Search This Blog

Monday, May 25, 2026

Queenstown New Zealand Exploration

Allie and I arrived in Queenstown on December 3, 2026 in the afternoon (local time). We left California our previous day of December 1, 2026 (local time). We lost a day to travel and another day to the International Date Line. We also lost a portion of one day to a long stay in Auckland Airport on our way to Queenstown. The following are my journal entries from the first few days.


Tuesday, December 3: A Lakeside Welcome at Wakatipu Grill

We stayed at the DoubleTree by Hilton in Kawarau Village near Queenstown. After settling in, we walked over to Wakatipu Grill at Hilton Queenstown Resort and Spa. Restaurant staff sat us in a glass-enclosed patio with good views of the lake as the sun set. The dishes were very good. I had the Pork Porchette, and Allie had a steak dish she liked a lot. We also tried a drink called a Matcha Mojito, which ended up tasting more like a Long Island Ice Tea than anything that should bear the name “mojito” or “matcha.”

The staff were really helpful, though. They went out of their way to make an actual Iced Tea for me even though it’s not on the menu. For a location that doesn’t brew iced tea, they made a great one. Dessert was a bit of a surprise. The Strawberry Cheesecake was really more of a strawberry mousse. Even still, it was fairly tasty, just not what we expected. We also had a type of Chocolate cake that tasted very good but came with a super hard chocolate shell that was thicker than a candy bar. It literally required a steak knife to break through. The shell was likely just too thick, making it a bit of a nuisance to an otherwise tasty dish. Overall, it was a great experience with extremely attentive, capable staff.


Wednesday, December 4: Water Taxis, Gondolas, and Queenstown CBD

The weather was nice and sunny with light cloud cover and a little bit of a morning chill. We started the itinerary by taking a water taxi from the Hilton over to the Queenstown CBD, which let us see the area from the lake and take in the gorgeous scenery. From the CBD, we walked over to the Skyline Gondolas. On the ride up to Skyline Queenstown, we saw and heard a goat on the side of the mountain. I had an 11:45 reservation at the Stratosfare Restaurant for their buffet lunch. The food was high quality with a lot of great options, and our table offered awesome views of the town and lake from a high vantage point.



Afterward, we hit the souvenir shop before heading back down. We had another appointment at Kiwi Park Queenstown where we explored this special kind of zoo. Highlight is that we were able to catch glimpses of actual kiwi birds! That was awesome. We also saw many other beautiful and native animals, including a bird and reptile show. There was also a happy and buzzy bee colony.




We left the park and roamed around the CBD for some more shopping. The town is very much a touristy place, and there didn’t seem to be a ton of local personality beyond the architecture and the beautiful deep valley lake backdrop. After a long day, we took the water taxi back to the hotel to relax and rest for the evening.


Thursday, December 5: Hiking Frankton and Finding the Local Spots

Allie and I went on an exploratory hike into the Frankton area and ended up at Pantry by Frank’s. We ordered a couple of bagel sandwiches, but what’s called a “bagel” here is more of a white bread with a pastry crust than an actual dense bagel. Allie’s Pesto Chicken sandwich was served cold for whatever reason, while my Chicken Club was warm. Allie had a hot breakfast tea, and I had a hot Chai tea. Exploring the area further, we discovered an Asian market, a grocery store, a very nice laundromat, and a few other shops. The grocery store had a permanent resident cat who guards the entrance as it naps throughout the day. On the way back to the hotel, we took a heavily vegetated trail along the river. The bugs annoyed Allie, but luckily none bit her.

Being so far South on the Globe in the summer means there is still direct sunlight on the city at 9pm. Later that night, I caught a view of the full moon with its light reflecting perfectly across the lake.

On December 6, we took a day-long tour of various Lord of the Rings filming locations on the South Island.  Unfortunately, we had a series of cancelled flights on December 7, so we ended up staying an extra day in Queenstown, not making it to Auckland until December 8.

