h a l f b a k e r yThis product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
| |
No, you're missing it. It looks to me that "Deer Avenger" is a 3rd person shooter, just one where the deer (typcially the pray) is now the hunter. In a 2nd person shooter, the player would have the perspective of the thing being shot, but would control the shooter that the thing sees. |
|
| |
Baked. Play 'Serious Sam' in split screen mode. |
|
| |
It doesn't do that on purpose, but it seemed to be the effect the one time I tried it. |
|
| |
Also baked on a Star Wars game for the Nin-lawsuit-tendo when you do a code, in which you take on the view of a Storm trooper. Wait, I think you might actually control them which isn't what you're talking about, but I'm not sure. You know what? Just ignore me, I'm not thinking right. |
|
| |
So in Grand Theft Auto, you play an innocent pedestrian, but CONTROL the maniac whose running you down in a bus? |
|
| |
erm... how do you control your own player when he is not on the screen... how do you aim etc... |
|
| |
It could work if you had an adversary that aggressively pursued the player, so the player was usually in sight of the foe. Part of the game would be running and avoiding the opponent’s shots, then turning and firing. I don’t see any problem here. |
|
| |
This sounds like a cool idea, but it would be really hard to play as 2 things at once. You would also have to have 2 contollers, which would be hard to manage. Maybe it would work having something like a picture-in-picture view just so you could SEE through the eyes of whatever you are killing, but you wouldn't actually control it. |
|
| |
What we *really* need is a Third Person Plural Conditional Past Perfect Shooter.
Or maybe not. |
|
| |
I don't see why you would need two controllers, just two methods of display. You're not actually *playing* the victim, you just see everything from their perspective. For example, you could be a robot hunter getting the readout from the robot's vision sensors.
In addition to this, however, you would need some sort of readout for controlling your player (even if it is just a simple radar in the corner of the screen). An alternative, would be to control various static gun emplacements positioned within your virtual world, and use the victim's visual display to determine which one to fire. |
|
| |
You begin with a number of turrets, perhaps with different weapons available (ala Scorched Earth), and your target (whose eyes you see through) runs around destroying these turrets. He has a HUD which shows the turrets' relative positions, which comes in handy as you switch between the remaining turrets and use simple controls to launch missiles which would follow a nice parabolic path towards the target, who would dodge explosions manically as you find your range... |
|
| |
this might actualy work... (not that I realy want to play it...) |
|
| |
"Third Person Plural Conditional Past Perfect Shooter" Let's see, I think that would require multiple 3rd person readouts, that would play back what would have happened if you had or had not shot... |
|
| |
RobertKidney: You're probably right, it would be weird to play, but there's nothing new in games right now. Someone needs to push the envelope. As long as they push it in a good direction... |
|
| |
What kind of half-baked storyline could this perspective lend itself to? I mean, first-person is fairly obvious, third-person usually goes completely unexplained (just looks better, easier to control), whereas the kind of thing we are talking about could feed any number of strange plot setups - how did I get into this guy's head? |
|
| |
jabber: I think the answer is mind control. You could be playing someone who can control third parties while you personally remain inconspicious in the crowd. |
|
| |
Have you ever played Syphon Filter for PSX? In it, you control Gabe Logan, and there is a special weapon that you always have in your inventory called the air taser. When fired at the opponent, this "air taser" lodges an electric probe into the target, and begins electrocuting them so that they begin to catch on fire. But the whole point of me saying this is that, as the opponent is catching on fire, you see it from a third person perspective, but you are actually seeing it from second person, but it is played out in third. If you don't understand what I just said, rent Syphon Filter for PSX and it will make things a lot simpler. Just be sure to get the original Syphon Filter, since in the 2nd and 3rd Syphon Filter games, the air taser is only available as a special weapon. |
|
| |
My idea for a cool 2nd person shooter (SPS) is that it is played as a third person shooter (TPS), but when you hit someone, it reverts into a 2nd person view, where the camera is located slightly behind the target and you see them being shot. A special button would revert you out of 2nd person view, so if you are in, say, an intense firefight, with multiple targets overwhelming you from all directions, you wouldn't have to watch one-by-one as each person gets shot. |
|
| |
Earlier today, I was at school and I brought this subject up to friends. Now, even though I personally consider this to be an extremely dumb way of viewing your character, my friend suggested a 6th person shooter, or "from the gun's point of view". Again, this was not my idea, so don't think i'm and idiot or anything like that. This is strictly my friend's thinking. |
|
| |
Anyway, this is getting really long, so I'll just wrap this up. I think this whole 2nd person shooter thing would be a cool idea, but that it should not be mandatory to watch from the 2nd person perspective. It should be used sparingly, like bullet time in MP for instance. |
|
| |
In Descent 2, (or maybe it was 3, I don't remember), you could shoot a guided missle with a missle-view camera. It was quite handy for exploring around the mines, shooting remote locations, etc. |
|
| |
How about a 1st person game that switches to 2nd person when you are in view. The advantage of seeing people following and hiding from you balanced with the disadvantage of innacurate shooting. Levels with reflective surfaces would make things even more interesting. A possible explanation would be some kind of psychic hunter (are Predators/Aliens psychic, that seems like a game that this could be fitted into). |
|
| |
I've played plenty of games that switch to a target view for the kill. |
|
| |
This is not exactly what you were getting at, but it would fit your broader idea. |
|
| |
How about one where you specifically control the victim. In this you are a pathetic wimp, and are furiously trying to evade a big badass typical-fps type hero. No shooting back because it's pointless. Just run, dodge, duck, jump and hide. Maybe knocking things over in his path, and creating various diversions as you go. This could just be a test of how far you can get/ how long you last before you get smeared, or it could have various tasks/ checkpoints/ conditions you have to satisfy along the way. |
|
| |
Actually, couldn't a 2nd person shooter be quite useful to enhance one's spatial coordination abilities? |
|
| |
all right i will solve this all!! SO SHUT UP and listen....
