Sorry your browser is not supported!

After playing ICO and SHADOW OF COLOSSUS, I started thinking about this...

I am aware that FPS exists to put the player in a pure fight-or-flight scenario. In fight-and-flight, FPS is the most dramatic way of expressing that situational perspective... but is FPS the most emotional perspective?

If we're to use life, it seems that during a dramatic situation (FPS) we react out of instinct and adrenaline, but very little emotion. The emotion comes when flight-or-flight has ended and we reflect on the same situation. In essence, we add emotion to the situation we experienced after-the-fact -- when we can look at it more objectively, from a different perspective (3PS). So, with that line of thinking, FPS is best for fighting or task-related games (BATTLEFIELD), while 3PS would be best for story-driven (MYST) or emotional games (SHADOW OF COLOSSUS).

Throw into the mix that I've been designing an FPS that I want to be emotional. Now I'm questioning the basic design... So, I'm hoping to get some views on the theory above. And Please expand on why you believe one way or another.

Many thanks!

Hmm... in cinema I think it's true that you don't empathise with the viewpoint *you* take as the viewer - largely because that viewpoint is assumed to not exist as a character - and instead empathise with whatever you see on screen.

This is especially true of, say, the shower scene in Psycho: when you see the character screaming into the camera, your empathy is with the screaming character, not with the killer who (we can assume) is standing pretty much where the camera is.

So perhaps you have a point: we feel empathy mainly because of what we see or hear around us. That sort of makes sense.

Of course, if you're making a story-driven FPS which is supposed to evoke empathy, you could show another character (maybe a companion/ally) having something awful done to them. For example, Half Life 2 was able to get across the brutality of the combine not so much by throwing them at the player (every enemy does that anyway) but by showing them shaking down, imprisoning and kidnapping NPCs.

Think of your "game" as a movie first, then work out your "emotional script" with how you envision it to flow, making storyboards of the emotional sections.

Some people/studios tend to make cut-scenes the norm by injecting "movie-quality acting and voice-overs convey those emotional states"...

I think doing these things, though a great way to perpetuate and propagate the story, takes something from the player by making him/her sit through hundreds of hours of non-related nuances and character situations the player may not want to delve into.

All too often we see another Final Fantasy or complete a mission arc in Eve Online and get bombarded by these gorgeous cut-scenes and feel as if we're playing and DYING and replaying, just to get to the next one.

Write your story first. Does it allow for conflict, emotional interaction, impending doom, a climactic near-miss, another globe-shaking conflict, an anti-climactic non-event or two, a cataclysmic climactic ending, a follow-up ending to show what happened to the world, then "The End" ending...? If it has mane of these things, can you truly make a game out of it? Something that can truly engage the players and their emotions? If not, write and publish the story! If it does or if it can, then start out with a section of environment with a small cluster of events-- like the introduction of the player into the "new" world-- and help the player to become "one" with the world and it's inhabitants-- not just some cookie cutter misfit sent in to make things right... (I hate games like that!)

Anyway, it's food for thought...

Thats what i do

This is true of FPS and 3PS. Either can be used very well to achieve the 'What the H*** was that..?!' reaction.

With first person, you want to stress what they see and hear. Try to allow the player to sense everything that their character can. That includes emotion. There are subtle tricks that can be used to alter the emotional sense in a scene which can work very well in first person views. Try lowering the bloom. A light darkening of the area. The background noise of crickets or squeaky floor boards gets a tad louder. First person view means that you can't see what's behind you... That can create a very eerie scene where whatever happens may well leave the player frightened.
Want them sad? Slow it down a bit. Slow mo the part that they should feel sad about. Have someone other than the players character scream or cry. Add a very subtle blur effect right afterwards. Once the killing is done, take control of the camera for a very short cutscene where the character looks over at the object of sadness and let it sit there for a moment before fading to black. Fade back in to the normal camera controls.

By adding emotional queues to a first person game, the player is more apt to feel more personally attached to their character since they see and experience through their characters eyes.

3rd person adds a detachment which can allow for a different kind of buildup similar to watching a movie where the hero dies at the end. You had the whole movie to become attached to the character and it makes the movie watcher sad. It triggers a sense of loss because they cared about the character in the movie.

So, first person tries to make the player feel as though they are the character in the game. Third person makes the player feel as though they are influencing the actions of a close friend (Their character).

The closer you can get to achieving that, the more addictive and popular the game will be.

The choice of FPS or 3PS will decide the technique used to evoke the emotion, but both can be equally powerful.

Invoking strong emotions other than fear/panic for the Player in first person (without switching view angle) would appear to be a challenge. I've been pondering over techniques to achieve it. Im certain that its more than just camera work that influence emotions in films, audio plays a critical role in the process and may be even more crucial in a First Person approach.

However, I was focused on visuals. My current ideas revolve around finding opportunities to visually convey to the viewer how the Character is feeling thru facial expression seen thru `reflections` in mirrored surfaces, and body expression thru views of parts that we normally see visible. I think Meteroid used a similar technique in which the characters face was reflected in the helmet the player was wearing.

In FPS you get to react to things the character sees and hears but you have no sence of who you are and the character have limited ways to interact with the surroundings. In 3PS what you character sees and hears have a much less impact on you but you see who you are, how you behave and you can see more of what happens around the character and you have far more possibilities to interact with the environment. Therefore you can relate to the character in 3PS and also become someone you are not.

Thanks for all of the feedback! It's been great hearing other perspectives. I really appreciate the feedback.

I come from film making, so I've spent quite awhile studying POV in more passive storytelling... but games -- although using many of the same techniques -- are a slightly different animal. In games, I tend to think along the same lines as Digital Awakening...

FPS is great for reaction (what I was calling "fight-or-flight"). I'm reminded of one of the early RESIDENT EVIL games; you play through 3PS, but as you travel through a door, the game suddenly uses an FPS perspective (if only for that moment of travel). Granted, this is a very limited example, but it shows the strength of FPS perspective as a means to thrust the player into a "personal" situation and create tension. IMHO, the BATTLEFIELD games are almost perfect FPS, but they certainly aren't emotionally complex or character studies.

I'm wondering if this is the reason most FPS games give the character a name (the squad has to call it out to get your help) but generally don't fill in much of the character? In essence, you use the character's name, but it's actually you as player and character. There's little reason to try and create character, because you bring your own personality to the gameplay.

In 3PS, the main character is a full person with attributes, deficiencies, and a personality that may be completely opposite of the player.

I'm interested now in seeing how RPG's from a FPS perspective work. Any suggestions?

I guess some might wonder why I'm so caught up with this idea. Well, I've been designing an FPS game that is actually a character study... and the inability to see the character's reactions to the environment is making me question the choice of genre (FPS).