>FPS >TPS What are some video games with a second person camera?

>>383988391
massive spoilers but pokemon sun/moon

>>383988391
Older Resident Evil games

>>383988391
Resident Evil?

>>383988456
Fuck you mean?

>>383988391
Jak II at one point

Keep Talking And Nobody Explodes?

>>383988391
I know battletoads has a boss fight like this and sometimes when fighting The End in MGS3 it switches to his perspective, but no full on games.

>>383988391
Do games where the pc isn't the mc count? Like ffx or ffxii? Or do you specifically mean a game where you control a character that you're looking at from someone else's pov? There's probably a puzzle game that does that out there

>>383988527
>>383988530
When?

3rd person is 2nd person. You are the 2nd character.

There was a whole game where you controlled cameras and lights to make protagonist do whatever it is you needed her to.
Don't remember the name, I think it was a french or canadian game.
Also in Fatal Frame you could switch to monsters' viewport but it was clunky as fuck and barely useful 2bh.

>Have someone look at monitor and use mouse
>You look away and use keyboard while other guy tells you whats happening.
badda bing badda boom you got a second person experience.

>>383988924
No, you are the audience. Second person would be when a character in game is looking at the controlled character.

The only media at all that I can think of that is in second person is Peep Show.

>>383988945
Would that be ghost trick?

>>383989097
>ghost trick
Nah, it was a fully 3D adventure game. Probably quite low profile so no wonder it slipped under everyone's radar.

Siren lets you see what the enemies see.

Siren: Blood Curse

>>383989186
Shit, you're right, it was Siren, not Fatal Frame.

>>383988391
Mario 64

>>383988456
such a mysterious post

>>383988391
Zero Time Dilemma (you're playing as Delta for 90% of the game)

>>383988391
http://www.kongregate.com/games/himojii/second-person-shooter-zato

>>383989274
Watch it come true in Ultra S/M or some wacky shit

File: 960.jpg (34KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 960x540px

>>383988391
In Super Mario 64 the camera is technically the perspective of the Lakitu

Legacy of Kain
MGS 2
God of War

I remember one PC boxing game that had various view-points you could select. One of them was from eyes of the opposing boxer.
It played like ass.

>>383989438
But Lakitu is the 3rd person in this situation, Mario would have to be interacting with him to be the 2nd person.
>>383988391
In Spychonauts the clairvoyancy power allows you to view the world through the eyes of other people.

>>383989628
psychonauts

also ratchet and clank

Any game where you are getting shot at is an SPS

>>383988849
1/2/3/0/Code Veronica

>>383988391
Your graphic is not exactly the clearest definition, but I've actually thought about a game setup like that before. People complain about cinematic experiences because there's no player agency, but pretty much every game with player agency lacks a strong story because it's too easy for people to get distracted fucking around instead of actually getting shit done. Second person could potentially be a solution to that -- anything happening at all is still contingent upon the main character/actor, so the developer can still control the story to an extent. But the player, in second person, also has some influence over the character.

Unfortunately I couldn't really get any further than that; the only ideas I came up with were either playing as some kind of ghost/spirit or as a dog trying to help its master. The potential just doesn't seem there to me.

File: CNPpGQJUEAANVdB.jpg (69KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 600x800px

>>383988391
screen looking in splitscreen

Most stand out instance would have to be god of war 3.

Watching you beat the shit out of a boss through the eyes of that boss was neat.

>>383988391
I always figured the 'best worst game' would be a second-person shooter. Where your character was always wandering around the world somewhere with shitty tank controls, and the camera would be attached to the nearest enemy's face.

File: 1471379341139.gif (996KB, 290x231px) Image search: [Google]

996KB, 290x231px

>>383989981

Minecraft

>>383988391
we had this thread a couple of years back and someone posted this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8G3z1dwwto

>>383990265
>he doesn't play Screencheat

>>383988391
Lifeline had you guide the protagonist using voice commands with an actual headset.

>>383988391
In steep the camera is the pov of a drone not sure if that counts tho

>>383989813
Name one moment in any of those games where the perspective shifts to second-person.

>>383991097
It does, fcorpigmier{in.u,'

>>383988391
The model does not work for cinematography. End of thread.

>>383991787
>cinematography
>video games

>>383988391
1st person = you looking through your characters eyes
3rd person = you looking at your character from 3rd person's view

there is no 2nd person view.

>>383991906
technically 2nd person would be characters breaking the fourth wall and looking at you.

