Analysis of MGS4’s Camera Perspective System and How It Fosters Unique Playing Styles for the Player (Essay)

April 11th, 2009

This year I enrolled in an elective course about video games. The largest chunk of assessment for this course (50%) is the “Research Essay”. Strangely it’s positioned mid-term, I guess because the next best piece of work is the always hazardous group presentation task. Anyways, being the enthusiastic student I am, I’ve completed the essay well ahead of schedule. Simply put, the essay was designed to carve up a huge chunk of the holiday break, and I wasn’t going to just idly sit by and let it proceed.

We had a handful of questions for the assignment, let’s see; intellectual property and user-generated content, social ills and video games, violence and games, the effect the Wii has on the games industry and finally “why is X game fun”. I chose the last one because it’s essentially demanding game critique which is a great free ride of an essay, particularly one of 2500 words, merciless.

Metal Gear Solid 4 is the game I wish to “critique” for the essay, but before I get down to business, I scrutinize the hell out of the innocent assignment question. I kinda regret fussing so much about it now. I should present the question in full if the rest is going to make sense;

“While people clearly play games because they are fun, we still have only a rudimentary understanding of the particular pleasures that games offer us. Pick a particular game or game genre as your case-study ‘text’ and critically analyze how its form, structure, elements and other modes of engagement work to provide pleasure to its player or players.”

Lastly, I know this piece drones a little and surprisingly the dull tone is irrelevant to the academic make-up. I just didn’t enjoy writing it and I think the text reflects that. I was also sure to let the teacher know that the preface was not some rude stab at them, although it’s partly (ok, fully) implied by the text. Anyways, that’s enough from me, the complete piece can be found below:

Problematic Beginnings

Dissecting the forms and functions of a video game, in the aim of understanding how it can be pleasurable to a player is undeniably a tremendous task. Tremendous because it’s either highly problematic, impossible or the task is simply invalid – it really depends on which way you slice it. Whatever the case, it’s important to address our methodology and any underlying issues with the request given, so that our analysis is both transparent and credible.

The activity that we’re being asked to participate in is formally titled games criticism. At the current time, the process of games criticism lacks any standout methodology at which to apply, furthermore it’s debatable whether such a thing as games criticism actually exists , let a lone a single critic (Klosterman, 2006). Whatever the case, little progression in this area can be made due to the stalemate that game criticism continually finds itself in (Lui, 2008).

There have been many attempts at formulating a methodology to critically assess games both in and outside the academic sphere. Some have concluded with mixed results (Consalvo & Dutton, 2006), created a new lexicon of vocabulary (Terrell, 2009), relied on the gathering of pre-existing knowledge (Battle, 2008), while other approaches do little but point out the obvious (Konzack, 2002). Whatever the case, the form of approach and understanding is yet to be developed, which makes this undertaking more than problematic for a student of this medium.

We can of course (and ultimately have to) try our hand at this, but explaining how a game is pleasurable to all is simply an impossible task, that or the question (and subsequently any results to come out of it) is invalid. Anything can be pleasurable, the mundane can be pleasurable (Erdelack, 2009). A company such as Blizzard has turned routine work into a pleasurable activity for millions through World of Warcraft’s corporate metaphor of the real world (Rettberg, 2007). Ultimately though, pleasure is a subjective thing. In his widely respected The New Games Journalism manifesto, Kieron Gillen states that “In videogames there is no ‘there’. You’re either sitting in front of your PC or slumped in your front-room, controller in your hand. It’s all happening inside your head….You’re experiencing something that simply doesn’t exist.” (Gillen, 2004). He follows “This makes us Travel Journalists to Imaginary places. Our job is to describe what it’s like to visit a place that doesn’t exist outside of the gamer’s head”. Kieron is saying that the experience of playing games is highly personal and therefore any such pleasure received by the player is deeply tangled in their life experiences. What we are being asked to attain is something we simply can’t, it’s in the player’s head, jumbled within those experiences. Furthermore the question implies that our results are absolute for all people, but as can be seen by the above argument, there are no absolutes, such as that of what the question is hoping we answer. Any attempt at defining an absolute answer on behalf of all players, all people, can only be inherently generalized to the point of falsehood.

