What happened to "2nd ...."

Skeeter

Skeeter

Skeeter

Caporegime
Joined
8 Mar 2007
Posts
37,146
Location
Surrey
Hi

Just wondering whilst watching some tele, what happened to "2nd <something>"?

I mean, we have 1st person and 3rd person shooter, theres the 1st world and 3rd world countries, I can talk about myself in the 1st or 3rd person. Is there a 2nd for these type of things, or is it just omitted? and if so, why?

You never hear of somone from a 2nd world country writing a review for a new 2nd person shooter in the 2nd person...
 
"# I (1st. person singular)
# Thou (2nd. person singular, archaic)
# You (2nd. person singular/plural)
# He (3rd. person singular, masculine)
# She (3rd. person singular, feminine)"
 
In a 2nd person shooter, you would control the object that you are hunting/shooting, but you would be in control of the shooter still, in effect you would need to shoot yourself to live; I'm not quite sure how a game could be based on that..

The term "Second World" is a phrase that was used to describe the Communist states within the Soviet Union's sphere of influence. Along with "First World" and "Third World", the term has been used to divide the nations of Earth into three broad categories. The term has largely fallen out of use since the end of the Cold War. The other two 'worlds' are still widely talked about, although "First World" is now deprecated for the more politically correct "developed country" and "Third World" has been replaced with "developing country". Many "Second World" countries are now considered part of the "First World". These countries include Russia, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_World
 
So there is such thing as a "2nd world", thought their must be. Even if the americans came up with the numbered system I dont think their stupid enough to miss out 2...

But yes, as you say, its now about the developed-ness. I was always taught More Economicaly Devloped Country (MEDC) and Less Economicaly Devloped Country (LEDC) in geography at school, but that doesnt seem to be used anymore either.
 
strudey said:
A 2nd person shooter would possibly involve viewing the action from a character who is not the protagonist?
Click to expand...

Yes, in effect. Although you would still be in control of the protagonist. In essence the goal of a 2nd person FPS would be to hunt down and shoot yourself..
 
Dracata said:
Yes, in effect. Although you would still be in control of the protagonist. In essence the goal of a 2nd person FPS would be to hunt down and shoot yourself..
Click to expand...

Or could it be a bystander watching the 'hero' (which you are controlling) shooting baddies?? Therefore every scene would be viewed from the bystander's pov i.e. he is following the hero around?
 
Dracata said:
The term "Second World" is a phrase that was used to describe the Communist states within the Soviet Union's sphere of influence.[/url]
Click to expand...

when I was at school ( long ago ) 2nd world countries were developed but relatively new countries ( in terms of being developed ) , USA, Australia etc

appears the definition has changed now
 
I thought about this a few years ago. I came to the following conclusion:

1st person is the view from the players eyes

2nd person would be looking straight back at the player. Wherever the player moved, the camera would shift to be looking right back to the player and in effect be totally unplayable, unless this was just used as a quick-look mode to see how visible you were from a given location.

3rd person is your typical Tomb Raider view, and also the cinematic style view in Resident Evil, although there are moments in Res evil that could be barely classed as 2nd person.
 
I love the idea of a second person shooter - you are the person shooting, but you see the game from the view of the person you're shooting at. A new take on the genre!
 
Rotty said:
when I was at school ( long ago ) 2nd world countries were developed but relatively new countries ( in terms of being developed ) , USA, Australia etc

appears the definition has changed now
Click to expand...
Correct. Well, second world is what they called NPI (in France: Nouveaux Pays Industrialisés) or Newly Industrialised Countries in English (forgive my foreign education). Countries like South Korea which aren't quite on par with the big economic powers of the first world but which are definitely not third world countries.
 
Skeeter said:
my god! That game is brilliant!

Not sure its worth developing any further than a concept tho...
Click to expand...

I think it could be damn fantastic. Fps style, with a minimap so you know where abouts you/your enemies are. But rather than viewing from your own perspective, you can select from any of your opponents perspective at any given time. Sort of like when you die in a round of CS except you use the minimap to navigate into the general area, then their view port to kill them It would be epically funny to play.
 
Clinkz said:
I think it could be damn fantastic. Fps style, with a minimap so you know where abouts you/your enemies are. But rather than viewing from your own perspective, you can select from any of your opponents perspective at any given time. Sort of like when you die in a round of CS except you use the minimap to navigate into the general area, then their view port to kill them It would be epically funny to play.
Click to expand...

It would be almost impossible to control your character, becuase unless your enemy was looking at you, you wouldn't know where you are.
 
All of these examples of a 2nd person shooter don't work, you're still playing from the first person perspective.

First person doesn't mean the main character ;)
 
0
oddjob62 said:
It would be almost impossible to control your character, becuase unless your enemy was looking at you, you wouldn't know where you are.
Click to expand...

hence the minimap overlay

Mr_White said:
All of these examples of a 2nd person shooter don't work, you're still playing from the first person perspective.

First person doesn't mean the main character ;)
Click to expand...

Thats not true. In the first, you can observe your enemy but not yourself. In the second, you can observe yourself, but not your enemy. In the third, you can observe some, all or none.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom