Support NeoGAF

[#Phonepunk#]

He gets it right all the way up until he brings up that Driver game. That is not 2nd person, that is still 1st/3rd person.

it's not 1st person cos if it was, you would be seeing behind the wheel of the car in front. you are seeing from behind the wheel BEHIND the car you are driving.

it is not 3rd person cos if it was, the camera would be centered on the car you are controlling. yet the camera is centered on the car behind it.

so far it's the best example anyone in this thread has given. RTS is not really 2nd person as you are controlling the army itself the whole time. if you were controlling someone who controlled someone playing an RTS, then maybe. you need that second point of reference.

the reason RC cars don't work is because the perspective never shifts. you have a god's eye view the entire time. the Drive example shifts the perspective after using a standard perspective the whole game. feel like people are missing the shift.

 

[Asgan]

What do you think about The Experiment aka Experience 112 by DreamCatcher? I always thought that it meets most people's definition of a second player game.

 

[Eiknarf]

The scene from God of war 3 is all he needed to show...

wait, what's the scene from GOW3 look like?

 

[Trogdor1123]

wait, what's the scene from GOW3 look like?

The perspective changes from Kratos to his foe, and you see from his foes perspective what you are doing.

 

[Kamina]

That'd just be third person. You can't have direct control in a second person game. It'd have to be a setup where you gave Joel commands but how he actually interpreted them and acted on them was out of your control.

If you played a character that gave another orders, how would that make the ordered character the 1st person and yours the 2nd? If anything wouldn't it shift the first person to your character?
And why wouldnt i be able to control a 2nd perosn game, when i am able to control a 3rd person game just fine?
From my understanding the 2nd person is just a view change into a persona related to the 1st person from the usual viewpoint of a 3rd person camera or the 1st person itself.

 

[Zannegan]

it's not 1st person cos if it was, you would be seeing behind the wheel of the car in front. you are seeing from behind the wheel BEHIND the car you are driving.

it is not 3rd person cos if it was, the camera would be centered on the car you are controlling. yet the camera is centered on the car behind it.

so far it's the best example anyone in this thread has given. RTS is not really 2nd person as you are controlling the army itself the whole time. if you were controlling someone who controlled someone playing an RTS, then maybe. you need that second point of reference.

the reason RC cars don't work is because the perspective never shifts. you have a god's eye view the entire time. the Drive example shifts the perspective after using a standard perspective the whole game. feel like people are missing the shift.

I see what you're saying, but if an RC car doesn't work (and I agree, it doesn't), then the Driver: SF example is disqualified for the same reasons. Your perspective may shift, but you still have direct control over your character. Driver's no more second person than any other game with a follow-cam.

And in RTSs, you tell the troops where to go, but you don't directly control any one soldier, and in many games the soldiers will act on their own beyond being told where to go (and in the Total War series they may even disobey that). That at least has second-person gameplay, even if the perspective is still third person (just like Driver).

Really, wouldn't games that tell you what to do (like DDR or Seaman) while you act it out be the only truly second-person gaming experience--visually and gameplay-wise?

 

[Evil Calvin]

Would AstroBot in VR count as second-person? You control him but you are passively there looking around, checking on the surroundings making sure he has a good path. Camera isn't really directly following him and it's not first-person either.

 

[TUROK]

ITT: nerd who thinks he knows better than other nerds

10,000% accurate.

 

[Myths]

So to be clear, it’s still third person in the end.

... or how about this: every cutscene ever is basically second person

 

[StreetsofBeige]

First person - you see through your own eyes

Third person - you see yourself

That's it. Why third person isn't called second person, don't know.

Using the car driving scene as an example of so called second person, then what do you call a guy in a grocery store, who watches an old lady with a poodle, who watches a crossing guard, who watches a car, which that driver is watching you on screen?

6th person?

 

[FMXVII]

So to be clear, it’s still third person in the end.

... or how about this: every cutscene ever is basically second person

The Second to Last of Us

 

[Shrap]

I forgot to mention Mega64's take on second person shooters (and beyond):

 

[silentstorm]

Wow that whole video just to say he-she safely

Probably to do with his past when he got fired at a job for sexual harassment claims, and it actually seems he admitted those were true and apologized to the women he harassed.

I think it's him playing it safe nowadays and likely treating women very differently just to avoid scandals, or he actually regrets what he did and has changed, one of the two.

Oh yeah, he used to work for Polygon in the video department, mostly making stupid silly videos about a car simulation game and a modded Skyrim thing where he would watch people make sexual escapades and laugh at it...yes, that was a Polygon thing.

 

[Rodolink]

Not so mindblowing. There's research done already and several examples of published games showing 2d person mechanics like theres this horror game where you look through the eyes of a ghost while controlling your character.
Hes just a joung youtuber that relaized this, made a nice video though.

 

[alabtrosMyster]

The only reason someone is asking the question is because they know how to count to three and they noticed that there is a missing number. My son ,who is almost 3 now, can do that kind of "deep" reflection.

You can make the "logic" case for it by talking for a ling time, eventually some people's will become numb and they will just accept your premises because they don't want to look stupid.

There is no logical difference between what he calls second and third person, it's still the camera outside of the character and you reacting to whatever is going on on the screen, either with a regular game controller or some other input (microphone, move controllers, etc.)... I mean, Mario 64 has some yellow dude holding the camera the only thing that doesn't make it second person is the narrative in the game (i.e.: they forgot to tell you that the yellow guy controls Mario, because you see the world through his camera after all, he may be telling us about the story of Mario).

I would put it on the same level as this jewel from the 9th century:


So do the dog headed men have souls?

 

[nkarafo]

Cool gaming mechanic but it's still 3rd person.

Otherwise we can all say 3rd person games are really 2nd person, the character is you and there's someone else holding the camera. Kinda like Super Mario 64 where Lakitu (supposedly) physically exists behinds you with the camera.

 

[Belmonte]

IMO second person does not need to be the protagonist seeing himself. It only needs to be the point of view of another character. NES Battletoads first boss and Mario 64, like people are saying in the thread.

Someone can argue that these examples are too cosmetic to take them seriously, since, for mechanic purposes, it is the same as third person. In this case, another example is when you see yourself in the eyes of your friend in split screen.