Lastly, what exactly defines pleasure anyways? The term is so vague that anything can be claimed as being pleasurable without proper justification. One would need to narrowly define the word first before they could possibly begin investigation.

Some Solutions

This paper will (at least try to) circumvent these issues in several ways. Firstly the term pleasure will be narrowed and specified, secondly there will be no attempts of objectivity. This paper will only reflect that of the author’s interpretation of the game in question. The only way I could speak on behalf of everyone is if I remove myself from everything that defines myself, which I cannot do, so in similar vein to cultural research I don’t claim the results to be objectively conclusive, rather that of my own interpretation, skewed by my own experiences. Methodology shall be derived from that of fundamentals discussed the above referenced examples of criticism, as well as methodology of my own. Lastly, the game in question is particularly deep, with a wealth of mechanics and systems drawn from twenty years of series history, as such I shall be focusing on a concentrated segment of the game.

Now, We Start…

With all of these niggling issue brought to the forefront, we can now begin the analysis. My game of choice is Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots for the Playstation 3 home console. This game, developed by Kojima productions and published by Konami, saw a highly anticipated release last year (2008) on the Playstation 3. The game’s tremendous hype and critical reception, had many commentators discussing whether this was famously the “Citizen Kane of video games” (Abbott, 2008) (Suellentrop, 2007). Much of the high criticism from the enthusiast media appears largely unfounded, and hype driven. Amongst this though, one thing is certain, MGS4 provides the player with a wealth of options for tackling the game. It provides inverted freedom to that of say Grand Theft Auto III (Frasca, 2003), offering the player a wealth of mechanics, allowing them to perform a vast range of actions, yet confining the game space to a non-open world area. The game is a magnificent stumbling beast, a kitchen sink of ideas that match and clash a every avenue (Abbott, 2008).

I wish to explore arguably the most incremental system of mechanics in MGS4, the system that infers many of the industry’s most popular forms of contemporary play onto the player.This paper will explore how the game’s core camera perspectives (and supporting systems) create different play conditions for the player, which in turn encourage varying play styles, and hence foster the element of exploration within the player.

MGS4 offers the player four camera perspectives, I have labeled them; normal, third person auto, third person manual (over the shoulder) and first person. I will now discuss each of the perspectives individually, focusing on how they create different modes of play for the player, concluding by relating this back to the element of exploration.

Normal (CQC) Perspective

The Normal Perspective (NP) is MGS4‘s default looking angle where no weapons are readied (L1). This is the only mode where full analogue control of Snake (the game’s protagonist) and the camera is provided. You control both of these freely with the dual analog sticks. You also have complete functionality of the non-offensive game mechanics such as climbing, crawling leaning against walls and objects, camouflaging with the chameleon-esque sneaking suit, as well as inventory items. Snake can also use all forms of CQC – close quarters combat, essentially anything involving physical contact with an enemy unit in the game. The CQC library is quite diverse including strangleholds, enemy shields, dragging bodies, de-equipping enemies and throws to ground. The majority of weapons have their own CQC functions too, usually a simple knock with the weapon itself. All of the above are exclusive features of the NP.

On the flip side, Snake can’t fire a single bullet in this mode. Pressing the attack button (R1) will either result in a quick jab or a CQC move dependent on the weapon equipped and proximity to the nearest enemy. Since you don’t have to hold down the L1 button (using the index finger to press) to ready a weapon (doing so will result in jumping to another mode) you’re hands are freed up a little, giving you more control over Snake’s movement. This is facilitated for with variable movement, where Snake can run, walk and sneak depending on the pressure placed on the analog stick. The camera in this mode maintains a 3rd person perspective, providing the widest field of vision.

