is the Chaparral.
They are not the same thing because they won't(?) see a "functioning" model, not even a "functioning as designed" (that is, using an ablation system or a souped up V10) because with the Citroen they slapped a gasoline engine in its body, not much different from the Volks VGTs that had "functioning" prototypes, in other words, they are driveable. But that's because carcasses are usually not the brunt of R&D.
GT did pass safety checks and a bunch of other to be vendable and road legal I suppose.
Note that in all of the above examples, they're cars that actually exist. That's my particular favourite category: cars that exist. Old, new, from any country, road or race. I'm not too picky.
There could be a few reasons for those sorts of situations, actually.
Where are the 60's (or 70's) F1 cars? Where are the V8 Supercars? Modern supercars? Pre-war vehicles?
Returning to my post there's this part:
"By these perspectives every selection that does not include all elements possible to a set will be considered lop-sided and hole-filled by someone somewhere."
Where are the 70/80's NASCARs, Formula Indy from a number of decades and etc.
All (or charitably,
most) elements of the set or else always hole-filled. Unless there's an objective proposition avoiding personal preference on why some characteristics sets are more important/necessary than others.
And you said it yourself, you do know there are "a few reasons for those sorts of situations".
I'll even help it out as it serves to the point below:
Game series developed
in Japan, starting 1996, where at first they modeled
not only from production cars, but scale models, practice that had a drastic shift in the late first decade from the 2000's because of the added preoccupations of model representation fidelity, one aspect of that being interiors which made production times
much slower.
On the topic of lop-sidedness: yes, a game that has a car list where 58% of the garage is from Japan, while Italy and the UK both see 6% shares each is lop-sided. Or, if we'd rather look at years: 72% of GT6's car lineup sits between 1990 and 2009.
So it's lop-sided in relation to an (approximately) even distribution? Be it in terms of country or date.
If we have 200 japanese cars, should we see 200 or so americans cars, 200 or so italian cars, 200 or so german cars? And swedish, and spanish, and indian. Same goes for year of production.
I definetely agree with that.
But
I do know a few good reasons for that sort of situation. And it's somewhat an impossible "problem" to fix. Unless they even it out by just subtracting elements rather than adding, which doesn't seem like a good solution for what it is a "perception of sufficiency" issue and the general design message of representing most types of cars.
https://www.gran-turismo.com/local/jp/data1/products/gt6/carlist_en.html You can see too that majority of new cars added to GT6 are not japanese, so hey, bright days.
And it's sensible to assume that VGTs are not an aggravant to the (lack of) appearance of new "real cars" (manufactured or driven as designed).