RTS games, perhaps?

1st - I do (Act)
2nd - You do (Command)
3rd - They do (Observe)

Especially when units talk back

>>383991787
What is Peep Show? Shot in half 1st person and half 2nd person.

>>383989097
>>383989154
eXperience 112? Great concept, too bad it was buggy as hell.

>>383991848
>>383992368
Y'all falling into a linguistical trap, kids. Camera angles don't correspond to narrative perspective in literature from which these terms originate. These are grammatical perspectives, not visual ones.

>>383992305
this! I was thinking about aoe, but every rts is 2nd

>>383988391

does Mario & Wario on Super Famicom count?

>>383988391
Battletoads first boss fight

>>383992989

Yep.

Best game wins again.

Camera looking at you is third person regardless of "who's looking", you dipshits. There is no cinematic second-person perspective.

File: e174ez1.webm (446KB, 612x460px) Image search: [Google]

446KB, 612x460px

>ctrl f "stanley parable"
>0 results

I really, really fucking hate this board.

>>383989004
Different anon, but there is no functional difference in this case. See Super Mario 64, where the camera is both 3rd person (the audience) and 2nd person (Lakitu).

File: 1493893764110.png (434KB, 626x627px) Image search: [Google]

434KB, 626x627px

>>383988391
Whoever made that image is an idiot or a troll.

A 2nd person narrative is just a list of instructions worded in a very specific way, its like a training manual. You can't tell a story, make a game or movie in a 2nd person narrative,

>>383988391
I think there was a splitscreen shooting game where you have to look at the other's view to see what your doing

or something

>>383993270
Here comes yet another dipshit confusing visual and grammatic perspectives. The narrator speaks in "narrative second-person". The camera is "cinematic first-person".

>>383993270
Why would a first-person game be mentioned in a thread about second-person games?

>>383992816
>>383993148
Regardless of semantics, there's a difference between viewing from a secondary character's perspective and viewing from a disembodied perspective.

>>383993281
For Lakitu, it's first-person. There is no visual second-person.

Text adventures

There was a cut item in Shadow of the Colossus that let you see your fights from the Colossus's perspective.

>>383988391
Super Mario 64. You got Lakitu's perspective.

>>383993438
That's the point: the difference is diegetic justification of the existence of the camera, but not of perspective. That is, the camera that provides the third-person perspective may or may not exist in the game-world, which does not change the perspective tiself.

People ITT tend to call diegetic cameras "second-person", but that's both stupid and wrong.

>>383993448
You're looking through Lakitu's camera so it is second person

>>383993438
Viewing a game from a secondary character isn't 2nd person you dipshit, its 3rd person.

>>383993448
You see through his eyes, while controlling Mario. That's 2nd person.

>>383993598
>>383993663
In Uncharted the non-diegetic camera is providing a third-person perspective. In SM64 a diegetic camera (Lakitu's) is providing a third-person perspective.

Existence of camera int he game-world does not change perspective.

>>383993680
Yes it does.

>>383993617
Do 2nd person doesn't exist, then?

>>383992816
This - 2nd person has nothing to do with camera angle. 1st person is you acting, 2nd is you giving orders to someone who's not you (regardless of camera angle), 3rd is observing someone's actions

>>383993693
No. You're falling into a linguistical trap. Second-person is grammatic perspective, not cinematic.

Parappa the Rapper

>>383993680
You're pathetically missing the point. Question: regardless of the camera, are you viewing the game through Lakitu's perspective or not?

Ever17 is one of the only actual "games" with 2nd person and it's a visual novel.

>>383993718
>2nd is you giving orders to someone who's not you (regardless of camera angle)
>>383992954

>>383993748
Wrong

>>383993617
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/first-second-and-third-person

First person is from the person's own perspective. Second person is from another existing person's perspective. Third person is from a perspective that does not phyiscally exist in that world. 3rd can not impact the world in any way. 2nd and 1st person has the potential to.

>>383993748
First/Second/Third person can refer to both language and perspective, and the are different things. We're talking about perspective, not language.

File: 1500071683612.png (23KB, 240x240px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 240x240px

Are there any fourth-person games?

>>383993748
You're the one falling into the linguistic trap of relying too heavily on the word "perspective".

>>383993764
The camera's existence or nonexistence in the game-world does not change its perspective. Abstract camera is non-diegetic 3rd, Lakitu is diegetic 3rd.

