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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
South Mesa has a good loop trail and lots of interconnecting trails with many other areas. The loop takes you from the trailhead and around the South Mesa. Technically, this is not the route shown in 60 Hikes Within 60 Miles: Denver and Boulder, but it still a nice hike with good views. The hike starts out with thick brush, but transitions to forest on the Westside of the Mesa, as you switch from Mesa Trail to Homestead Trail before returning to the trailhead.
When working in trades like carpentry, machining or cooking,
you often run into decimal measurements that are difficult or impossible to
translate to a standard ruler, tape measure, or measuring cup. Sometimes, you
just need to work with fractions.
While a CAD program might output a required component hole as
0.6875 inches, a person on the shop floor needs to select a tool or check a
dimension using the common fraction 11/16 inches. Similarly, scaling a recipe
can result in awkward numbers like 0.833 cups, which is much easier to manage
when converted to a practical fraction like 5/6 or the nearest standard
measuring cup size. Below is the tool that is designed to bridge that gap by converting any
decimal into its closest usable fraction.
The Fractional Rounding Tool (below) takes any decimal
number and, based on your chosen level of granularity (the maximum denominator,
such as 1/8 or 1/16), it determines the nearest possible fraction. This is
essential because it allows you to standardize your precision and use common
measuring instruments effectively. You also have full control over the rounding
method, which dictates how the tool handles numbers that fall exactly halfway
between two fractions. This is a great feature when working with tolerances,
negative numbers or specific industry standards like rounding half up or half
even. Use the tool below to instantly convert your decimal plans into
measurable, actionable fractions.
Futhorc Runic Bi-Directional Converter: Turn your message in to First Millennium runes and back! [Try out this rune conversion tool on your own messages.]
Earth's Looming Expiration Date: Why Earth faces an early deadline as Sun's energy output increases. [Idea on how to preserve our planet]
Number Rounding Tool: This the rounding tool that you didn't know you need! Multiple methods of rounding are supported. [Type Your Number and Round it up or down!]
Chautauqua Park is a great mountainside park with various interconnecting hiking trails of easy to hard classes. Allie and I have been here many times. We almost never hike the same combination of trails. In fact, I don't think we've hiked the specific trail choices mentioned in 60 Hikes Within 60 Miles: Denver and Boulder. Segments of the trails are in shade, while other segments are exposed. There are great views of Flatirons and Boulder. This park is particularly dog friendly, though dogs need to be leashed.
.jpg)