MGS4 can be played as an action or a stealth game, and these four perspective each accommodate varying points on that spectrum. Since the Metal Gear series is traditionally a stealth game, the default perspective forces one to play in such a way. I found that this perspective best accommodates for a more passive playing style. Perhaps the most important contributor to this is the fact that Snake can’t fire a single bullet. Unlike in the other modes where the camera is concentrated on a fixed position/object, the NP allows the player to find their own focus. As such, a free camera encourages you to explore your surroundings a little more carefully, fostering a slower, more methodical style of play – ie. stealth. Another significant contributor is the sneaking suit, which changes texture dependent on what surface you are leaning against. This form of camouflage is ideal for hiding. On top of this, once camouflaged, you can also play dead, lowering the risk of being spotted. The supporting maneuvers such as hiding in lockers, dragging bodies, hanging off ledges are also indicative of a stealthier playing format. Hence, this mode is designed for stealth.

Third Person Automatic Perspective

The Third Person Automatic Perspective (TPAP) is very similar to the NP featuring the same 3rd person viewpoint, yet the perspective and Snake’s movement is fixed and central (respectively) to the circumference of the enemy unit. To enter this mode hold down the L1 button and the nearest enemy is automatically snapped to, the right stick toggles between multiple enemies. An icon appears top centre of the screen confirming the perspective. Snake’s now walks at a single, slower pace, much slower than in NP, and movement is refitted so that he strafes left or right and closes in and out around the circumference of an enemy. As with all of the perspectives to follow, Snake cannot perform special maneuvers in TPAP, such as dragging bodies, hiding in lockers or camouflaging. When Snake bumps into a physical object, the game reverts back to the normal perspective.

Although TPAP centers a targeted enemy, Snake’s repertoire of weaponry is limited to only the basics; pistols, sub machine guns and riffles. CQC and scoped rifles cannot be used, neither can the railgun, explosive peripherals (ie. grenades) and other miscellaneous items. Each of the former require manual aiming.

Locking onto enemies is handled automatically, meaning that you cannot aim for specific parts of the body. Furthermore, almost all weapons that can be used in this mode are rapid fire weapons. The cumulative effect of these features enforce a run-and-shoot style of play. Between this and the manual perspective (as detailed below), the player is forced to choose between sacrificing manual targeting for field of vision or the other way way around. TPAP is less conservative as targets are locked on via the body, hence requiring more ammunition to down.

The lock-on component constricts the free movement, reverting to a digital movement pattern defined around a sphere (with the enemy in the centre). This removes the obstacle of movement for the player, allowing them to concentrate more on the shooting, but with a wide camera, on the environment also, keeping an eye of the surrounding environment at the same time. It’s a balance between attacking and hiding.

I used this mode accordingly, to scout out the ensuing action, while being aware of the surrounding environments. Ideal for situations where explosions are going off, but you still need to put up a fight. Sometimes, this mode felt like more of a panic mode, it’s easier to hit an enemy, but at the expense of bullets, only used in desperate situations.

Third Person Manual Perspective

Third Person Manual (TPMP) is an over the shoulder perspective (with Snake on either the left or right hand side) that requires manual aiming of all weapons. To enter this mode, hold down L1 to ready your weapon and then press the square button to toggle across. Movement is slow as with TPAP, but this time the camera it isn’t centralized around the enemy, so when the player nudges the analog stick forwards, Snake walks straight ahead, not towards the nearest enemy. Camera control is limited to either a left or right hand swing (R3). With the camera tucked in, you feel closer to the action, a reticule is present as well, which indicates where you are shooting.

The weapon set is fully fleshed out in this mode, everything is available with the exception of CQC. Although for some peripheral items that need planting, the camera will pull back. Still, the game allows you to execute those moves while in TPMP.

Manual aiming demands greater skill of the player to land a shot, it’s facilitated by the closer camera, yet unlike the previously discussed perspectives I found myself refusing to stay in this mode for long periods of time, simply because it tunnels the player’s vision. Instead I found myself popping and stopping between this and the other perspectives, using it in a peripheral nature. I’d scout out an enemy unit in NP, lock on in TPAP and then bring the camera in (TPMP) for a manual shot. As you can see, there is greater risk in TPMP. The closer camera removes the environmental distractions, peeling off another layer as we move away from modes facilitating stealth play to those closer to action.