Second person is grammatic perspective. It is impossible outside of language. Get this through your fucking head.

>>383993834
Also Ever17.

>>383993834
There's no such thing, so no.

>>383988456
Team Rocket?

>>383993867
>The camera's existence or nonexistence in the game-world does not change its perspective

Yes it does.

>>383993834
Dr. Manhattan speaks in a 4th person narrative.

>>383993867
Incorrect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-person_narrative

>A narrator is a personal character or a non-personal voice that the creator (author) of the story develops to deliver information to the audience, particularly about the plot. In the case of most written narratives (novels, short stories, poems, etc.), the narrator typically functions to convey the story in its entirety. The narrator may be a voice devised by the author as an anonymous, non-personal, or stand-alone entity; as the author as a character; or as some other fictional or non-fictional character appearing and participating within their own story.

>>383993871

Yes it does. A fourth-person game would be someone folding the space so that the camera is touching the character.

>>383993967
Gmod?

>>383993867
You failed to answer my question, instead relying on a misunderstanding of language, and "muh camera".

Also, see:
>>383993816 and >>383993943

>>383988391
Ps1's thrasher: skate and destroy
When the cop is going after you.

File: 1494578028058.jpg (51KB, 687x1024px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 687x1024px

>>383993816
In grammar, there is a difference between second and third person. In visual media there is no difference besides whether the camera is diegetic or not. The camera is either in the focal character's eye or outside the focal character, and that's it. Whether it physically exists in the game world does not change the perspective itself, unlike in grammar.

>>383988391
there was this game when you had to guide someone using a cctv system. Can't remember the name

File: 1497556222595.jpg (91KB, 500x745px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 500x745px

So let me get this straight.
First person is from the perspective of the player's eyes.
Second person is from the perspective of an NPC/security camera of whom you can't control
Third person is from an invisible entity looking at the player

does that make Super Mario 64 a 2nd person game?

>>383994087
Yes!

>>383994030
You keep repeating this. It's not true, no matter how many times you repeat it. A third person does not exist within the world that the story is being told in. A second person does, but is not the character of focus. First person is told through the character of focus's senses and, potentially, thoughts.

>>383988391
Experience 112, the entire concept was based on the 2nd person gimmick.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5loypvOr_XQ

File: 1499593233271.png (260KB, 803x790px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 803x790px

>>383994030

Are there any games that take place in the future perfect tense?

>>383993663
Read what you wrote.
YOU see THROUGH his eyes
Therefore you are the second person. You are not Mario.

>>383994087
>Second person is from the perspective of an NPC/security camera of whom you can't control
Almost. You can potentially control the 2nd person perspective, like Lakitu. However, the 2nd person is not the character of focus in the story. He exists, but is not the focus in any meaningful way.

>>383994128
Yes, because you will need to understand that visual media can not directly borrow terms from grammar that describe effects that don't exist in visual media. You're erroneously dragging diegesis into visual perspective.

>>383992019
in narrative form, it's more of some guy talking about your exploits

it's hard to implement it as a camera view though

>>383994189
No. Because Lakitu is not the narrative focus. Third person doesn't exist, so it isn't a third person, and you aren't seeing through the eyes of the character the narrative is focusing on, so it isn't first person. This leaves... second person perspective.

>>383994087
>got awful hideous bolt-ons

My first trap faps were to Alexis, her cute tiny feminine penis as she put a buttplug in her ass, she ruined her body.

SM64 is simultanously a first and second person game. Controlling Lakitu is first-person. Controlling Mario is from the second-person.

If Lakitu was somehow a completely independent character whose perspective you saw through, but still had to control Mario, then it would be a truly second-person game. Otherwise, it is a combination of the two perspectives to make it playable.

>>383994217
okay, gotcha. It would be more like a monster watching the protag as they unknowing walk towards it

>>383994087
>>383994108
>>383994217

2nd is you giving orders, and the game acknowledging as much. Think god game or RTS where the units talk back. Your example of second is still 3rd person, which is you playing an observer.

>>383994231
We aren't talking about grammar. We are talking about NARRATIVE. Two different things.

File: Ouchface.jpg (27KB, 854x212px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 854x212px

Doom

In this thread we see how people didn't know "1st/2nd/3rd person" is referring to the narrative focus.

>>383994314
>2nd is you giving orders
Wrong

>>383993943
So bastion?

>>383994313
Literally any perspective that exists within the world, but is not the perspective of the narration's focus (typically the protagonist).

