There is no personal offence taken when someone points out flawed logic in a given list. That is a really weak argument to resort to whenever someone points out said flaws. No one is attacking anyone.
You cannot have certain Vision GTs in a game and claim to want to remove the entire concept of Vision GT. You cannot possibly expect to exclude most manufacturers from a collaborative effort.
You cannot reduce endurance races to 1 hour because you simply don't feel like doing them. Endurance races are called endurance races for a reason. A one hour endurance proves diddly squat.
I can keep going with this and pick apart most points in that original post.
From the point of view of my vision of Gran Turismo 7 those few VGTs that I like will then be renamed and put in dealerships as design or concept cars. There have been several collaborations that have been forgotten (Pikes Peak ... where are you ...) within Gran Turismo so I think they would not be a novelty that would happen with the Vision GT. If they should all remain there then they should be in their own group divided by classes in order of power.
As far as Endurance races are concerned, the duration of one hour is from my point of view perfect and would not ruin the experience for anyone. I have a lot of friends who don't have much time to devote to the game because they work or have other things to do, and many of them are happy that in Gran Turismo Sport the Endurance doesn't last more than an hour. But even from the point of view of fun, not everyone is a fan of total realism for the duration, as I wrote above I find it incredibly boring to race for hours on a track alone against an army of AI-driven drivers. The possibility of using the feauture of pausing the race as @o000o mentioned does not change for me that it is all time wasted. When I want to start the game I do it because I want to do something else, I don't wake up saying .. "WOW I can't wait to do another 6 hours on SPA without dynamic weather, without dynamic weather and against computer controlled racing drivers". .. where then at the end of the race ... you win ONLY 1 million (Since we certainly didn't drive cleanly so goodbye 50% more) and a prize car that surely if they use the Gran Turismo Sport method will be a Pace Car or a random GR.3 car. No, honestly it doesn't fit me. Instead, I could agree, if anything, the B-Spec mode would also be inserted where we can speed up the race time to immediately conclude the event, but here it depends whether the B-Spec will be able to drive or not. (In Gran Turismo 5 v1.0 he was famous for crashing into walls ...).
As for my 4 * point where I said to remove the cars that I consider stupid and useless, I would like to answer @o000o. Why consume useless slots for cars that few or almost no one would like to drive if they can be used for more interesting cars. What is better to have a Dodge Neon or a Ferrari SF90? What is more interesting a Lotus Elise GT1 or a Ford Ka? What is more legendary than a Ford GT40 LM '66 or a Red Bull X2010?
They've been adding uninteresting cars like the Pontiac Voltz lately, but wasn't it better to put a Daihatsu Sirion X4 that has a lot more fans and is a lot more fun? Where are the Nissan Laurel Medalist Club-S C33? NEVER INSERTED yet it is so popular in Japan and in Japanese video games. Where are the tuned cars and their tuners Mine's, Mugen, Nismo, TRD, Tom's, Gazoo, Mazdaspeed, Tommi Kaira?
I totally agree that Gran Turismo is a little encyclopedia about cars, but if the interesting cars stay at the image stage for museum mode it's not my fault.
For me you can be against every point of mine on the list but it will never change my idea about which features I don't want in Gran Turismo 7. I keep reiterating that if anything there will be all the things I don't like, I'm not going to take it badly or get angry like someone wrote above. I've played pretty much all the titles in the series and I'm aware of the evolution, but I'm not happy that I have to agree with everything that fits 90% of the community.