Gaming semantics

[Nappi]

Damn. This could make marketing the game I just described a lot harder.

What term should be used to describe two dimensional thing when the dimensions aren't width and height then if 2D is not suitable? 2Dv2?

[Wrestlevania]

I'm not entirely sure I grasped your "1 pixel wide" example enough to give you an informed answer.

But on a somewhat related note: the early id Software and 3D Realms shooters were rather unfortunately described as "2.5D", because of how their reasonably sophisticated 2D image manipulation / offset rendering technologies simulated pseudo-3D spaces.

[Nappi]

Basically this is what I meant:

. < sky

.

.

. < a duck

.

.

. < your crosshair

.

.

. < ground

.

.

. < your gun

When the duck comes closer it will cover more pixels. The player could move the view up and down and possibly move forward and backward.

I only wrote the example to demonstrate what (almost) two dimensional fps could look like. I'm not really serious with this.

[Thrik]

And let's not forget 3D Monster Maze.

[miffy495]

Light guns makes me think of something kind of interesting. As actually holding a gun (or pointer, whatever) and shooting at the screen is arguably about as first person as shooting in a game can possibly get, where does that leave games that have you shoot like that but still show you your character? I'm thinking specifically here or RE4 for the Wii. On the one hand, the game is a third person shooter. You're seeing Leon in the third person and running around and watching him do things. On the other hand, when it comes time to do the actual shooting, you hold up your gun/wiimote and fire at the screen in what I would argue could be called the first person. Yeah, you can still see Leon, but you can also see your own arm and gun shooting at what you want to hit. FPS? TPS? Too weird to classify? Any thoughts?

[Wrestlevania]

It's definitely an interesting blend, but I'd say the actual act of just holding your arm out in front of you isn't the game -- it's the imagery you're watching that's the game and that's in the third-person.

[DanJW]

Yeah, I think we have to draw a line between in-game mechanics and outside-game controller technology. Not that the controller isn't important, obviously (hello Wii), but it's different.

[miffy495]

Fair enough. I still consider RE4 a TPS, it's just that the mention of light guns as an example of first person brought to mind the Wii edition I've been putting so much time into which is, as mentioned, a something of a TPS/light gun hybrid.

[ThunderPeel2001]

This is absurd circular reasoning, "it's being debated so obviously my viewpoint is the correct one" ? That's a very convenient debating tool ¬ ¬

We're talking about the possibility of it, and whether it's valid, that doesn't automatically make either of those things true.

No... we're talking about how it's already been referred to as a FPS by other people on multiple occassions, and whether the people who describe it as such are wrong or right or foolish or whatever.

Quote from Ben, who started this whole discussion, with this post: "I don't know why everyone insists on referring to Gears of War as an "FPS". It's not. So stop it. Everyone."

It's not circular reasoning in any way.

And, just because I think he's right, here's what Rodi said after Ben: "[Why do people insist on calling Gears a FPS?] I guess it's because in practice it feels so much like the direct approach of FPSses. There's a sense of immediacy that is often lacking in 3rd person shooters, where you can clearly feel some distance between you and the avatar you are controlling. So, I think it's not a fluke that everyone accidentally calls it an FPS. Regardless of how you call it however, I am keenly tempted to group it with FPS games because apart from the perspective, the game plays much the same."

The use of the word "sick" to mean something good is one of countless examples of words being used ironically, sure the original meaning is directly in contrast with the new one but that is exactly the point. It exaggerates the descriptor to the point of being "so good it's bad". The use of FPS we are talking about isn't being used ironically it's just being used wrongly.

You've totally missed the point. I wasn't saying that using "sick" is an example of the whole FPS/TPS thing, but rather it was in response to those who say "I don't agree with this word being used in this way, therefore its usage hasn't changed". Do people actually read what is written, within the context that it's written, or do they just see what they want to see so they can argue?

Wait wait, what you are saying here says that because FPS is being applied to Gears of War the term is now less precise and less useful....... this is exactly the reason it shouldn't be applied to GoW!

There are many types of FPS games with varying gameplay styles, but they all have two things in common:

1) a default first person perspective

2) shooting as a dominant action

Some have twitch / strafe gameplay, some are more deliberate and slow. None of them have a default third person perspective, the term FPS doesn't describe a gameplay style.

Have to agree to differ on this one.

[ThunderPeel2001]

No, sorry: bullshit. Max Payne is far more twitch-based throughout than Gears of War is at its most frenetic. And nobody refers to that series as being FPS.

You've not only shot your argument in the foot with this, you've taken both of its legs off as well. Ergo, your argument has no legs.

Well, if you insist it's more "twitch" based, it doesn't mean that Gears of War hasn't got more in common with Quake than it does with Max Payne. Again, just my opinion. I probably used the wrong word with "twitch", I guess.