>>383993798
specifically, second person is narrating about your story

>>383994315
You can call a third-person with a diegetic camera "second-person visual perspective" if you really want to. It would be a misnomer that uses terminology from grammar as a metaphor (like "tone" in music).

As for narrative, there is no first/second/third person. Cf narratologists Genette, Stanzel: there is the narrator, there is the focalizer, they are seperate entities. The 1/2/3 person is exclusive to grammar.

>>383988391
Text adventures

File: 1499065181727.png (13KB, 266x220px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 266x220px

Seems like Mega Man X3 would count because you can switch to Zero any time.

Jojo's Bizarre Adventure for the SNES

>>383994368
Haven't played it. But if that has a dude following the protagonist around with a camera or something, then yes. Lakitu from Mario 64 is the perfect example of this. He exists, but is not the focus of the narrative.

There is a reason 2nd person is rarely used in anything including books. It's retarded. Same applies to camera

>>383994368
Second-person literary narration, third-person camera.

>>383994391
Dude, I listed the wikipedia article about 2nd person narration. You want to keep slapping your grammatical definition onto the narrative definition, and pretending that the narrative definition doesn't exist, be my guest. You just come off as a fool, just like someone who is arguing with a German or Spanish guy, saying that objects can't be masculine or feminine, because they are objects.

>>383994231
You've been proven wrong countless times already, but I'll explain why you're wrong for you one more time.

First person is when you see the perspective of the character you play as. Second person is when your perspective is that of another character, and third person is when your perspective is not of any character, but is "disembodied".

We're not taking about language, or even narrative, we're only talking about perspective. In SM64, you're viewing the game from Lakitu's perspective, and is hence second person.

>>383994391
Appeal to authority combined with a fundamental misunderstanding of language. Amazing. Try to understand things as they actually exist, and how words are actually used.

>>383994486
Technically poems like second person a lot.

>>383994543
Narrative definition does not exist. Cf Genette, Stanzel, Fludernik, Ryan etc. etc. etc.

Isn't it more reasonable to assume typical ''third person'' games to actually be second person, whereas ''god mode'' (camera isn't connected to any character (model), no direct control over any characters) like AoE are the real third person perspective?

>>383994545
>we're only talking about perspective. In SM64, you're viewing the game from Lakitu's perspective, and is hence second person.
As I said, you're falling into a linguistical trap. The terminologic existing of 1st and 3rd person perspectives makes you beleive there must be a second-person perspective too. You're confusing terminology and are mixing grammar, cinematography and narratology all into one.

>>383994597
There is an abundance of evidence to dispute your claim. Just like the dude that says "chairs can't be masculine OR feminine. They are sexless, genderless objects." It's not going to stop a german from referring to it as, "Der stuhle," instead of "das stuhle."

>>383994741
"Abundance of evidence" comes from layman publications. I'm listing major narratology scholars.

>>383994597
You're exactly like a radical feminist ego had been shown scientific evidence for sexual dimorphism, and instead of accepting it, you just screech "but Butler said it's a social construct reeeee".

Grow up, get out of your ivory tower, learn what words actually mean, and admit when you're wrong.

>>383994690
The only person confusing anything here is you. I'm insisting on a fundamental difference between language, narrative, and perspective. You've been proven wrong countless times already, and immense evidence against your point had already been shown to you. You can either accept that you're wrong, or not.

>>383994802
Appeal to authority, again. Arguments should rely on evidence, not name-dropping. Try to understand how people actually use words, and you'll understand why you're wrong.

>>383994802
And those scholars that you have listed have stated that there can be no such thing as a 2nd person narrative experience?

Even if they had, its an appeal to authority, just like you could also say, "The head physician at John Hopkins has examined chairs. They have no genitals!"

>>383993371
You can certainly tell a story in second person. I'll give you the rest though.

When a pro sports person plays themselves in a sports game.

>>383988391
That one level in Driver San Francisco.

>>383994808
>You're exactly like a radical feminist ego
>You've been proven wrong countless times already
You don't sound qualified to discuss any of these.

As I said, you insist on calling what amounts to visual third-person with a diegetic camera "second-person". Is that correct? Good for you then. You're inventing terms, but good for you.

>>383994859
>>383994870
>Appeal to authority
>Even if they had, its an appeal to authority
You want me to paste monographs proving the basics of narratology in my posts?

File: 000[1].gif (2MB, 288x288px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 288x288px

>>383994932

>>383988391
Mostly text based games.

