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

[freshseth83]

Not that I put it past PD, but when you say something like interior views are not supported, if you really mean SOME interior views are not supported, then that's basically a lie of omission.

"I don't have sexually transmitted diseases" (note plural) does not also mean "Therea are multipel diseases I don't have but also one that I do".

So what it says is internal views are not supported. If the view you are thinking of is internal, it's not supported. There you go.

Want to argue it's a miss translation? Well nothing to stop you, but what it says is what it says.

STDS is a bad example buddy. Were talking of a japanese guy's words (Kaz) being translated by another japanese guy (translator). Then were talking about Kaz's Japanese being put on the Japanese site- Standard Car does not correspond to interior view- translated from Japanese. American site- Standard cars do not support interior views.

Notice the difference? there isn't much. Why is this? Because they are the same. Where did those 'INTERIORS' come from? Kaz's translated words for something NOT pertaining to the cockpit view.

 

[McLaren]

No, it's not inside the passenger compartment but it sure isn't in front of your car pulling you or under it. If it's between the sheet metal or has shielding or protection from all 4 sides, then it's inside the car.

But it's not in the interior of a car, which is my point. It's in the engine bay.

Yes, cars do have cockpits as do boats and planes.

Cars do not.
Planes do.

Boats have a cockpit, but it is not where a boat is controlled. That's a helm or bridge.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Ok, everyone calm down.

Personally, I interpret this all as meaning super detail for the premium cars, and a generic cockpit for standards. But if I'm wrong, whatever. At the end of the day, I'm buying the game regardless.

Where does it even mention anything about level of detail in that one sentence?! This takes "getting your own interpretation" to a whole new level.

No, it's not inside the passenger compartment but it sure isn't in front of your car pulling you or under it. If it's between the sheet metal or has shielding or protection from all 4 sides, then it's inside the car.
Yes, cars do have cockpits as do boats and planes.

So, how often do you refer to your cars cockpit? Do me a favour and use the term throughout the day and see how many people give you a wtf look.

STDS is a bad example buddy. Were talking of a japanese guy's words (Kaz) being translated by another japanese guy (translator). Then were talking about Kaz's Japanese being put on the Japanese site- Standard Car does not correspond to interior view- translated from Japanese. American site- Standard cars do not support interior views.

Notice the difference? there isn't much. Why is this? Because they are the same. Where did those 'INTERIORS' come from? Kaz's translated words for something NOT pertaining to the cockpit view.

Is the "cockpit" you keep speaking of in the interior of the car? Go on, I'm curious.

It is, you say? Hmm, well look at that, the site says "no interior views". And a cockpit view is indeed a form of that.

 

[eSZee]

But it's not in the interior of a car, which is my point. It's in the engine bay.

I agreed tot he part that said it's not in the interior of the car. I disagreed with the part that said the engine is not inside the car.
I know what you're saying.

So, how often do you refer to your cars cockpit? Do me a favour and use the term throughout the day and see how many people give you a wtf look.

And what does that have to do with anything? People who don't know a dipstick from a spark plug won't care about me saying cockpit. I was at the races all weekend and they sure seemed ok with saying cockpit.
McLaren said cars don't have cockpits, which is not true. He didn't say calling the driver's compartment a cockpit is stupid.

 

[Tate566]

*Puts gun to head after reading entire thread* I can't take this no more

 

[SlipZtrEm]

And what does that have to do with anything? People who don't know a dipstick from a spark plug won't care about me saying cockpit. I was at the races all weekend and they sure seemed ok with saying cockpit.
McLaren said cars don't have cockpits, which is not true. He didn't say calling the driver's compartment a cockpit is stupid.

Hm, a simple "cockpit" in Google shows primarily aircraft links. Formula 1 uses the term, which isn't surprising, since drivers are essentially ground-based pilots . It's still not an accepted widespread term; journalists and auto enthusiasts use it.

Semantics aside though, the term itself is unimportant. A cockpit view, put as simply as I can make it, is still an interior view. You cannot possibly argue that. So if "interior views are not supported", then anything that can be labeled as such, can't be supported.