Sunday, May 24, 2026

Discoveries across the Galaxy

While exploring the Galaxy recently, I made several incredible discoveries.  This first image was taken in a newly discovered system of a white dwarf (DC) as the primary star with closest planet being an Earth-Like World (ELW) and the second planet being Water World (WW). Both planets are under 60ls from their star. This is a very rare configuration, even taking into account all white dwarf types in the Elite Dangerous galaxy. 


In another Neutron Star System, I discovered a rare luminescent lifeform.


On the same trip, I also discovered even rarer Crystalline Shards.

Related Instagram post: https://www.instagram.com/p/DVxR0Y2Dt_j/?img_index=1

Saturday, May 23, 2026

Escape Velocity Calculator

Escape velocity is the minimum speed an object needs to break free from a body's gravitational pull without any further propulsion. The formula is simple: v = √(2GM/r), where G is the gravitational constant, M is the mass of the body, and r is the distance from its center. The result tells you how fast something must be launched to escape that gravity well entirely with no engines required after the initial push.

It can be surprising as to how much this number varies.  Earth's escape velocity is about 11.2 km/s. Jupiter's is over 59 km/s. The Sun's surface escape velocity is around 617 km/s. And for a neutron star, it can be a significant fraction of the speed of light. Use the calculator below to explore escape velocities for planets, stars, galaxies, and any custom body you wish.

Escape Velocity Calculator


For information on other tools and topics:

Friday, May 22, 2026

Movies I watched in the theater in 2017

I am not sure where I saw most theatrically released movies in 2017. This list is put together from memory. One fact I remember is that the only reason I saw Star Wars: The Last Jedi was because The Disaster Artist was sold out when I arrived at the theater. I think this may have been the point where I stopped doing walk-ups and started to regularly buy my seats ahead of time.

Movies I saw in the theater in 2017:




Tuesday, May 19, 2026

Many Paths of the Collatz Conjecture

The Collatz Conjecture is one of mathematics' strange unsolved problems. The rule is deceptively simple: take any positive integer, and if it's even divide it by 2, if it's odd multiply by 3 and add 1. Repeat this process and the sequence seems to always eventually reach 1. Always. This is true for every number ever tested! Even still, no one has ever been able to prove it, though some attempts have got close.

The sequences themselves are practically unpredictable. For example, the number 27 takes 111 steps while rocketing up to 9,232 before finally collapsing to 1. Nearby numbers can reach 1 in just a handful of steps, while others take hundreds of chaotic steps before converging. Use the interactive math tool below to explore and compare up to 5 numbers at once.


Collatz Conjecture Visualizer

Pick any positive integer. If it's even, divide by 2. If it's odd, multiply by 3 and add 1. Repeat. No matter what number you start with, the sequence always seems to reach 1, but nobody has ever proved why. Enter up to 5 numbers to compare their paths.

Enter Numbers to Compare

About the Collatz Conjecture: Mathematician Paul Erdős said: “Mathematics is not yet ready for such problems.”

For information on other tools and topics:

Monday, May 18, 2026

Movies I watched at the theater in 2018

2018 was likely the year I really started using my AMC membership. At some point that year I joined the AMC Stubs program and later upgraded to AMC A-List. Before then, I had never used an elevated membership to go to the movies. I think I had the equivalent of the free Insider level since 2016 or 2017, but I was not using it regularly during those years. Since 2018, I have watched most of my movies at AMC, though not all. For example, I saw Mandy at an independent theater.

Here's the list of movies I was in 2018:




Friday, May 15, 2026

Movies I watched in the theater in 2019

The year was 2019. This was arguably the peak year for going to the theater to see movies. Even still, I saw a surprising 33 movies. That's more than one movie every two weeks!  I was definitely using my AMC A-List membership to its fullest. This was a great year for quality of  movies too. I don't remember trying hard to justify my membership by seeing a bunch of movies just because I could see them for free. There was simply a lot of movies I wanted to see at the theater!