File: 1498789196047.png (1MB, 1600x1350px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1600x1350px

>>383994932

>>383994997
Why bother, I could just link other articles that call certain stories in film, books, and vidya, "2nd person perspective."
You want to walk away thinking you're technically correct, feel free. You have not, and can not change the world's mind simply by an appeal to authority.

In Narration:
1st person is through the protagonists eyes.
2nd person is through the eyes of someone who exists in that world, but is not the protagonist.
3rd person is through the perspective of something that does not exist in the world, and could not impact the world no matter how badly they wanted to.

You are just going to have to deal with that. Just like "literally" no longer means "without exaggeration."

File: 736[1].gif (625KB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

625KB, 400x225px

>>383994932

>>383994938
>why can't everyone stop using terms ivory tower social studies hacks don't like reeeeeee
Learn to understand how people actually speak. Second-person perspective is a term that many people use, and that many articles have been written about. Hardly 'inventing' any terms, considering it's used infinitely more often than "visual third-person with a diegetic camera".

>>383995176
Summed it up better than I could.

File: 1433710226025.jpg (99KB, 610x395px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 610x395px

>>383995176
Your "in narration" goes completely contrary to mainstream narratology. Therefore, you're either a person capable of completely reforming an established field of study or a Dunning-Kruger effect sufferer. Sit back, consider your qualifications and decide which of these is the case.

>>383995397
>Sit back, consider your qualifications
Another appeal to authority? Fuck off.

>>383995352
>why can't everyone stop using terms ivory tower social studies hacks
Oh my, anti-intellectualism. That's always good defence against insight.

keep talking and nobody explodes?

>>383995442
>Another appeal to authority?
You're right, I should stop referring to knowledge and just invent everything on the go like the free spirit that you are. Because fucked if narrative or grammar weren't so easy that you couldn't just grasp them immediately and tell field liuminaries to go fuck themselves. It's not Dunning-Kruger, it's just that you're really more knowledgeable than those dusty old guys you've never even heard about. I agree.

>>383995524
Keep Talking and Nobody Cums

>>383995397
If you're going to appeal to an authority, you should at least do it to where it isn't a fallacy:
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority
>The valid form of argument is one in which a recognized and knowledgeable authority on the relevant subject is appealed to by citing a statement by that authority. This is a form of inductive reasoning in that the conclusion is not logically certain, but likely.[22] Examples include following the treatments prescribed by a medical doctor, or citing a respected author to establish claims of fact in a written work.[22]

But if you were to do that, you wouldn't be able to conclusively deny 2nd person narration.

>>383995570
>Just because some people I listed stated this, it is magically true, and will remain such until the end of time!
Again, fuck off.

>>383988391
2d platformers?

Fallout 3.

Your character is never the main character and has just about no importance to the plot. You are just watching the main characters do their thing

>>383995452
>equating empiricism with anti-intellectualism
No, it's just anti-elitism, and favouring evidence over appeals to authority. But feel free to attack anyone who provides any evidence against your ideology as being "anti-intellectual" (because I'm sure only people who agree with you are intellectual).

There's a reason why most people, especially natural scientists, dislike those in social studies and the humanities, and this is exactly it.

>>383995601
Narratology works like it does not because Genette said so, but because we know that from Genette et al's studies. You're asking me to prove the validity of standard terminology from fields you don't seem to know anyhting about. If you become one of my students, I will, but that is not possible to do in a 4chan post.

>>383995681
Models are imperfect and will very likely be improved or done away with, but obviously not by someone with your level of insight.

>>383995397
>Autism: the post

You're being proven wrong post after post, but are still parroting bullshit whilst thinking you're superior to everbody. I have to respect it in some ways

>>383995765
Linguistics or narratology are established fields. If you disagree with the consensus, the burden of proof is on you.

>>383995939
The burden of proof is in the real world. Definitions change. Case in point: the definition of "literally."

Great scientists used to claim the world was both flat and the center of the universe. Appealing to their authority does not make it any more or less true.

I'm pretty sure MGSV hits this idea, especially Ground Zeroes.

>>383996013
>The burden of proof is in the real world.
The fuck you even talking about now, you doofus.

>>383995939
but linguistics is a natural science incorrectly classified as a humanist discipline

>>383995939
Ok. Let me ask you a question. There is a movie that is not in the first person. The camera, however, can be and is disrupted by a person jostling it at some point.

What perspective is it, and why?

