"Standard Car" does not correspond to the interior view.Update read 1st page

[Devedander]

As in send her the link to the page where the line is from? No.

Well I meant in general... I was kind of thinking it would be good if that was just the absolute translation without need for context so there isn't any personal bias thrown into the mix.

 

[eSZee]

They said the word in that context wasn't plural.

Well I meant in general... I was kind of thinking it would be good if that was just the absolute translation without need for context so there isn't any personal bias thrown into the mix.

I'm sending them the links now so they can see the whole page and see the quote within context.

 

[Akira AC]

They said the word in that context wasn't plural.


I'm sending them the links now so they can see the whole page and see the quote within context.

the quote stands alone from the rest of the web page text,I personally think that probably this is it,wait until gamescom but think that is most likely to don't have cockpit view,maybe dash view but still it is a interior view so that is probably it.

 

[freshseth83]

Like I said before, I don't even drive from the 'cockpit' or 'dashboard' view, I drive where i see nothing but road or the hood cam, that's more accurate. Especially if you have your own wheel. you don't need to see two wheels, that's not real. it seems like you're driving from the backseat of a car. With the bumper view or camera, it's like you are in the car, and the road is in front of you, as it should be.

Interior point of view is a loose term. Look up point of view and it has multiple meanings. I'm waiting for McLaren to get on here and say something he thinks is smart or intelligent instead of answering a question I posed to him. I love it when people do that. It's ok to ignore someone's question towards you, but it's not ok for them to ignore the question they ask. How comical and hypocritical.

I'm still sticking by the interior camera views mean something other than driving view. I'm not expecting a detailed cockpit and stitching on standard cars, but I am expecting a generic steering wheel/gauges/dash. Nothing can back up my claim officially but I expect the 'camera views' to be when you look back from your mirror you'll see the back seat in premium cars. When you view a replay you'll have multiple POINTS OF VIEW and CAMERA angles to watch from in premium cars. That's what I THINK standard cars won't support. But to have a driving postion that only 1/5th of the cars support sounds stupid and unlike Kaz and PD.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

...it also sounded unlike Kaz and PD to ever give us two distinct levels of quality in regards to cars. It happens, and saying what's "unlike them" doesn't hold much water anymore.

Although since you're mentioning ignoring questions, you never did answer: where in relation to a car is the cockpit view? If it's not an interior view... what is it?

 

[eSZee]

the quote stands alone from the rest of the web page text,I personally think that probably this is it,wait until gamescom but think that is most likely to don't have cockpit view,maybe dash view but still it is a interior view so that is probably it.

I agree completely! But some people think, I did too, that since it seems to be placed in a weird spot on the page, that it might mean something else.

 

[KilzoneStrife]

So why were they clear with the damage part, saying (select vehicle). They could of did the same thing with PS3 eye statement saying the eye works with (select vehicle) they did not say that so that makes me think standard cars will
have some type of cockpit/interior dash view.

exactly what I was thinking...

 

[McLaren]

Announcement directly from the kitchen: Today's lunch will contain no animal products.

"I think they will still have steak though. They didn't say no meat. Explain why?? I think "animal products" just means eggs and milk. They would have said meat if there's no meat. Also I saw a picture of a steak on a menu, explain that!?

No common sense allowed, please.

Very possibly yes. However we havent had any clarification and most of the information regarding the issue can be interpreted either way. The grammatical structure of all statements in question support both view points. Wether the information is read with hope or disbelief kind of determines the conclusion you come to.

I'm not sure how you can break that sentence down any other way. The word "not" with "do" implies a negative aka, absence or lack there of.

Interior point of view is a loose term. Look up point of view and it has multiple meanings. I'm waiting for McLaren to get on here and say something he thinks is smart or intelligent instead of answering a question I posed to him. I love it when people do that. It's ok to ignore someone's question towards you, but it's not ok for them to ignore the question they ask. How comical and hypocritical.

Ignoring your own attempt to be smart, what question are you asking? If that's dribble you posted before, you got your answer when I told why PD worded it that way.

 

[JDMKING13]

exactly what I was thinking...

👍 At this time Kil I'm just going to sit back relax and takes notes. The next upcoming gaming event will hopefully put this to rest! All I know is if we do have cockpit for the standard cars many folks on here is going to be like and i will be like "told ya so".