 

[McLaren]

McLaren said cars don't have cockpits, which is not true. He didn't say calling the driver's compartment a cockpit is stupid.

But, it technically is. There is no actual term for a car called the "cockpit". The word itself is an aviation term for a plane's control/flight deck. A boat has it as well, but it's not for the area a boat's controlled.

I guess I'm just one of those people who usually stick to the technical definition. But regardless, as Slip said, the "cockpit" is an interior view (this isn't directed at you Dave).

 

[mykem]

Not that I put it past PD, but when you say something like interior views are not supported, if you really mean SOME interior views are not supported, then that's basically a lie of omission.

"I don't have sexually transmitted diseases" (note plural) does not also mean "Therea are multipel diseases I don't have but also one that I do".

So what it says is internal views are not supported. If the view you are thinking of is internal, it's not supported. There you go.

Want to argue it's a miss translation? Well nothing to stop you, but what it says is what it says.

The thing is it's not as your misquoted, "...interior views are not supported" but instead "Standard cars do not support vehicle interior camera views" which has recently been added to the US/NA GT5 info page:http://us.gran-turismo.com/us/news/d5247.html

Prior to this week, the statement wasn't on anywhere but on GT's japanese site (and obviously in Japanese) and the reason for the glaring mistranslation of "Standard Car Does Not Correspond to The Interior View". The actual phrasing in english with the addition of "camera" and the plural in "view" changes the meaning completely. It's no longer a question of mistranslation but instead of english comprehension. Without harping what I've said previously, to me it clearly refers to the recently added feature in GT5- the multiple angle interior views- which can be seen on some of Mimaximax's Youtube videos.

 

[freshseth83]

To me that's what it means as well, mykem.

I've been trying to get my point across but many don't see it. In Japanese to english you get a rough translation that isn't accurate. There's more to just translating Japanese to english. This is why the text on the Japanese GT site wasn't on the English GT site. Because of the translation. Now we have this translation of the text and it reads interior views aren't in standard cars. Why go from Standard car doesn't correspond to interior view with a direct translation to a now- Standard cars do not support interior camera views. Where was the camera in the original translation? Where was the views in plural in the translation? Views being plural sets it off for me.

 

[Luminis]

Ok, if you get that hung up on the wording, how about using a wee bit of logic? The wole '*Standard cars do not support vehicle interior camera views.' was added to the GT US site after the debate about whether the standard cars have a cockpit view or not was already up and running.
Now what, what's more reasonable? That PD put the line there to clear up the commotion? Think about, a few times, if need be. The question at hand is the following:
Q:"Do standard cars feature a cockpit view?"
A: "Standard cars do not support vehicle interior camera views."

Besides, if you're arguing that you only get a somewhat rough translation from Japanese to English that isn't always accurate, wouldn't that mean that such subtle differences like the plural used in the quoted sentence might not even be intentional, let alone bear some hidden meaning?

 

[daan]

3. Cars do not have cockpits.

It will not say cockpits because a car does not have a cockpit. And even if it did, you would still say, "LOL, it says cockpits!"

Cars do not.
Planes do.

Boats have a cockpit, but it is not where a boat is controlled. That's a helm or bridge.

But, it technically is. There is no actual term for a car called the "cockpit". The word itself is an aviation term for a plane's control/flight deck. A boat has it as well, but it's not for the area a boat's controlled.

Stop being so pedantic. "Cockpits don't exist in cars." Stop pulling "facts" from your arse.

cock·pit
   /ˈkɒkˌpɪt/ Show Spelled[kok-pit] Show IPA
–noun
1.
a space, usually enclosed, in the forward fuselage of an airplane containing the flying controls, instrument panel, and seats for the pilot and copilot or flight crew.
2.
a sunken, open area, generally in the after part of a small vessel, as a yacht, providing space for the pilot, part or all of the crew, or guests.
3.
the space, including the seat and instrumentation, surrounding the driver of an automobile.
4.
a pit or enclosed place for cockfights.

cock·pit (kŏk'pĭt')
n.