Here is the list of what I watched at the movie theater in 2019:







Thursday, May 14, 2026

Movies I watched at the theater in 2020

It is 2026, but I am going to look back at the movies I actually saw at the theater in 2020. That was a tough year for movies, of course. Even still, I ended up going to the theater a bit more than one might now guess. I really started to use AMC A-List in the prior year, but clearly it did not get much use when everything shut down in 2020 and the program was suspended. I actually watched Tenet at a local drive-in.

Tuesday, May 12, 2026

Movies I've seen in 2025 and "why"

Has there been a return to form for movie theaters to pre-pandemic levels? No. However, I found myself going to the cinema more in 2025 than in 2024. The nature of movie-going has fundamentally changed with the dominance of streaming. Patrons now see fewer films in theaters, opting to wait for many of them to arrive at home. This is especially true for movies not designed as a spectacle or an event, creating a fresh challenge for the industry. Still, theaters have faced similar hurdles before, such as when televisions became commonplace in the home.

Eventually, theatrical films improved after over a decade of adjustment throughout the 1950s and 1960s. Even before then, patrons had stopped attending theaters for short serial shows. Additionally, the concept of made-for-TV movies eventually emerged, allowing lower-quality films to be released directly to television without a theatrical run.

Later, both theaters and television were challenged by the introduction of VHS and movie rentals. This led to the straight-to-video concept for lower-budget films, which raised the quality expectations for theatrical releases even higher.

Today, streaming poses yet another challenge. Many high-quality movies do not necessarily require a theater because they do not rely on spectacle to be enjoyed. Even when a large screen might enhance the experience, a story may be perceived as small scale, making it easier to wait for a streaming release.

Despite all of that, I still enjoy seeing various types and scales of movies at the theater. Some films are so massive they demand a theatrical viewing, such as the Avatar franchise. Others are enhanced by the cinema experience even if they have a straightforward story, like Last Breath.

Finally posting my 2025 list

I have been putting off this post for five months for a simple reason: I saw too many movies in 2025 to make this article enjoyable to create while including a poster for every film, such as last year's article. I believe movie posters add value and enhance the post, but including all of them is an immense amount of work. To that end, I am scaling down this year's post to a simple hyperlinked list.

Here is the list of what I watched at the movie theater in 2025:





Thursday, April 02, 2026

Reaching the known Universe and Project Hail Mary

 

The movie Project Hail Mary touches on a topic about which I recently wrote. That being the ability to reach any point in the Universe within a human lifetime using relativist travel. Time Dilation Visualized is an excellent video that helps visualize both the movie itself and the general discussion as well. Have fun watching and reading about this fascinating exploration.

Thursday, February 12, 2026

Will the Gaming Industry Change Use of FPS and TPS?

The Inertia of Familiar Language 

The traditional definitions of first- and third-person games rely on camera placement rather than on player agency. That shortcut has distorted how we talk about perspective for decades.

So why has this never been corrected?  The short answer is likely inertia.

Once a term becomes familiar, widely taught, and commercially useful, it stops being descriptive and starts being infrastructural. Changing it becomes expensive, not just financially, but culturally.


The FPS Effect

The modern taxonomy of game perspective crystallized in the 1990s with the rise of the first-person shooter (FPS).

“FPS” was an unusually successful label:

  • It described what players saw

  • It differentiated a new genre

  • It was easy to market

  • It spread quickly through magazines, retail shelves, and early web discourse

Once first person became synonymous with “camera at eye level,” everything else was forced into contrast. The term third person did not emerge from narrative theory. It emerged as whatever FPS was not.

This asymmetry locked the vocabulary in place before anyone had reason to question it.


Camera Language Is Easier Than Agency Language

Camera placement is concrete. Agency is abstract.

It is far easier to say:

The camera is behind the character

than to say:

The player issues commands to a represented self

Marketing departments, tutorial writers, and reviewers naturally gravitated toward the simpler explanation. Over time, that simplification hardened into definition.

Once perspective was taught as a visual property, revisiting it as a player–system relationship required more effort than most discourse was willing to invest.