First Person Perspective

The First Person Perspective (FPP) places you in Snake’s eyes, limiting the view even further to just what is dead in front of you. To enter FPP you must first press L1 to launch into TPMP or TPAP (depends on what’s toggled) and from there press triangle to enter first person. The camera is obscured somewhat by the weapon being held, which draws your eye into the centre of the screen, for lining up shots. Making the FPP stress the centre of the screen, the field of vision is now at its most narrowest. The camera also jumps into first person automatically when crawling through vents and tight places. When utilizing scoped weapons such as sniper riffles and rockets, this perspective takes the imagery of the inner scope. All weapons can be used in this mode, but no CQC.

This perspective is on the farthest end of the spectrum (action), which perhaps explains why it requires such an effort to reach – you need to enter through the previous third person modes to reach FPP. My time spent in FPP was even shorter than that of TPMP as it’s tighter and riskier still. The scopes make FPP the premier option for taking specialized shots. Their visual representation (and zooming mechanics) are indicative of this too. I enter this mode in the hope of taking head shots or from sniping from a distance. The two motives can be radical from one another, either slow and steady or quick and rushed. The perspective stresses accuracy and now, even a decent perspective of the landscape is non-existent. Everything lends itself to shooting, the polar opposite of the pacifist default perspective. I only enter this mode with the objective of shoot to kill.

Conclusion

As the above analysis has shown, MGS4‘s four modes of perspective each provide the player with various options for tackling the given situations on a spectrum ranging from stealth to action. Like layers of an onion, the further you move along, the further the supporting mechanics of one side tear away, revealing that of the other.

The pleasure in all this? Again, I think it’s far to general to simply state that such mechanics provide pleasure to the player, rather, I feel that the freedom provided by this system of complicated mechanisms allows the player to play to a style they see fitting – freedom, perhaps. That, and also explore this rather technical yet versatile “swiss army knife” approach to gameplay. Each perspective garners a different play experience, and toying with the complexities of each of them, realizing the games complex mechanics and then testing them within the variables of this interactive playground (which we haven’t even began to discuss!), I find to be an adventure in itself.

References

Games

Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots 2008, Hideo Kojima & Kojima Productions, Konami

Reference List

Abbott M. (2008). Apples, oranges, and parallels. Retrieved 10 April 2009, from http://www.brainygamer.com/the_brainy_gamer/2008/06/apples-and-oran.html

Abbott M. (2008). Kojima and the theory of everything. Retrieved 10 April 2009, from http://www.brainygamer.com/the_brainy_gamer/2008/07/kojima-and-the.html

Battle K.(2008). Zarathustran Analytics Synopsis. Retrieved 10 April 2009, from http://www.popmatters.com/pm/post/zarathustran-analytics-synopsis1/

Consalvo M. & Dutton N. (2006). Game analysis: Developing a methodological toolkit for the qualitative study of games. Retrieved 10 April 2009, from http://gamestudies.org/0601/articles/consalvo_dutton

Erdelack W.(2009). In Praise of the Mundane. Retrieved 10 April 2009, from http://versusclucluland.blogspot.com/2009/02/in-praise-of-mundane.html

Frasca G. (2003). Sim Sin City: some thoughts about Grand Theft Auto 3. Retrieved 10 April 2009, from http://www.gamestudies.org/0302/frasca/

Gillen K. (2004). The New Games Journalism. Retrieved 10 April 2009, from http://alwaysblack.com/blackbox/ngj.html

Klosterman C. (2006). The Lester Bangs of Video Games. Retrieved 10 April 2009, from
http://www.esquire.com/features/ESQ0706KLOSTER_66

Konzack L.(2002). Computer Game Criticism: A Method for Computer Analysis. Retrieved 10 April 2009, from http://www.digra.org/dl/db/05164.32231

Lui, C.K (2008). Why game criticism doesn’t exist. Retrieved 10 April 2009, from http://www.gamecritics.com/why-game-criticism-doesn-t-exist

Rettberg S.(2007). Corporate Ideology in World of Warcraft. Retrieved 10 April 2009, from http://retts.net/documents/rettberg_corp_ideology.pdf

Suellentrop C. (2007). What “the Citizen Kane of Video Games” Really Means. Retrieved 10 April 2009, from http://www.slate.com/id/2179398/entry/2179795/

Terrell R. (2009). Critical-Glossary. Retrieved 10 April 2009, from http://critical-gaming.squarespace.com/critical-glossary/

Cross Blog Dialogue: GTA: Chinatown Wars #2

April 9th, 2009

gta-chinatown-wars1

This is the second round of shared commentaries between myself and Steven O’Dell from the Raptured Reality blog regarding the recently release GTA: Chinatown Wars. You can read the first part of our conversation here.