you would see through an allys point of view. side kick kind of. he will stay in front of you and on your screen you would see what he sees but also what you see still controlling you you use the other guy as a scout of sorts. if you want 2nd person thats the best you can get becouse any other way would ruin the game. im sorry but if im in a room and the 2nd person im seeing through is in a nother your screwed. |
|
| |
--2nd person does not have to be the enemy-- |
|
| |
Very interesting. Wouldn't it be EXTREMELY hard to aim, though? |
|
| |
Seeing a fight through the eyes of the enemy was baked on the NES game Battletoads. A fairly early boss was a large gun turret. Your toad had to lob rocks at the screen while dodging the crosshairs. |
|
| |
[chronkyrios]'s suggestion sounds like a bit of Spiderman on the playstation. One of the later confrontations with Venom involved running like hell through a load of twisty corridors. You couldn't hurt or stop him, just try to out run him. |
|
| |
This idea is awesome. Empathy is exactly what our nerds need. Baked in the sense that people who cheat in split screen modes have already done this. But thats mitigated by the aspect that its a forced view. Most of you people are idiots. I'd like to point that out. |
|
| |
Just played F22 Lightning 2 and tried a dogfight from the baddie's perspective. Damned hard. |
|
| |
[quickshot44] has me spinning around in circles. You make no sense, boy. |
|
| |
This game idea is kind of odd. I see the appeal, but it would just be too difficult to play as a whole game, as opposed to a single boss scene where everyone's in the same room. |
|
| |
[stilgar], the Battletoads boss scene sounds like something I remember from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles for the SNES. Pretty much the same thing, except with different characters, of course. |
|
| |
To better explain [quickshot44]'s anno, the camera switches to a 3rd person view from the person getting tazed, until they catch fire. Best part of the game, and the sequels sucked.
Glad someone brought up Battletoads, I forgot all about that boss.
//Just run, dodge, duck, jump and hide. Maybe knocking things over in his path, and creating various diversions as you go.//
Play Manhunt, one of the bosses has a chainsaw and you can't hurt him. I forgot how to beat him, but you pretty much run around and throw stuff to lead him off course. |
|
| |
My idea for 2PS would be it all starts off black (your character is blind/psychic?) on your screen, and as other creatures get closer to your character, you begin to see what they see on the screen. |
|
| |
So, basically, you have to navigate by keeping close to other creatures. And then shooting them would be a spray fest joke =) |
|
| |
The HUD in my game would show all the normal stuff, like Health, Current Weapon, Ammo etc. But everything on the screen would be from other creature's perspective. If there are too many others, the screen becomes blurry, filled with too much information - unless you press a button to filter it, say to the nearest one, and then tab between creatures. |
|
| |
Maybe any map would be based on 'what your creatures' have seen. |
|
| |
Somehow I am reminded of the scene in City of Lost Children where one cyborg is killing another cyborg and before he strangles his foe, he swaps the optical cables, so each sees the others point of view. Pastery. |
|
| |
Just play a first person shooter and suck
hard. I've been saying Counterstrike is my
favorite second person shooter for years. |
|
| |
does it have to be a shooter? |
|
| |
Shooting John Malkovich anyone? |
|
| |
I quite liked [chronkyrios]'s suggestion (and username) of controlling the hunted while viewing the eyes of the hunter. I think this could make a great Terminator game. Trying to get out of his way, whilst seeing it all in the weird robot viewpoint. |
|
| |
in Jak II, there are some challenges that
the viewpoint is shifted to the view of
something chasing you. it's really kinda
confusing for the first couple of times. it
just seems more like a cheap way to
increase the game's difficulty. |
|
| |
//In Descent 2, (or maybe it was 3, I don't remember), you could shoot a guided missle with a missle-view camera// |
|
| |
There was one of these in Ratchet & Clank, and I vaguely remember it in the second and third installations in the series. |
|
| |
I thought that this idea was that you played a person who was unable to fire a weapon or kill for some reason (physical incapacity, religious beliefs, something like that), and they had control of a person who for some exotic reason could shoot weapons, but couldn't aim (ie, he was blind, something like that), so you would have to use a control for yourself to dodge enemies, all the while aiming and shooting using some other guy. Kinda like a cross between Timesplitters 3 and The Ice Climbers. |
|
| |
If it can't see you then you can't see it. So if it was smart it would put a towel over its head. |
|
| |