>>383995939
So is gender studies. What matters is evidence, and you haven't been able to refute any that has been shown to you.

>>383996071
He's talking about you going on about, "Well, so and so said this, and this other guy said that," as if this makes what they say both true when they said it, and true now.

>>383996231
Perspective is third-person. The camera is a diegetic object.

>>383996282
That anon also asked for you to explain why.

>>383988391
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WMFMwBoWU0

>>383996282
You explaining what it is doesn't explain WHY it is.

Go on.

>>383996265
What your'e saying is true. But there's an important difference between a open-minded scholar proving the previously held beleifs wrong and someone completely not qualified simply disbelieving thems ivory tower nutters.

>>383996318
>>383996345
I'm done.

>>383996418
Now, now. The second we ask you to start qualifying your claims, "you're done?"

Don't tell me all you had was claims from other people?

>>383996318
Why what exactly? It's terminology. As I said, if you want to call third-person camera that is also diegetic "second-person visual perspective", that owuld be inventing your own definitions, but you're free to do that.

>>383996480
>It's terminology.
Feel free to explain. What, you can't even define your own claims beyond the authority of others? "They said it, so it must be true!"?

>>383996557
It's too complicated to explain here.

>>383996593
If you can't be assed to explain any of your claims, don't expect anyone to buy into them.

File: 1464474264589.jpg (101KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1280x720px

>>383990174
It makes me mad to this day, even more than Mass Effect 3 ending. After playing through amazing simple epic story about climbing up a titan to the temple chained to his back and experiencing an incredible journey to the isle of creation where fates weave and cut the threads of life we got God of War 3. The opening is just insane, perfect build up to mount the Olympus itself, fighting off and killing Poseidon.

Even Hades is alright if I ignore Athena bullshit. But then the entire game afterwards is just lost potential. Why the fuck was Stig Asmussen directing this one and not my boy Cory Barlog? The lost potential, fuck I am mad.

>>383988456
No

>>383996557
Someone got so angry that they decided to start pretending they're me. Anyway, terminology is subject of consensus. There is no terminology outside of authority by definition.

>>383996593
You're a child.

>>383996625
Facts don't rely on your belief.

>>383994802
said scholars think "singular they" shouldn't exist

>>383996683
English does need a gender neutral singular pronoun. "He or she" is so fucking cumbersome.

>>383996672
>Someone got so angry that they decided to start pretending they're me. Anyway, terminology is subject of consensus. There is no terminology outside of authority by definition.
That's not explaining your argument. That's, once again, appealing to others who are not here to question. You've made your assertion, now it's on you to argue why you are right.

Super Mario 64

>>383996683
Who, Stanzel, Ryan? Which "said scholars"? most didn't even write in English and have "polite plural" naturally embedded in their languages. How fucking ignorant are you?

>>383996750
>>383996750
>>383996750
Yoooooooo

>>383996746
that's why I said "they"

>A player gets hit by flames. They receive burning damage.

>>383996748
When you attack consensus, the burden of proof is on you.

Have you finished high school yet?

>>383996746
"They" works perfectly fine. Why fix what nobody but said scholars are bitching about?

There was a boxing game where you could play through the eyes of your opponent.

>>383996815
>>383996834

I don't know what you're talking about. I'm just agreeing.

>>383996843
Why are you looking for obscure examples when Super Mario 64 is a 2nd person game

A 2nd person perspective would be you behind the eyes of an npc while controlling the main character. Needless to say, it's doesn't work well for video games. Doesn't work well for literature, although there are some example of 2nd person in lit. It would be like this:

"You wake up. You start to get dressed. You look in the mirror and brush your teeth."

Ironically, it's meant to make literature feel more like an interactive medium, despite video games never using that perspective.

Pokemon GO

>>383988391
Kingdom Hearts 2 has a boss fight entirely fought through the eyes of said boss.

I win.

>>383996823
Ok. The consensus of the general public is that 2nd person is the perspective of a character that exists in said world, but is not the focus of the narrative. I have cited my sources to leverage this point. You have attacked the general public's consensus with some scholarly consensus. Therefore, the burden is on you to disrupt the general public's consensus.

>>383996480
So instead of accepting words that real people use in real-world situations, and that are intuitive and easily communicate a single concept, you instead insist that this is actually wrong and that your terminology is the only correct non-invented terminology because some people said so once? The best thing about this is that you are simply incapable of understanding that your entire point is based on nothing but appeals to authority.