1.

1.

The space in the fuselage of a small airplane containing seats for the pilot, copilot, and sometimes passengers.
2.

The space set apart for the pilot and crew, as in a helicopter, large airliner, or transport aircraft.
3.

A compartment in an old warship below the water line, used as quarters for junior officers and as a station for the wounded during a battle.
4.

An area in a small decked vessel toward the stern, lower than the rest of the deck, from which the vessel is steered.
2.

The driver's compartment in a racing car.

I guess I'm just one of those people who usually stick to the technical definition. But regardless, as Slip said, the "cockpit" is an interior view (this isn't directed at you Dave).

Then stick to the technical definition. A "Cockpit" is a pit for fighting cocks. It was then transferred to an area of a boat, then to planes, then to cars.

cockpit
1580s, "a pit for fighting cocks." Used in nautical sense (1706) for midshipmen's compartment below decks; transferred to airplanes (1914) and to cars (1930s).
Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper

To attempt to argue that cars don't have a cockpit is ludicrous.

 

[RedBaron]

Wow, PD made a concrete note on their website to stop those speculations and yet somebody is driving it mad further and further...

 

[Honda-Crz]

Personally I think that standard do have the cockpit view however replay cameras will not move around in the cockpit.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Personally I think that standard do have the cockpit view however replay cameras will not move around in the cockpit.

Anything as they say is still possible.

Probablity, however is not looking too good right now.

 

[eSZee]

Hm, a simple "cockpit" in Google shows primarily aircraft links. Formula 1 uses the term, which isn't surprising, since drivers are essentially ground-based pilots . It's still not an accepted widespread term; journalists and auto enthusiasts use it.

Semantics aside though, the term itself is unimportant. A cockpit view, put as simply as I can make it, is still an interior view. You cannot possibly argue that. So if "interior views are not supported", then anything that can be labeled as such, can't be supported.

Woah, I lose, case closed!
I never said cockpit was not an interior view.

But, it technically is. There is no actual term for a car called the "cockpit". The word itself is an aviation term for a plane's control/flight deck. A boat has it as well, but it's not for the area a boat's controlled.

I guess I'm just one of those people who usually stick to the technical definition. But regardless, as Slip said, the "cockpit" is an interior view (this isn't directed at you Dave).

Cockpit actually was first used for boats and later moved on to planes(flight deck) and cars.
agreed

 

[mykem]

Anything as they say is still possible.

Probablity, however is not looking too good right now.

Probability is actually at 50-50. It will either be on or off. At the moment there's nothing definite to sway it to either direction.

 

[Ranko_SD]

Would you like to sit in my cockpit?
Now that you are in my cockpit do you mind if I eject?

 

[chepe371]

Then stick to the technical definition. A "Cockpit" is a pit for fighting cocks.

. Gold.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Probability is actually at 50-50. It will either be on or off. At the moment there's nothing definite to sway it to either direction.

I'm puzzled as to how you figure that.
There is nothing confirmed by an authoritive source either way.

However there are no reports left that I'm aware of, that still claim there will be standard car cockpit view.
There are several now that claim and/or indicate the contrary.
Unless you choose to ignore all of the latter, you won't come up with 50/50 probability.

 

[ralph89]

The winner: daan!

 

[chromatic9]

Going by strict definition, this section is gtplanet's cockpit.

 

[Akira AC]

I am back to keep ranting about:

1. People made up in their minds that:

"Standard cars do not support vehicle interior camera views."
equal to
"standard cars do not have cockpit view"

now yeah a lot of people say:

yeah "Standard cars do not support vehicle interior camera views" means any interior view is supported which is possible but they say "views",in Japanese it is also plural in that sentence,and what I have seen so far is the several angles from the interior of the cars,which as you know is not the same as cockpit,we know that cockpit is the place in a vehicle were the controls and dials are,not correspond to back seats or another parts of the interior,and to be clear there are some facts:

We have seen several points interior of view from premium cars, we also have seen cockpit view in GT5prologue and GTPSP,KY said that Cockpit views from PSP are technically possible,and as the end of it there is a Japanese word for cockpit(コックピッ&#12488is direct taken from the Japanese and the word cockpit is a romanjisation(direct conversion of an abroad word into Japanese based on the kana dictionary)in this case the word cockpit from English.