How Designers Commonly Talk About Perspective

In public-facing discourse, perspective is usually described in terms of camera placement. In design-facing discussions, however, the vocabulary often shifts.

Designers frequently frame perspective through concepts such as:

  • Player embodiment

  • Identification with an avatar

  • Degrees of abstraction

  • Command versus inhabitation

  • Latency between decision and action

These ideas appear regularly in design talks, postmortems, and critical writing, even when the traditional labels of first- or third-person remain in place. The emphasis is less on where the camera sits and more on how the player relates to what they control.

This does not mean designers uniformly reject camera-based terminology. Rather, it suggests a practical distinction: the internal language of design often exceeds the precision of the public labels used to describe games.

In other words, the mislabeling persists not because designers lack conceptual tools, but because those tools are rarely surfaced in player-facing taxonomy.


Why the Industry Is Unlikely to Fix the Labels

Even if the argument is sound, several forces resist change:

1. Legacy Vocabulary

Decades of books, articles, reviews, and tutorials use the existing terms. Revising them would create friction with historical material.

2. Search and Discovery

“Third-person action game” is a deeply indexed phrase. Replacing it would damage discoverability without offering immediate commercial upside.

3. Audience Expectations

Players already believe they know what these terms mean. Correcting them risks sounding pedantic or confusing, even when accurate.

4. Mixed Perspectives

Many modern games blur categories intentionally. Studios may prefer flexible ambiguity to precise taxonomy.

Taken together, these pressures make formal correction unlikely.


Why This Still Matters

If the industry is not going to change its labels, why insist on the distinction at all?

Because language shapes analysis.

Mislabeling perspective:

  • Obscures why certain games feel immersive despite external cameras

  • Confuses discussions of agency and control

  • Flattens meaningful differences between avatar play and command play

  • Makes serious criticism sound mystical rather than structural

A player-centric model gives critics, designers, and players a sharper vocabulary—even if public-facing labels remain unchanged.


The Value of a Parallel Vocabulary

This series is not a call to rename genres overnight. It is a proposal for a parallel framework that can coexist with existing terminology while offering greater precision.

Just as film studies distinguish between camera angle and narrative voice, game analysis benefits from separating:

  • What does the camera do

  • What is the player

Keeping these concepts distinct allows deeper discussion without breaking compatibility with established language.


A Useful Mental Reframe

Rather than asking:

Is this game first person or third person?

Ask:

Who is acting?

Who is being addressed?

Where does the player exist in relation to the system?

These questions remain valid regardless of genre, technology, or trend.


Keeping It Going

The industry is unlikely to abandon camera-based labels. They are too entrenched, too useful, and too familiar.  But clarity does not require replacement. It requires recognition.

We can say that a game has first-person perspective with third-person camera angle. Or, a game is second-person perspective with the ability to show either game-piece camera angle or top-down third person camera angle.  Such descriptions are more meaningful. 

Once we understand that most so-called third-person games are structurally second-person, a great deal of confusion dissolves. Design intent becomes clearer. Player experience becomes easier to articulate.


Also see

Tuesday, February 10, 2026

Full Day Lord of the Rings Mavora Lakes Adventure

Allie and I enjoyed an adventure on South Island of New Zealand (Te Waipounamu) where we retraced the steps taken to film Lord of the Rings trilogy. We toured with Trails of Middle Earth on their Full Day Lord of the Rings Mavora Lakes Adventure.  The tour included multiple filming locations for Lord of the Rings in the general Mavora Lakes region, including the famous Orc Mound, Anduin River and Nen Hithoel.[1][2] At Mavora Lake, we had a chance to cosplay with Hobbit outfits and authentic replicas of many battle weapons from the Trilogy. Overall experience was positive.

However, while visiting these filming locations was great, the travel between them is a bit rough. This is the nature of travelling around the South Island of New Zealand in this region, especially when you are leaving paved highways behind for a time.  The tour length definitely adds to discomfort as much as the roads themselves since this is a 10 hour tour, with long stretches between locations.  Just be prepared.  One bit of advice is to pack your own lunch, as I found the location where food was available to purchase to be rather lacking.

