Comments on: Picture Imperfect – Chasing Third Person Cinema

By: interactive movies are not machinima « Erik Champion

interactive movies are not machinima « Erik Champion — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 01:45:51 +0000

[...] There has been some interesting discussion on storytelling versus authorial control of the camera 3rd person cinema plus also the ability to either create your own trails in video -interactive video object [...]

By: zeech

zeech — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:59:15 +0000

Just a bit of a word in support of cinematic cameras. Whilst some people dont like it, I found that the cinematic camera was essential in the Devil May Cry games (3 was the best). I guess it’s a usuability thing – there’s simply no fingers left to control the camera when fighting. The later games added some small degree of camera control, mostly used in the exploration/traveling parts of the game, which was much needed. But the cinematic camera is very important to the fighting parts. (the game design of DMC doesnt require aiming, so attacking things that are offscreen is not as big a problem.)

We see some serious crimes in DMC4 tho – several areas (some with JUMPS! >_< ) have cameras that flip 180 in the middle of the jump, which completely messes with you. I think those were sloppy mistakes, its a shame they made it into the game.

By: Bashers » Blog » Picture Imperfect onderzoekt de in-game camera

Bashers » Blog » Picture Imperfect onderzoekt de in-game camera — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:04:11 +0000

[...] platformer: de in-game camera. Man Bytes Blog heeft nu al twee delen over dit fenomeen geschreven: één over de bekende ‘chase cam’ en één over de ‘first-person’ camera. Niet al te lang en zeker leuk om [...]

By: Daniel Purvis

Daniel Purvis — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 23:08:53 +0000

Entering this discussion a little late (alright, over a month late) but what of a game such as Skate, which utilises a fixed chase cam that focusses on the skaters board, not so much the skater — the camera sits low to the ground, with the skater and board placed either to the right or left of field as per your Fallout 3 example.

While this provided a greater focus on the feet and the board, which as a skater, you do when riding, it also made the game more difficult to play as the focal point was pulled too tight to the character, you also lost sense of direction — often approaching ledges you plan on grinding from a too sharp or too shallow angle.

Yet, the camera was far more interesting than the fixed 3rd person chase cam used by Tony Hawk’s.

After legitimate complaints were made regarding the inflexibility of the camera, the developer of Skate 2, Black Box, said they’d provide users with a range of camera options and some tweaks to alleviate the problems. However, if you were to tweak the camera too much, I believe you’d lose that focus, feel and vision that the developers originally intended, resulting in a game that might be easier to play but felt less like real skating.

By: Cori

Cori — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 02:58:36 +0000

Despite it being a ridiculously easy game, the camera style for RE4 was my favorite chase cam. It used an “over the shoulder” third person that, while not putting you directly into the action, conveyed enough of the action that on the first run through the suspense and tension had a chance to sink in… the camera never once got into a frustrating place (for me at least, but I’ve played it at least 7 times each in both normal and professional) and seemed almost natural in its implementation. Again, the only problem was the ease of beating it (although this was rectified by limiting myself to 3 saves per game… and later, no saves per game. Or attempting to play through with only one type of weapon. Though the ease of the use of the camera seemed to decrease the difficulty of the game by always allowing for what you would do in any given situation.

By: Corvus

Corvus — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 10:20:47 +0000

@Chris It’s exactly why I think I should play it, despite how much I’m likely to not care for the game itself. And you know me, I like my theory to be free of constraints such as budgets and hardware limitations!

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 09:01:15 +0000

It’s hard to recommend you bother with Super Mario 64 at this point, but it’s a vital title in the history of videogame cameras. It was the first to conceive of the notion of a camera object, and to give the player camera controls to rectify the problems that resulted.

Interesting examination of the subject of cameras, although I’m sceptical of your stance here, only in so much as I feel that it requires huge budgets to tailor the camera to such a great degree.

But I would be delighted to be wrong about this!

Best wishes!

By: Corvus

Corvus — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 00:14:50 +0000

@Alan, it doesn’t derail the conversation at all. I touch on the latter in my post (admittedly without explicitly referencing controls).

By: Alan Au

Alan Au — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 00:06:48 +0000

At the risk of derailing the conversation, I feel compelled to insert a brief comment about the connection between the camera and the character controls. That is, are the controls relative to the player, or relative to the camera? The later causes no end of problems, especially when the camera is abruptly moved to a “cinematic vantage point” halfway through a tricky jumping sequence.

By: Corvus

Corvus — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 22:08:24 +0000

Yeah, Echochrome probably deserves a mention, but not really in the context of cinematic or chase cam 3rd person. And while that it uses the camera as a game mechanic is interesting and innovative, it isn’t really something that applies to games where manipulating the camera isn’t the point.