Daniel: I reached 25% progression on my last play through before I started to write this response.

On the story, it’s pretty pathetic. What surprises me is how long some of the pointless dialogue dribbles on. It’s intended that the gatekeepers to the missions come across as arrogant criminal hypocrites. They’re meant to be annoying pricks because literally they are annoying pricks that murder and beat people, but in Chinatown Wars they roll around in it too much. Yes, we know that the Chinese guy is going to protect honour through means of murder, theft and villianary but why does he need an extended script to get this simple message across. I remember the characters in GTAIII were frankly too busy to bark orders, they just told me to piss off (often literally) and the game filled in the gaps. I was originally bothered that Rockstar had to promote the protagonist Huang Lee as an spoilt, mature age brat, fortunately though he doesn’t have an exerted amount of character, and is fine.

Hmmm…the Chinese angle. Yeah I reckon that I’ll probably discredit any cultural investigation. Most of the cast is Chinese, making it feel like GTA: Shanghai, although in Shanghai they don’t speak like typical American thugs. Beyond some minor cultural tie-ins, the cast could be re-skinned as Americans and it wouldn’t make a difference. Not sure why the Chinese are at war with the Koreans though, I guess Chinese living in America haven’t caught onto the latest K-Pop/K-drama phenomena sweeping Asia. ^_^

I wanted to ask you if the game’s map is a mirror of GTA IV, that is a smaller, pocket-sized mirror. Also, in terms of scale, how do the size of the two game worlds compare? Obviously GTA:CW is smaller, but to what extent?

I found it interesting that the whole map is free to roam from the beginning. The lack of restriction sometimes loses me actually. I head in one direction and then realize I’m lost in a district I’ve never visited before. It plays around with the dynamic, don’t you think?. In previous games you use to familiarize with the game world piece by piece, now it’s delivered all in one gulp. Is this troublesome do you think? The missions tend to congregate in pretty close proximity, but drug tip-offs can send you from one island to another, and with the police on high alert it can make the venture out a little risky I find. A game like GTA encourages the player to explore at will, and with no constraints, I lack familiarity with the environment, it’s a bit concerning.

–

Steven: I’m also at 25% completion at the time of writing this response and, to put it simply, I agree on the story so far. I’m leaving myself open to the idea that it is still early days and it has the potential to go places, but until it does (or does not), it’s just been the excuse to participate in and tryout the unique missions we’ve already discussed. The characters aren’t compelling at all, including Huang Lee who as you know, we play as. It is like his role in the story so far is to throw in a one-liner here and there, to interrupt the boring and long ramblings of the characters that give you missions. Perhaps I am spoiled by GTA IV’s narrative so it will be interesting to see whether Chinatown Wars’ one improves or continues to be there for the sake of acquiring missions. There seems to be a disconnect between what the characters talk about before a mission and then the objectives you end up doing as well. I know that has been the case in all of the GTA games but I guess the boring dialogue just makes it more obvious or something.

gta-chinatown-driving

To answer your question about the game’s map, it is fairly similar to the Liberty City in GTA IV though there are of course subtle differences and changes in Chinatown Wars’ version. The entire state of Alderney (where downloadable expansion The Lost And Damned takes place) is missing, so that’s one big omission there that I assume was made due to technical reasons. Roads sometimes branch off in different directions as well, though for the most part it isn’t a problem for me because it is mostly similar to the GTA IV version. In fact, I felt right at home as soon as I fired it up (one of the first things I did was go for a drive to see what was or wasn’t different) and had no hassles realizing where I was within the city. Reading about your unfamiliarity surprised me actually, though obviously you haven’t played GTA IV like I have. I found that having the GPS display on the top screen as well as the bottom one, helped in the areas where I did get confused or lost, though. Having the entire city open to explore isn’t unique to Chinatown Wars, it was all open from the beginning in GTA IV as well so it feels no different here, though I understand where you are coming from about gradually learning the city. I never thought about it like that before you mentioned it though, which I will put down to my photographic memory. Going back to the story, then, have you met the two characters that appear at around the 25% mark yet – the ones who look like they could lead the story into a more interesting area? I’m looking forward to seeing where these particular characters take the game and I seriously hope the story starts to pick up as well. Though, if it doesn’t, I’ll still be happy to continue exploring Liberty City and participating in all the side missions.