 

 






Besides the thrill of discovering so many filming locations in one tour, we also got to see much of the beauty of South Island's mountains and lakes. It feels like New Zealand was always meant to be the location of Middle Earth.

Sunday, February 08, 2026

Real-World Games and Player Perspective

Why Physical Games Clarify the Debate

If digital games complicate questions of perspective with cameras, avatars, and simulated worlds, real‑world games strip those ambiguities away. There is no virtual camera, no rendering engine, and no ambiguity about where the player exists in relation to play.

What remains is the core relationship that person actually describes: how the player is positioned relative to action and agency.

When we apply the same player‑centric framework to physical and tabletop games, the mislabeling of digital perspectives becomes immediately obvious. The categories align cleanly without edge cases, caveats or special pleading.


First Person: Embodied Physical Play

In first‑person games, the player is the acting body. There is no representational layer.

Examples 

  • Tag

  • Soccer, basketball, martial arts

  • Darts, bowling

  • Poker (as bodily participation rather than avatar play)

Perspective Structure

  • The player acts directly

  • The player’s body is the locus of agency

  • There is no token, piece, or proxy

The language of play is unambiguously first person:

I run.

I throw.

I bluff.

No one meaningfully describes these games as issuing commands to a representation. There is no interpretive distance between decision and action.

This is first‑person perspective in its purest form, mapping precisely onto digital first‑person games where avatar and player identity collapse into one.


Second Person: Token‑Mediated Play

Second‑person play emerges the moment a personal proxy is introduced.

Examples

  • Monopoly

  • The Game of Life

  • Sorry!

  • Most role‑playing board games

Perspective Structure

  • The player is personally represented

  • Actions are issued to a token

  • The token is “you,” but not identical to you

The language shifts naturally:

You move three spaces.

You pass Go.

You go to jail.

No one confuses the plastic token with the player’s physical body. No one treats the token as an unrelated entity either. It is unmistakably you, addressed directly.

This is the exact structural relationship found in traditionally labeled “third‑person” digital games:

  • A visible body

  • A controllable character

  • A personal avatar that can be observed, directed, and positioned

The tabletop world exposes the truth that digital cameras obscure: this is second‑person play.


Third Person: Unembodied Command

True third‑person perspective appears when the player has no personal representation at all.

Examples

  • Chess

  • Checkers

  • Go

  • Wargames with multiple units per side

Perspective Structure

  • No piece represents the player

  • All entities are equally external

  • The player exists entirely outside the system

The language reflects this detachment:

That piece captured the queen.

These troops were sacrificed units.

That side is losing control of the board.

Even when players identify emotionally with a side or strategy, no single piece is you. The relationship is observational and managerial rather than embodied.

This maps cleanly onto digital strategy games, god games, and simulation titles where the player’s presence is abstract, systemic, or omniscient.


Why These Categories Feel Obvious Offline

In physical games, no one argues that Monopoly is “third person” or that chess is “first person.” The distinctions feel intuitive because:

  • There is no camera to confuse viewpoint with identity

  • Tokens and the actual human self are physically distinct

  • Agency is visibly mediated or not

Digital games inherited linguistic categories before these distinctions were fully examined. Real‑world games demonstrate that the confusion is not conceptual, but rather it is terminological.


The Consistency Test

A useful diagnostic question emerges:

If this game were played on a table instead of a screen, what would represent the player?

  • Your body → First person

  • Your personal token → Second person

  • Nothing at all → Third person

This test holds across media, genres, and technologies.


Implications for Game Analysis

Understanding perspective through real‑world analogs helps clarify:

  • Why some games feel intimate despite external cameras

  • Why avatar visibility changes player psychology

  • Why command‑based games encourage strategic rather than empathetic thinking

  • Why VR intensifies embodiment without redefining perspective

Most importantly, it reinforces the fact that perspective is about player–action relationships, not visual framing.