Hey, I still got my legs!

[eljay]

No... we're talking about how it's already been referred to as a FPS by other people on multiple occassions, and whether the people who describe it as such are wrong or right or foolish or whatever.

I apologise, my use of the word "it" meant I wasn't clear with what I said. What I meant was we are talking about the possibility of language having changed, and whether it is valid to apply FPS in this new context. As I already said, just because we are talking about the possibility of language having changed doesn't mean it has, it just means some people are using the word this way. Also ben was clearly using hyperbole when he said everyone is using it.

You've totally missed the point. I wasn't saying that using "sick" is an example of the whole FPS/TPS thing, but rather it was in response to those who say "I don't agree with this word being used in this way, therefore its usage hasn't changed". Do people actually read what is written, within the context that it's written, or do they just see what they want to see so they can argue?

Please, please stop being so bloody arrogant. You are the one that missed my point, my explanation about "sick" is directly relevant. I was pointing out that FPS is being used incorrectly in terms of the meaning(in EXACTLY the same way as fish is sometimes used incorrectly to describe dolphin) so resistance to this new use is completely valid, whereas while I may not like the term "sick" (and think it's silly) the reasoning behind it is justifiable within the context of the word's meaning.

Remember at the start of this you were telling people to just get over it an move on because language has changed. Which is the main thing I'm arguing against, just because you've heard some people use it doesn't mean you have to accept it as a change in language. Even if language has changed, then what's to stop us changing it again to get rid of this usage?

[Cigol]

I came across this in a recent article on RPS:

If you want more Half-Life 2 right now, this is probably the best way to get your fix. If you don’t think you can stomach any more on-rails Combine-shooting, don’t run off yet. This does things differently.

[Mel]

I think this argument is getting close to rivaling a 'what are adventure games smackdown.' It's interesting but too tense for me.

[n0wak]

I think this argument is getting close to rivaling a 'what are adventure games smackdown.' It's interesting but too tense for me.

<seinfeld voice>What are first-person adventure games and what is the deal with them? </seinfeld>

[Mel]

Hahaha!

"...just remember, it's not a lie if you believe it."

[Coldkill]

It's not a lie if you believe it and no one else cares that it's a lie and believes it. Or doesn't care about you and wasn't listening to the lie. In which case

Anywho onto the topic at hand: Journalists tend to be from the mentally retarded end of the IQ range so I wouldn't expect them to use grammar, spelling or combinations of words such as "first", "person" and "shooter" correctly.

(the above cannot be said for all journalists, some of who can write very informative and articulate articles on subjects which may or may not include the words "first" "person" and "shooter")

[ThunderPeel2001]

I was pointing out that FPS is being used incorrectly in terms of the meaning (in EXACTLY the same way as fish is sometimes used incorrectly to describe dolphin) so resistance to this new use is completely valid, whereas while I may not like the term "sick" (and think it's silly) the reasoning behind it is justifiable within the context of the word's meaning.

I understand you, but that's not what I was talking about.

Which is the main thing I'm arguing against, just because you've heard some people use it doesn't mean you have to accept it as a change in language. Even if language has changed, then what's to stop us changing it again to get rid of this usage?

Because nobody can decide to change language. It just happens.

[Nappi]

I still don't understand how the change in language would work in practice in this case.

If the new use of FPS was truly accepted (and not just accepted as a common mistake), what would the term mean? I mean, if in 2034 when first person shooters, Gears of War, all its sequels, and some other TPS game (I really don't understand how to easily categorize TPS games after the change in language has occured) are all listed under FPS genre, then surely most of people who are interested in those kind of games also want to know what the term stands for (because that's the human nature).

People who don't know anything about this debate would most likely find it utterly ridiculous if the term still stood for first person shooter. Same goes for it (and TPS) standing for nothing in particular. Therefore, both of the terms would need to be renamed.

FPS and TPS are ways of categorizing shooters by the perspective used in them. I don't understand why other gameplay elements should affect this in any way. It would also make categorizing TPS games needlessly hard. Hence, it would only cripple both terms and make unanimous categorization of a particular game a lot harder.

There is a lot of variation between games in FPS genre. Why shouldn't there be in TPS genre? Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfight 2 and Serious Sam are both FPS games and no one seems to have a problem with that. You can pen new terms that describe shooters by their gameplay, but I see absolutely no reason why the terms FPS and TPS should be knocked unconscious, crippled and modified.

True, nobody can change language, but it just doesn't happen either. There needs to be a reason for the change, and people would have to accept it.

[Thrik]

Of course, for such a change of language to occur there'd have to actually be a majority of people using the new/incorrect/whatever term. I've still not come across anyone describing Gears of War as an FPS in my day-to-day life, both online and in real-world conversations.