>>383996823
The burden on proof relies on those making claims, and requires evidence. "Consensus" without evidence is just an appeal of authority. You can't make an appeal to authority then screech "burden of proof!" whenever anyone questions you or asks for you to back up your claims.

File: test.jpg (29KB, 780x478px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 780x478px

>1st person view
>subject: you
>source: you
>2nd person view
>subject: you
>source: not you
>3rd person view
>subject: not you
>source: not you

so i'd argue the third person camera is actually an incorrectly named second person camera since it fits criteria for 2nd person.

>>383996903
it isn't

>>383996913
killcam/replay is implementing this right?

>>383996950
>The consensus of the general public
No, the scientific consensus. What laymen beleive is not strictly relevant to how things are. Layman's views on linguistics are important to understanding how a layman operates and thinks, but completely important to understanding linguistics themselves.

>>383996974
personally, that question is idiotically constructed

a simple "Bobby has four dimes and Amy has 30 pennies. Prove who has more money."

>>383996974
In 2nd person, the source exists and is tangible. Think of it as a narrator or a cameraman. They can still be touched.

You can't touch a 3rd person perspective.

>>383997114
>thinking social studies is science
How cute.

>>383997114
e.g. the difference between what plebeians think of "theory" vs. what academics think of "theory"

it's why you get retarded reactions when you make the masses see something like, "theory of evolution" or "theory of relativity"

File: 897783-picture_2.png (158KB, 408x392px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 408x392px

>>383996934
Battletoads did it first

>>383997186
What the fuck is with your fixation on social studies? You keep bringing it and feminism up. Did they sodomize your family or something?

>>383997206
It's not plebians vs. patricians. It's laymen versus professionals.

>>383997114
I like how you just refuse to quantify your argument beyond appealing to an authority. You don't bother to quote them, or link us to where they came to this conclusion. You just say, "They said it. Trust me. Therefore, it's true."

I don't trust you, and it isn't based on the arguments you have given. That's all the energy I have for you. It's obvious you don't even know why they came to such a conclusion (if they even did come to such a conclusion), and you're being a grammar nazi just for the sake of it, and appealing to authority when challenged.

>>383997206
That's just a particular word having different definitions in different contexts/usages. Both are equally correct definitions of the word "theory", but they can be incorrectly used.

>>383997260
>I can't refute any points made against me so I'll just attack people instead

>>383988945
the game is eXperience 112
similar is Republique

>>383997307
>I like how you just refuse to quantify your argument beyond appealing to an authority.
As I said, when you attack the consensus, the burden of proof is on you.

>>383997324
He keeps bringing up social studies for some reason. Linguistics or narratology aren't social studies, hence the question.

>>383997390
>I get to define what the consensus is!
Fuck off.

>>383997304
though you'd agree the academic level is similar

>>383997324
they are, but I guess people forget context a lot

>when people spout "it's just a theory!" on a fucking theory of evolution

>>383997390
If I challenged Stephen Hawking to explain to me why he thinks black holes work the way that they do, he could explain it. He wouldn't say, "It's the consensus."

He asked you to explain it. You refuse to, saying the burden of proof is on him to refute what a bunch of poofters who pontificate about language think language is.

>>383997390
>Linguistics or narratology aren't social studies
Please enlighten me as to what they are then, o great one

>>383988456
This is the best thing I've seen all day

>>383988391
If you take a drone that follows you and livestreams video of yourself into a VR headset that you're wearing - that's a second person perspective. Also a cool idea.

>>383997416
I listed major scholars whose seminal works I rely on. They are not infallible, but it takes more than some random fucker's off-hand disbelief to change the consensus view on linguistics or the theory of narrative.

>linguists in /v/

now I've seen everything

>>383997496
>If I challenged Stephen Hawking to explain to me why he thinks black holes work the way that they do, he could explain it
I also could. Were you my student, I would. Similarly, if you should ridiculous shit at Hawking online, he will not launch into a basic physics course for you personally, and so wouldn't I or anyone.

File: maxresdefault[1].jpg (112KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 1920x1080px

Boom.

>>383997569
Yet you haven't actually been able to explain what they said, what their evidence behind their claims are, or how what they said is applicable to your claims. Appeal to authority, over and over and over.

>>383997642
How convenient for you that you don't have to explain yourself out provide any evidence.

>>383997686
>out
or*

>>383997229
That makes neither of us any more or less correct.