–

Daniel: I probably wouldn’t hold out much hope for the story. I don’t think I’ve run into those two characters you speak of, is it before or after the point where the Korean gang enters the narrative? Story-wise I’m around that mark. I’ve been spending a good half of my play time hunting down the hidden security cameras, buying property and partaking in rampages, the latter which I thoroughly enjoy. I can’t help but feel that I immerse myself quite heavily in these distractions as a means to better familiarize myself with the boundless environment. As I said in the last response, I don’t feel completely comfortable with the territory, at least as much as I did with the other games, due to the game world being fully open from the start (rather than gradually revealing itself). My familiarity is now spread over a much larger surface area and is naturally thinner than it would be if that area was contained.

I think this has other implications too. For example; exploration is meant to be one of the game’s freedoms, yet with such a large area to explore, I feel that my “off-time” out of missions to just mess around and explore has to be managed, otherwise I’ll explore endlessly and it’ll get tiresome/I’ll get lost. This for me, places a burden on what I consider to be the strongest element of this series. It’s by no means a flaw I don’t think, just how I’m personally responding to this change.

While we’re looming over some complaints I wanted to know what you think of the PDA system which manages your missions, map, drug trade and so forth. This tool plays an integral part in the exploration element, and it mostly works effectively. I have a couple of quibbles though and wanted to know if you share them.

gta-chinatown-wars-touch2

I find myself wishing that you could just guide the mini-map on the bottom screen, rather than it prompting the larger map to appear. I usually only want to see what’s around the local area, I only need to peep over at the next few blocks. Secondly, I wish that there was a quick launch to the inventory of your drug stash, at the lower right hand side of the screen. I rarely ever need to quickly check the mission ‘brief’, and the inclusion of a quick launch into the stats menu is simply unfounded. There’s no reason for me to want to quickly activate my statistics. In contrast I have to slide through the menu to reach the Trade Info and from there tap through to see my inventory. It’s clunky. The Contacts and Music options are also useless inclusions that clutter up the interface. I just find these things slow down the flow a little. Any harsher criticism on your side of the fence?

–

Steven: The two characters were Hsin and the cop and, after playing a little more of the game since my last response, I agree with what you’ve said. To be a quarter of the way through the story and not interested in it whatsoever is, well disappointing to be honest. Again, perhaps I am spoiled by GTA IV’s narrative but unless something unexpected happens, Chinatown Wars’ story will just serve as the provider for the game’s unique and interesting missions and nothing more. This doesn’t bother me as much as I originally thought it would, though; Chinatown Wars seems to be a combination of all of the fantastic elements from the series. It has the fun factor covered by random Rampages, races initiated by entering certain vehicles and a return of the Vigilante, Ambulance and Fire-Fighting missions. It has exploration covered thanks to the hidden cameras, not to mention the unique situations and interesting places you can stumble upon. And, as we’ve discussed previously, it takes full advantage of the DS’s features to make an exciting game. Honestly, we don’t need the story to be decent but I still can’t deny that it’s a shame that it has been relatively boring so far. That could change though so we’ll see how it goes.

Returning to exploration for a second, I have to say that I haven’t had the desire to explore as much in this game. That surprises me a little because I always explore my games thoroughly and the GTA series has always been one of the most enjoyable to gradually explore. It’s not that the city is boring, far from it in fact, but rather I think that because I am already so familiar with Liberty City thanks to GTA IV, I just don’t have the urge to see what I already have.