 

[Snaeper]

For me the sentence does read every car. Otherwise, i would expect to see this:

*PlayStation Eye camera features that add a new level of detail to the game, including face tracking for looking around the interior of vehicles while in the interior dash view. (on select vehicles)

In that context it sounds like Face tracking wouldn't be available on all vehicles.

I can't wait until GT5 is released and a huge disappointment thread is made by those who thought Standard Cars would have interior view.

 

[Luminis]

I can't wait until GT5 is released and a huge disappointment thread is made by those who thought Standard Cars would have interior view.

I guess PD/Sony is going to put an end to this debate come GamesCom. Or TGS.

If people are willing to listen to what they're saying, at least.

 

[eSZee]

I can't wait until GT5 is released and a huge disappointment thread is made by those who thought Standard Cars would have interior view.

Really, is that necessary? At least when others say it, they have some insight as to why they say it. You just seem to trying to get under people's skin.

 

[SrRd RacinG]

If you think about it, how come they don't update the other countries with the "Standard cars" quote?

Makes me wonder how important it is.

 

[RufusGonePunk]

Look at this screen and read the highlighted text. It clearly says views, not view. Plural.
It is this that leads me to believe every car in the game will have a Prologue style dashboard view. Otherwise it's a step backwards, and that's not PD at all. What the Premium cars will have and the Standard cars will lack is multiple camera angles to be viewed during replays, like we have seen several times in the Ferrari 458.
Otherwise, what's the point in modelling individual stiches in the leather of the seats if we can only see the seats from the point of view of the driver?

 

[eSZee]

Look at this screen and read the highlighted text. It clearly says views, not view. Plural.

Yeah, but that's not correct.

 

[RufusGonePunk]

Yeah, but that's not correct.

Ahh okay. Is there any proof of this or is it just internet rumours becoming gospel truth?
Anyway, this screen is not the first time I've seen views and camera angles being mentioned in plural.

 

[Custer85]

Views may include more than just the views while driving. I guess views refers to the dashboardview and the cameraviews during replays, which show the driver. The look through the sidewindow and over the sholder might be counted as views aswell.

 

[Akira AC]

no we all check, its miss interpreted by the GT site translators

 

[Goshin2568]

Ok, this is just my opinion, but I think this debate is kind of pointless. Of course the standerd cars will have cockpit view! If only 200 cars have cockpit view, and only 130 are new (because then, all of the GT5 prologue cars would have to be premium) then that would just be poor preformance on PD's part. I think the "standard" cars will be like the ones in GT5P. Great looking, nice cockpit view, but just not the ultra-super-extreme awesomeness of the premium cars. Then, the Premium will be the super detailed, down to the last stitching level that we've been hearing about.

I mean, just think. Why has the 'official announcement' been kept from us? If it was a negative announcement, they would hurry up and announce it and then move on to the good stuff. But they've kept it from us, and wanted a good suprise later. Why would they delay the game so long so that it could be 'Perfect', and then leave out a key feature? That dosen't make sense...

 

[JDMKING13]

CARS THAT LOOK AND FEEL REAL
· A first for the franchise, vehicles will now show real-time damage and wear that reflect the driver’s treatment of the car. Cars will collect dirt (and can be washed at car washes) and will feature adaptive and accurate body deformation and performance damage based on point of impact and velocity (on select vehicles).
· Additional graphic touchups that add to the realism include smoke from tires, sparks that fly from vehicle rollovers, and dirt accumulation.
· Brand new vehicle physics engine that replaces the engine from Gran Turismo 5 Prologue, making the action more realistic than ever.
· PlayStation Eye camera features that add a new level of detail to the game, including face tracking for looking around the interior of vehicles while in the interior dash view.

I know you guys are going to say Im grabbing straws but i don't care. With this information It gives me a strong inkling that we will have cockpit view for all cars. When talking about damage it clearly say (on select vehicles) to let folks know this will not be for all cars, and seeing the GT5 page about damage it clearly backs that up. If we were not getting cockpit view for the standard cars, it would of said "including face tracking for looking around the interior of vehicles while in the interior dash view. (on select vehicles) Just as it did with damage. It did not say this, and this is one of the reason why i think we are going to get cockpit view/interior dash view for standard cars. When you read the info about face tracking on the GT5 page it says the following

Two new cutting-edge features set Gran Turismo 5 apart from the competition: full 3D stereoscopic gaming support, and face tracking support. Using 3D stereoscopic television like the Sony 3D BRAVIA series with 3D glasses, users can experience an even deeper immersion into the Gran Turismo's racing simulation like never before.