Looking beyond

Real‑world games quietly and intuitively preserve the original linguistic meaning of person in the terms of first-, second- and third-person. When we let them inform our understanding of digital play, the long‑standing mislabeling of game perspectives becomes impossible to ignore. The camera never determined perspective; the player's relationship within the game makes that determination.


Also see:

Saturday, February 07, 2026

Places I've Visited So Far Winter 2025-2026

It's 2026 and I have expanded the places visited, both within the US and Internationally. I've not expanded travel within Canada and Mexico, so I won't include specific maps for those.


Friday, February 06, 2026

A Player-Centric Model of Game Perspective

From Definitions to Application

The previous article in this series established a narrow but important claim: camera angle does not determine narrative person. "Person" in "first-person" describes who acts, not where the camera viewpoint is placed.

Taking this into consideration, let's apply the concept directly to video games. Doing so requires shifting perspective from what the player sees to how the player is represented within the game system.

This article proposes a player-centric model of perspective and uses it to reëxamine the three categories commonly described as first-person, second-person and third-person.


A Player-Centric Definition of Perspective

Rather than anchoring perspective to the camera, this model defines person by the relationship between the player and the acting entity in the game world.

Person Defining Question Player Relationship
First       Am I the body acting? Player and avatar are the same entity
Second Am I directing a represented “you”? Player controls a personal avatar
Third Am I commanding others? Player is unrepresented in the world

This framework does not replace existing camera terminology. It runs alongside it. A game can still be described as having a first-person perspective with a third-person camera. What changes is how we describe player perspective.


First-Person Games: “I Move Here”

In first-person games, the player and the avatar collapse into a single acting subject. There is no meaningful distinction between the decision-maker and the body that carries out those decisions.

Common examples include:

  • Doom

  • Counter-Strike

  • Mirror’s Edge

  • Most virtual reality titles

Player intent is expressed directly as action:

I reload.

I lean around the corner.

I jump.

The defining feature is not the absence of a visible character model. It is the absence of narrative distance. The player does not instruct a character. The player acts.


The Misnamed Middle: Games Labeled “Third-Person”

Most action and role-playing games are grouped under the label of third-person:

  • Tomb Raider

  • The Witcher

  • God of War

  • PUBG

This category is where the traditional terminology begins to fail.

In these games, the player does not fully inhabit the avatar in the way first-person play requires. The character on screen is visible, persistent, and separate. The player does not experience the world as the body. The player directs the body.

The internal language of play reflects this relationship clearly:

You roll.

You climb.

You draw your weapon.

This is not metaphorical. It is structurally second person. The avatar represents the player, but the representation is mediated. The player and the character are not the same acting subject.

What distinguishes this middle category is not camera distance, character visibility, or animation style. It is addressability. The player addresses a personal avatar that exists as an object in the game world.

That distinction matters. A player can empathize with, customize, and narratively identify with an avatar while still relating to it as "you" rather than "I." The presence of dialogue choices, equipment management, and movement commands reinforces this relationship. The player tells the character what to do. The character then does it.

The camera makes this separation obvious, but it does not create it. Even if the camera were forced to overlap the character’s head, the underlying relationship would remain unchanged as long as the player continues to issue instructions to a represented self.

The moment a player can observe their own body as something acted upon, perspective has already shifted away from first person.

This is the core of the mislabeling. These games are neither first-person nor third-person in the narrative sense. They occupy a distinct middle ground that aligns cleanly with second-person structure.


True Third-Person Games: “They Move There”

Third-person perspective, in the narrative sense, emerges when the player is not embodied at all.

Strategy and command-based games provide clear examples:

  • Civilization

  • X-COM

  • Command & Conquer

  • StarCraft

Here, the player does not control a personal avatar. Instead, they direct multiple agents, units, or factions.

The language of play naturally changes:

They advance the unit.

They lose morale.

They capture the city.

Even when the game provides a narrative role such as ruler, commander, or overseer, that role is abstract. No single entity in the game world stands in for the player.