I think there's probably about 0.1% of those who've played the game actually using the term (that's still a good few thousand people and probably being generous), which kind of nullifies the entire argument in this specific case.

Regarding this, though:

I still don't understand how the change in language would work in practice in this case.

I think language has proven a number of times that it doesn't have to make any sense. The "couldn't care less" example someone game above is a great example of this, with a huge amount of Americans still using the term "could care less", even though it quite blatantly means exactly the opposite of how the phrase is meant to be used. It continues to amaze me that this continues and continues, but if most other Americans understand the phrase how it's meant to be understood then is it really incorrect? Bluh.

Language.

[Nappi]

I agree in a way but still think there is a big difference between a turn of phrase and an exact term that should be used in categorization.

[ThunderPeel2001]

I still don't understand how the change in language would work in practice in this case.

I think Rodi summed it up perfectly (to me, at least). I understand that the whole thing is technically wrong, but there's aspects of Gears that feel more like a FPS, and they're the aspects that would fall under the modified FPS genre, I think (if it does continue).

"[Gears] feels so much like the direct approach of FPSses. There's a sense of immediacy that is often lacking in 3rd person shooters, where you can clearly feel some distance between you and the avatar you are controlling. ... Regardless of how you call it however, I am keenly tempted to group it with FPS games because apart from the perspective, the game plays much the same."

I'm sure there's a lot of examples of things they are technically incorrect... I just don't know them! I think B-movies was a good example because it technically meant the first movie before the main feature on a double-bill.

Other examples of technically wrong words that I can think of are; To "hoover" something up with a vacuum cleaner. Hoover was a brand, like Sony, not a verb. Same goes for "xeroxing" something when you mean photocopy. They're not as good as the B-movie example, but it's still commonly accepted distortions in the language.

I guess it's hard to put into words exactly what it is that makes some people want to describe it as an FPS, but I understand the way in which Gears played felt to me a lot like an FPS. Maybe somebody can help define what makes a FPS other than its perspective.

[eljay]

I think Rodi summed it up perfectly (to me, at least). I understand that the whole thing is technically wrong, but there's aspects of Dolphins that seem more like a fish, and they're the aspects that would fall under the modified fish category, I think (if it does continue).

Would you seriously not tell people that Doplhins aren't fish if you heard several distinct groups claiming they were?

(sorry to keep stealing your analogy nappi, I just though it applied so well)

I realise Gears feels more like some FPS games to you than any TPS games you may have played, but TPS is a fairly small genre currently. Some games across different genres do play similarly, no reason not to allow TPS to grow as a genre.

Also while you are saying you have heard enough people use it that way to accept it as a change in language, I don't know anyone who would refer to it that way. A handful of personal experiences can't really be relied on as proof that language has changed or not.

Your example of B-Movie is a good one as I had no idea of the true origin, I imagine the majority of people don't. It is incorrectly used, and I think it would be hard to impossible for anyone to contest the new use as being an evolution of language (especially since the new meaning can be found in dictionaries).

[ThunderPeel2001]

Ok, look. There's more to a FPS than its perspective. There are other games that are played in a first person perspective where you get to shoot people, but they're not called FPSs. Oblivion can be played first person, and I can shoot and attack people in it. Does that mean it's a FPS?

Of course not, it would be silly.

That's because there's more to the FPS genre than just its perspective. In fact, "first person shooter" is just a name that someone came up with to describe a certain style of gameplay (which then became widely used).

If the term "shooter" had become the term for Quake style games instead of FPS, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

That's because perspective is just ONE element (of many) that makes up the FPS genre's style, and it just happens to be in the genre's title.

[Nappi]

Yes.. the "first person" part happens to be there. There is no way to undo that. Thats why I don't understand why Gears of War should be forced under that incorrect label when one can just as well create another label that better represents the elements one finds important when categorizing games. Or just call it a shooter..

I wouldn't call Wii games mouse controlled action games, no matter how similar they would be with said games, just because wiimote isn't a mouse.

[eljay]

The Half Life series plays very differently to Quake and both of those play very differently to say... Rainbow Six, yet all of these are FPSs, so how you can claim FPS to be defined by one type of gameplay or how it feels is beyond me.

Oblivion would not be categorised as an FPS for the same reason as Tomb Raider is not categorised as a TPS, shooting is not the primary gameplay element. I think it's more about the balance of what you can do in a game, rather than a small subset (i.e. whether or not you can shoot).

If you disagree with that first statement then fine, but that only goes to show that what you are arguing is something completely subjective. Objectively GoW is a TPS and objective categorisation is far more useful than subjective as it means the same thing to everyone.