I was not a fan of Indigo Prophecy’s camera. It served well enough, but didn’t really break the mold as far as I’m concerned. I still found the jump cuts to be jarring.

By: Kimari

Kimari — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 22:00:54 +0000

I’m *shocked* that nobody mentioned echochrome nor Indigo Prophecy/Farenheit.
Alright, so echochrome is not *that* interesting but it’s only mechanic rests on camera controls and nothing else. The player is able to move the camera around the level but the focal point remains the same at all times. The goal is to obscure or create new paths for little manequins to walk on so they can reach the exit while avoiding hazards and other things.
It’s really interesting as a concept but I found it quite boring and devoid of almost any personality. Maybe it’s just me.

As for Indigo Prophecy, that game used cinematic cameras on purpose to make the whole game feel like a movie. And I have to say it worked, once you start walking around, talking to people and interacting with objects the game designer’s intent seems rather obvious. Plus the whole game is broken down in scenes… so, yeah, it was made to feel like a movie.
Also, the player has the ability to nudge the angle of the camera to look around although it’s never required (I think). Still, it’s nice to be able to look around.

By: psu

psu — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:33:02 +0000

I didn’t play all the way through the first game. It might have been the same.

In the *third* and later games, they pulled the camera in a bit tighter and it seemed to bounce more as you moved around.

The second game seemed to me to have the right balance between the camera sitting where you want it and allowing you to move it around without undue consequences.

By: Corvus

Corvus — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:32:14 +0000

@Michael Absolutely we become trained by our media. And, our feedback helps train the producers of the media too. It’s part of developing a meaningful vocabulary within any medium.

But sit down to play Assassin’s Creed with the default camera settings for a bit and switch over to Fable, also with the default camera settings, and see how different an experience it is. Unless we, as an industry, actually sit down and quantitatively talk about the emotional impact of our technical decisions, we won’t ever be able to earn the benefit of developing that common vocabulary and game design will continue to suffer because of it.

By: Michael Abbott

Michael Abbott — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:27:24 +0000

Great post, Corvus. I’m personally fascinated by the notion of a camera in video games, especially as it relates to a customary way of seeing we have been conditioned to accept and understand.

You may not recall this, but when instant replays first began to appear on telecasts of sports, a reverse angle shot was always noted on screen with a visual disclaimer “Reverse Angle” so as not to disorient the viewers. This, I think, stemmed from our conditioning to understand visuals that conformed to the old “180-degree rule” that was standard practice in Hollywood until the 1960s, and on television even later.

Today, we’re all accustomed to this rule being broken routinely, and with video games we’re able to break it ourselves. I’m not sure if I’m contributing anything significant to your essay here, but I do think it’s worth thinking about how media trains us to accept certain conventions, not only as techniques, but as ways of seeing that we don’t often stop to consider or analyze.

By: Alex

Alex — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:40:45 +0000

several attempts to use one of my precious shotgun shells on a zombie, only to find myself turning and walking away from him when the camera jumped to the opposite side of the room.

i know this doesn’t add much to the convo, but this is my ultimate pet peeve, and really the only thing/bug i can’t handle in videogames. with devil may cry or AC i would often just hold down a direction if it happened once and see how many times i could go back and forth between camera angles before dying (in game or IRL).
clipping – ok
framerate issues – ok
poor level design – ok
nonresponsive controls – ok
cinematic camera angles that don’t adjust for your movement when switching – the burning hot antipathy of a thousand suns

By: Justin Keverne

Justin Keverne — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:36:08 +0000

Oni had an interest solution to the camera\level geometry problem. When the camera moved through a surface that surface turned transparent so you could freely move the camera and still witness all the action going on within the confines of the level.

When it comes to chase cameras, it’s difficult to pin down games where it’s really well implemented because if the camera works you tend to ignore it.

Though I think Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time was a game that made good use of the camera, though it was still far from perfect. It used a combination of a cinematic camera in certain locations and a controllable chase camera in others. This allow for some player control of where they were looking but also allowed the designers to adjust the camera to highlight particular elements.

By: Corvus

Corvus — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 16:33:54 +0000

@psu Can you articulate what differentiated Splinter Cell 2’s camera from the first game?

By: psu

psu — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 16:30:59 +0000

My favorite third person cameras are

1. The second splinter cell game.

2. KOTOR

3. God of War, because the camera never really got in the way except in the hateful jumping puzzles.

I tend to go for cameras that I can push around but are also smart enough to follow me.

I sort of like the RE4 style over the shoulder camera too.