>>383997573
An actual linguist would shit on the idea of disproving "laymen" understanding of terms with appeal to academic authority.

Language is always subject to change and the most powerful force directing that change is practical laymen use.

>>383997651
>>383997651
>>383997651

>>383997686
You are not qualified to argue narrative science. And I'm not here to educate you. I only bring up narratology to show that you're using terminology incorrectly, e.g. when you say that "there is 2nd person in narrative" and I have to correct you that this is not the case. If you want proof, see Monika Fludernik etc. etc. etc. It calls for a vast amount of knowledge far beyond what is teachable in 2000 symbols.

>People here are still try to prove things using science shit and references

> On slash vee slash

topkek

>>383998169
forward slash

forward slash

>>383998193
doesn't like

video games

>>383997946
Except you're wrong

And you know what wrong rhymes with? Dong.

You're a weiner lol.

>>383997946
How convenient for you. I will continue using language as people understand it to be used and use "second person" in regard to perspective. I will also continue to regard you as an unscientific, fallacy-reliant, pretentious fool. It's very cute how you consider to insist that narratology is "narrative science", as if that makes your claims any less worthless. The fact that you're entirely unable to back up any of your claims, that you continually rely on appeals to authority, and respond to claims and criticism with "I'm not here to educate you" tells me everything I need to know.

File: 1433499945349.gif (2MB, 222x168px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 222x168px

ITT:
>>Which kind of craft will travel faster than light you guys?
>Currently it is thought that travelling faster than light is impossible.
>Oh yeah, and who says that?
>This, this and this major scientist.
>Quit appealing to authority! Prove it!
>In order to understand why that is so, you'll need to read this and that work. But for that you need to be familiar with this and that segment of physics and mathematics. And for that you need to know basics of this, this and that.
>Holy shit, you're appleaing to SO MUCH AUTHORITY you ivory-tower cocksucker lol

File: 47872_front.jpg (96KB, 640x467px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 640x467px

Does this count?

>>383998291
see
>>383998375
and .

>>383998375
its already been proven we can transport matter faster than light
einstein only contributed theories, unproven, and mostly untrue, thatll be proven wrong over time

science is the most pretentious holier than though field that is entirely ignorant of most of what reality consists of

>>383998497
>einstein only contributed theories, unproven, and mostly untrue
Ha ha, oh my.

>>383998375
>>383998428
>thinking that "narratology"is comparable to physics or mathematics on any level
Still doesn't change the fact that that anon failed to provide any evidence for their claims, or even illustrate a connection between their references and their claims. Nothing but appeals to authority.

At any rate, good science will always be able to be easily communicated to those without significant background knowledge. "I'm not here to educate you" is always a copout. Also, saying "this scientist said X, so it's true" *is* an appeal to authority; [actual] science always stands on its own merits.

>>383998497
You're an idiot.

>>383988391

In Forbidden Siren you can sightjack enemies and watch yourself play through the eyes of enemies. It's a good mechanic.

How does any of this theoretical shit improve your lives in any way? Does it help you cook a steak or plant a garden?

Reach the point where you can abandon your books already, otherwise you'll never have authority over yourself.

>>383999086

How did this whingey post that is upset about the interests of other people help humanity?

Strongly consider suicide.

>>383988391
XCOM : The Bureau

>>383997868
but I don't want retards to make words like "irregardless" real

File: 20a434_japanese-funny-fart-painting.jpg (111KB, 600x400px)

111KB, 600x400px

>>383999250

>>383999393
Then all you can do is convince people to stop using it.

>>383995397
you also dont know what dunning kruger means

>>383999393
Well then maybe you should start educating rather than just proclaiming.

>>383999086
>m-m-muh protons, neutrons and electrons!
Retards worshipping the "real" word are the fucking worst

>>383999582
but you do and people will ignore and shitpost you and pull shit like "well language evolves!"

The Bureau: XCOM Declassified

>>383999672
I can judge whether someone is qualified to educate me, and how much so, using 4 questions:
>Were they born into money?
If so, that's a ding.
>Did they major in something worthless in the private sector?
If so, ding.
>Have they ever worked in the private sector?
If not, ding.
>Have they worked in the private sector RECENTLY?
If not, ding.

Battletoads
Turtles in Time
any fps that shows how you died

>>383992816
Thanks for confirming this, I was starting to feel dumb

Wasn't there some photobomb game that did this?

>>383994172
There's a Time Splitters game with that as it's subtitle, so no.

Crash Bandicoot