They could say that "cockpit view is not supported" but they didn't what they say is interior views(it means not premium animation driver or 360º degree interior views as the premium cars do feature is possible)and its pretty difficult to apply all of this elements to standard cars,but is possible to apply a single view from inside the car,the arguing will keep go on but as I said I will not change my opinion,if cockpit view is not supported for GT5 I'll be fine with that,another 850 cars to drive doesn't sound bad to me but is PD already manage to make Gran Turismo be THE BEST RACING SIMULATOR TO THE DATE,not because they feature 1000 cars,but also because thay can manage day night transitions,world class tracks and for the premium cars photomode to the feet's,I am sorry but it seems that some people try to spoilt this features and focusing on the premium standard ,that is why this thread is all about but still if we get the 1000 cockpits this people will also arguing about it so I got nothing more to say,you can believe whatever you want,at the end all of us will or bought the game already

 

[McLaren]

Stop being so pedantic. "Cockpits don't exist in cars." Stop pulling "facts" from your arse.

To attempt to argue that cars don't have a cockpit is ludicrous.

Except I'm right, aren't I? Don't throw a hissy fit.

I am back to keep ranting about:

1. People made up in their minds that:

"Standard cars do not support vehicle interior camera views."
equal to
"standard cars do not have cockpit view"

Because that's what it says.

now yeah a lot of people say:

yeah "Standard cars do not support vehicle interior camera views" means any interior view is supported which is possible but they say "views",

"Doctors do not work on animals" means any animal can worked on is possible.
That's exactly what you wrote but for GT5.

Please, stop posting for the sake of grammar.

 

[Dravonic]

Since it is so hard for some people to grasp, I decided to draw.

Here is an easy to understand view diagram:

Now this is from the official website:

Standard cars do not support vehicle interior camera views.

Back to our diagram, what this means is:

As you can see they include every single interior view in their statement. There is no way to spin this to mean anything else.

If you argue that's not what they meant, I'm sorry but that's what they said.

 

[Dapper]

But they lie, a lot.

 

[SrRd RacinG]

The only remaining hope is:

Interior camera views are referring to the side views enabled by headtracking. It could be stating that standard cars don't support these views, meaning headtracking is useless for standard cars. Better yet, headtracking isn't supported for these cars.

Not sure, though. Looks very grim at this point.

 

[mykem]

I'm puzzled as to how you figure that.
There is nothing confirmed by an authoritive source either way.

However there are no reports left that I'm aware of, that still claim there will be standard car cockpit view.
There are several now that claim and/or indicate the contrary.
Unless you choose to ignore all of the latter, you won't come up with 50/50 probability.

Give me an example of concrete evidence showing that there won't be cockpit or dashboard views in all the cars.

 

[Dravonic]

Give me an example of concrete evidence showing that there won't be cockpit or dashboard views in all the cars.

My post above.

The only way to refute it is to claim the official website is not a reliable source; or the cockpit view is not an interior view; or they said one thing but meant another one.

All absurd claims.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Give me an example of concrete evidence showing that there won't be cockpit or dashboard views in all the cars.

I guess thats a "I'm choosing to ignore all of the latter" in your probability evaluation.

Not sure, though. Looks very grim at this point.

I'm afraid so.

 

[Devedander]

My post above.

The only way to refute it is to claim the official website is not a reliable source; or the cockpit view is not an interior view; or they said one thing but meant another one.

All absurd claims.

Actually I am going to point out that the first and last claim are not that absurd considering it's PD we are dealing with here...

That said, it is pretty obvious that the diagram is correct - the statement does say internal views are not supported. Cockpit view is an internal view.