The other major feature is a unique face tracking function using the USB PlayStation®Eye camera attached to the PlayStation®3. By utilizing facial recognition through the PLAYSTATION®Eye, players can move their face to the left and right to move the in-game field of vision while driving in a race.

3D and face tracking are both attractive features by themselves, but combined together, they make the world of Gran Turismo 5 an even richer place. By moving your face parallel to the screen, you can change your point of view (field of view), adding to the immersive feeling that you are driving inside the car.

This new face tracking is pretty serious, in that whole description I'm pretty sure they would of said something to let us know standard cars will not feature this feature.

 

[TeamStig]

Considering that there is a lot of engrish in that article to begin with, the whole plural argument just seems like wishful thinking to me.

 

[eSZee]

Ahh okay. Is there any proof of this or is it just internet rumours becoming gospel truth?

I had it translated. When I asked if "view", specifically, was plural in that context, the answer I got was no.

 

[SuperShouden]

no we all check, its miss interpreted by the GT site translators

I had it translated. When I asked if "view", specifically, was plural in that context, the answer I got was no.

But there is one other piece to this puzzle: This is a SONY site. SONY isn't American. They're Japanese. So, I personally don't care what "translators" you used. I doubt Sony America used a computer translator and probably consulted with PD and Sony to make sure it was correct.

 

[Tornado]

Indeed. I have a hard time believing that Sony would screw up one of their own press releases.

 

[eSZee]

But there is one other piece to this puzzle: This is a SONY site. SONY isn't American. They're Japanese. So, I personally don't care what "translators" you used. I doubt Sony America used a computer translator and probably consulted with PD and Sony to make sure it was correct.

yadayadayada. Do you think japan runs every part of SONY all over the world? There are separate divisions of sony.
Believe what you want but I'll believe the translation I got and not one from god knows who. It's just funny that teh official translation we have on the US SONY site is pretty much the exact same on we have in the title of this thread, except a couple words were exchanged to make it more correct.

Indeed. I have a hard time believing that Sony would screw up one of their own press releases.

You mean the same SONY that didn't even have that part on their own american website for weeks while the japanese site did?

 

[Tornado]

except a couple words were exchanged to make it more correct.

That's your argument? A "more correct" translation? That's not even an argument from a subjective standpoint.

You mean the same SONY that didn't even have that part on their own american website for weeks while the japanese site did?

What relevance does that have?

 

[SuperShouden]

You mean the same SONY that didn't even have that part on their own american website for weeks while the japanese site did?

*shrug* perhaps they were waiting for confirmation from the Polyphony before they put it on the site. I bet they were as surprised to see that as we were, and they wanted to make sure their information was correct before posting it on their site.

 

[eSZee]

*shrug* perhaps they were waiting for confirmation from the Polyphony before they put it on the site. I bet they were as surprised to see that as we were, and they wanted to make sure their information was correct before posting it on their site.

Why would they doubt anything? They had no problem posting the entire 7 pages of material bu somehow got hung up on one statement?

Then again, I'm not holding onto the idea that standard cars have cockpit view.

 

[SrRd RacinG]

If I want to get technical, the U.S and Great Britain site have a few grammatical errors which may support the idea that this editor or editing staff may have translated this badly.

How can I trust an awkward translation on the GT site when they cannot write in their own language?


Error # 1 (Great Britain and U.S.): The opening sentence: "Here is the latest information regarding Gran Turismo 5, announced at the worlds largest game show, E3, the Electronic Entertainment Expo, which kicked off on 15th June 2010 in Los Angeles."

Worlds? It should be [world's]. Basic grammar.

Kicked off on 15th June? This isn't Spain. It's June 15th. Who wrote this? A native?

Error # 2 (Great Britain): "The collection includes over 800 cars, a vast selection that spans a wide range of era’s and categories"

Era's? No. It's plural. It just needs the "s", becoming "eras". How come this person didn't mess up the next word? Is he guessing?

So we've seen that apostrophes are a problem for these site editors, so what if "camera views" is meant to be "camera's views?" And who is writing these notes for the English speaking sites? Hmmm?

It's not farfetched at all.

 

[SuperShouden]

Obviously that little bit of text was added AFTER the other regional sites got their translations of that info. So, the US GT sites and the others would have had to notice that bit of text then translate it, then ask PD and Sony Japan for confirmation on it in case the Japanese site posted a bit of mis-information