I agree with you on the location of some of the features in the PDA, specifically the drug trade info you mention. Bringing it up to see who is selling a certain drug cheaply, or who wants to buy a bunch of something I may have, is clunky and I definitely wish it was more accessible. It does work how it is, but I’ve found that I am buying/selling drugs a lot more than I expected to and having to bring up the PDA, slide to the right menu and then click through a few times becomes tedious after a while. Especially when I then usually back out of it all, bring up the map and then look through the list of dealers to find their location on the map so I can set the GPS waypoint. It wastes a few minutes and I agree that your inventory should have a shortcut option on the bottom screen instead of the Brief menu option. Another minor criticism I have is the music. It’s not bad, so don’t get me wrong, but it is repetitive and I wish there was a little more to it. I realize that the DS’s limitations are probably the reason for that, so it isn’t of major concern. Other than that, I guess my biggest gripe is what I’ve already discussed above, the story, so there’s no point repeating it here. So, a random question for you: how do you feel about the cars, the handling (do you use the assists or not?) and the visibility while driving on the top screen?

–

More discussion to follow shortly.

Height and Character Design Musings

April 8th, 2009

The strangest realization popped into my head when first playing Metal Gear Solid 4 roughly a year ago. In one of the numerous opening scenes, Snake was standing at the foot of a grave stone saluting. It wasn’t the obvious throwback to MGS3 that caught my attention – that metaphor was already obvious. No, what grabbed me was how Snake looked like a human, a normal person that could don a blazer, tie and pair of chinos. Normal Snake, in a normal context. Snake’s moment of reflection is then shortly interrupted by an equally real Otacon. Seeing both of these characters rendered in gorgeous photo realism certainly pulls at the game’s heritage and really draws you in.

Witnessing Snake in something other than skin tight fabric wasn’t exactly what made him seem human. It’s certainly a contributor, and presents him in a more personal light, but on pondering the idea a little, I realized what it was; these characters have legs!

The history of video games has been stunted by men and women with stumpy legs. I guess you could blame the plumer perhaps, he started it. While not true of all games and genres, I feel that in the past the build of video game characters have been presented in a rather obtuse fashion. Call it a technological thing, that resolutions are small and hence the pixel count to build a person is rather limited, you can’t argue with that. Less pixel power naturally results in less complex imagery and (generally speaking) more simplistic character designs. With these limitations in mind, when abiding by a strict pixel count, where on the human body can you cull pixels while still maintaining a “human” image? The legs, of course. Short hands, tiny head, empty torso naturally appear strange, shorter legs, I’d argue, less so.

That’s just a hand-wavy assumption though, I’ll let you judge that one yourself.

RPGs are another interesting point of discussion, due to a camera angle that looks down on its characters, the legs of many an RPG protagonist naturally appear shorter than they really are. It’s a neat camera trick. Phantasy Star was a little different in this regard, an exception perhaps.

final-fantasy-viii-8-cast

The first game that got me thinking about the legs in video games was Final Fantasy VIII. Unlike the growth stunted heroes of the previous entry, FF VIII realistically rendered their cast with human sized legs, maybe even a little longer. Since then, no legs have really stood out for me, until that of MGS4. Like FF VIII, these characters aren’t just tall people, they are tall by conscious design choice.

Another example of character height that stands out to me is village chief Bitores Mendez from Resident Evil 4. In this case, his height was intentionally standout and it works effectively in characterizing this menacing creature. Height is clearly an asset to him, unlike Ramon Salazar, another character in the same game, who’s height is clearly a challenge. There are rarely ever any (non-comedic) distinctively short game characters, which makes him all the more memorable. That and the shrill of his voice.

Maybe this commentary all sounds a little batty. Height is clearly an integral part of character design, so it’s interesting to explore its history and particularly memorable moments of its integration in video games. After all it does have an effect, it’s part of the reason why I’m quite resistant towards the dumpy characters in the Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles universe. I don’t know. Tell me some of your own ideas regarding game characters and height, and maybe this post would have been worth something beyond trail-less conclusions ^_^

Posted in Editorial | Comments (2)
Tags: character design

« Older Entries

Newer Entries »