This aligns cleanly with third-person narration in literature. The player observes and directs, but does not inhabit.


A Shift in Perspective

Reframing game perspective around player representation reveals a gap in the familiar terminology. What has long been labeled third-person gameplay occupies a distinct middle ground that matches second-person structure far more closely than third.

This does not mean existing labels must be discarded. It does mean they should be understood as describing cameras rather than perspective.

The next article in this series steps away from digital games entirely. By examining board games and other real-world play, it becomes easier to see why camera-based definitions were always an awkward fit.

Continue to Part III: Real-World Games and Player Perspective. 

Saturday, January 31, 2026

We’ve Been Using “Third-Person” Wrong for 30 Years in Gaming

A Comfortable Mistake

Video games are routinely sorted into neat perspective boxes: first-person and third-person. The terms feel intuitive, established, and beyond dispute. An FPS shows what the character sees. A third-person game shows the character from the outside. A second-person game doesn't truly exist, per se. Case closed. 

Except that this framing quietly borrows language from literature and then uses it incorrectly.

In grammar and narrative theory, person is not about camera placement. It is about who is the acting subject. Once we apply that definition consistently, a strange realization emerges: what the games industry has long called third-person does not actually describe a third-person relationship at all.

This article is the first in a short series. Its purpose is not to reclassify games yet, but to clear conceptual ground. Before we can argue about first, second, or third person in games, we need to be precise about what those terms mean.



Camera Angle Is Not Narrative Person

Before redefining perspective, one clarification is essential: camera angle does not establish narrative person.

Games inherited the terms first-person and third-person largely through visual analogy. The distinction became shorthand for what the player sees on screen, not for how the player is positioned within the system of action. This shortcut made the terminology easy to teach, but conceptually unstable.

In literature and narrative theory, a scene can be described from any imaginable vantage point without changing grammatical person. A third-person novel may describe events from directly behind a character’s eyes. A second-person text may position the reader outside their body. A first-person account may briefly describe the narrator from an external viewpoint for dramatic effect.

The camera, or its literary equivalent, does not determine personhood.

By tying person to camera placement, game discourse quietly collapsed two distinct ideas:

  • Cinematography: where the viewpoint is located

  • Narrative person: who the acting subject is

Untangling these concepts is the key to understanding why the familiar labels begin to break down under closer inspection.


What “Person” Actually Means

In language and literature, person refers to the relationship between the speaker and the subject of action:

  • First person: I act ("I walk down the road")

  • Second person: You act ("You open the door")

  • Third person: They act ("She draws her sword")

Person describes agency and identity, not point of observation. It answers a simple question: who is doing the acting?

This definition has remained stable across centuries of grammar, rhetoric, and narrative theory. What changes from medium to medium is not the meaning of person, but the techniques used to express it.

Game terminology drifted away from this definition by anchoring person to the camera rather than to player representation. Once that shift occurred, the labels continued to function socially even as they lost their original precision.


Clearing the Ground

At this stage, no games need to be reclassified. The only claim established here is a foundational one: camera placement and narrative person are not the same thing.

If person is understood as a question of who acts rather than where the camera sits, the familiar categories of game perspective become less stable and more interesting. Some labels begin to feel strained. Other labels begin to feel incomplete.

The next article in this series builds on this groundwork by proposing a player-centric definition of perspective and applying it directly to video games.

Continue to Part II: A Player-Centric Model of Game Perspective.

Thursday, January 01, 2026

Express Your Message as Atomic Weights

The Element Cipher transforms your words into strings of element names and then converts those to numbers that are based on the atomic weights for those elements. It’s a fun little chemistry-themed encoder. Type a phrase and watch it translate into a sequence of elemental values that hides your message in plain sight. Decode it back and your text reappears from the atomic haze!

Element Cipher

Converts text to atomic masses (3-digit format) and back.

Note on Numerals: Numerals (0-9) are not supported for encoding. Please spell out the words.