297: The Hands' Job

[beefpelican]

In general, I agree, with one point of contention...

But people can carry guns differently. Hold a pistol sideways.

But that would only work if you were playing a moron. Or a street thug, but I repeat myself. (Sights are on top for a reason, even if that reason isn't immediately apparent in an FPS with a crosshair HUD.)

In Killer 7 one character holds his pistols upside down and fires with his pinkies. I think you would like it.

OT: Usually if your character is talking and they aren't in a cut-scene they are holding a gun and freely moving. I feel that having emotive hands in a situation like that would look weird, especially if you weren't facing someone.

 

[palsma_rifle]

Actually, I'm more annoyed by first person characters not having legs. AvP was, in my opinion, pretty bad, but at least the characters had legs.

 

[CrystalShadow]

In general, I agree, with one point of contention...

But people can carry guns differently. Hold a pistol sideways.

But that would only work if you were playing a moron. Or a street thug, but I repeat myself. (Sights are on top for a reason, even if that reason isn't immediately apparent in an FPS with a crosshair HUD.)

This reminds me of Red Steel. Being a first generation Wii title, they tried to do something with the motion controls. One thing is that if you're holding a pistol in-game, the angle of the pistol onscreen matches the angle you're holding the remote at.

It's completely pointless for gameplay, but you can hold a pistol sideways, upside down, normally, or anything inbetween, and go back and forth however you feel like. (And yes, just that simple only partially accurate match-up between how you hold your hand and how the gun moves does demonstrate that holding a gun sideways is not a good idea. )

The moment is also empowering. The game doesn't yank out to the third-person view, but stays close. In first-person, the player feels more like the guy who can cauterize his own wounds than like the guy controlling the guy who can cauterize his own wounds.

This is so true as well, and apart from Bioshock we also have Elder Scrolls: Oblivion that does this sort of neat thing. Whenever i'm a mage or sorcerer, I would literally see the hand being placed forward in front of me, casting a cool lightning spell that made me feel like I was the one doing the spell, rather then me controlling the guy to do so.

This was a very good Article, I liked it a lot believe me. Most games of our generation just focus primarily on the guns we hold or other qualities the character may possess, most forgot about how awesome just our hands can really be. Letting us enable power with our hands (through the NPC) let's us have more choices along with powers to display to our liking. Seriously hope Developers continue to enable mechanics like these.

What I dislike though, to be honest is that there are a lot of times we don't get to see our own feet do the talking as well. In order to fully feel like we're in character in my eyes is that we're in first person who can punch, use powers with our hands, and ether jump a certain way or do some fancy kicking. I've yet to see a game where they allow you to use feet against your opponet. Not even in Mirror's Edge do they allow you to fight this way. Only thing the main character does besides fighting with her hands is slide into opponets, but that's just using her body as a mass to knock the foe over rather then the feet alone. Then again, that is unique so I shouldn't complain about that. Again, really good article, I loved reading it.

Heh. Reminds me of duke nukem. Doom allowed you to punch things if you were out of ammo, but duke nukem 3d allowed you to kick.

Thing is, if you switched to weapon 1, you'd kick with one foot (your right, I think), but there was another dedicated button to kick with your other foot.

With the rather amusing result that if you used both at once, you'd kick with both legs at the same time in a way that isn't even close to physically plausible.




Anyway, on a more general note, I've noticed that along with hands, the body is usually completely absent.
If you look down in real life, you will see not just your feet, but also at least some part of your body.
But in most games, even if you're looking directly down at the floor, you don't see anything other than your hands.
This wouldn't make any sense whatsoever if you consider the mechanics of it, because even if you look down by bending at the waist (not at all natural), you'd probably see your feet.
And if you look down in a more typical way, you'd see most of your body.

That's actually another case where Mirror's Edge does quite well, because Faith definitely has a body, and if you look down, you will see Faith from about the waist down.
That's less than you'd expect to see, but to be fair, a computer display has a much smaller field of view than a person does.
(It's been said that what we can see in our environment is a lot closer to the field of view of a 3rd person game than a first person one. Playing first-person games is like having severe tunnel vision really.)

So, Faith has a body, which in and of itself is not at all common in first-person games.

And I've got to wonder why it gets ignored? I guess it goes along with not paying much attention to hands either, but I've always found it rather jarring.
It makes me feel disconnected from the environment. We're more than a pair of floating disembodied hands after all.

 

[FlitterFilms]

I'm more worried about feet, particularly. Namely, how FPS heroes apparently don't have them and like to float in midair. It always makes me happy to look down and see my shoes (although in games like The Darkness the downside is that the player's maximum speed is 'overweight man jogging').

I think we should focus an equal number of resources on legs! Too often they are over looked and whenever I look down occasionally all I see is the floor and I feel like a floating head. And let me see my own body to, when you look down your legs don't take up your entire vision, your body is in there to!

Actually, I'm more annoyed by first person characters not having legs. AvP was, in my opinion, pretty bad, but at least the characters had legs.

I was just thinking the same thing. It's personal gripe of mine to look down in a first person shooter and discover I have no legs and am apparently a floating head with a gun attached.

Never really thought about this whole hands thing before but the article is absolutely right and all the games mentioned are better experiences for it. Don't see what's so bad about imposing some level character upon the player. Theoretically creating a character from scratch is a better experience but there isn't a game out there that I've come across that can truly do this. I like pretending to be reformed badass John Marsden in Red Dead Redemption but in Fallout where I'm supposed to immerse myself by creating a character I always find that what I would really do in these situations is never an option and I'm forced to compromise between the options of co-operate or kill whoever it is that I'm dealing with. Also why can't I become a raider? I can be just as psychotic as they can, give me a chance!

That's going slightly off topic but my point is that now I have new appreciation for my hands.

 

[mixadj]

One FPS I think represents the use of hands pretty well is Battlefield BC2. I find especially in the reload segments I feel immersed. Slapping in a mag, pulling back the bolt and letting her fly. With the machine guns especially it makes me feel slightly badass just from that simple action. Also not so much to do with the hands. The way you move when your guns up on your shoulder or you fire hipshot feels really immersive, as you scan the area slower zoomed in and faster zoomed out.

 

[FlitterFilms]

I'd like to add that I love how if you stand around in Half-Life holding one of the snark grenade aliens you start poking and prodding it and it tries to bite you.

 

[ClaytronJames]

If I had a nickle for every time a beautifully made FPS made me look at hands for the entire game that look like they didn't even bother to properly fully render...

 

[ClaytronJames]

If I had a nickle for every time a beautifully made FPS made me look at hands for the entire game that look like they didn't even bother to properly fully render...

 

[Therumancer]

Bad advice, and if they listen to this guy it's going to shoot the gaming industry in the foot.

To put things into perspective: People who communicate with a lot of excessive hand motion are annoying, and tend to get themselves made fun of if they don't learn to reign in the behavior usually. Where you most see this kind of thing is with the kind of flaming queen stereotypes that exist, but even most gays want to get away from. This is where a lot of the whole "limpwrist" thing comes from.

If you create games where whenever a cinematic happens your character's hands appear and move in reaction to everything he says, or is being said, I can almost guarantee this isn't going to have people praise the immersion, but lead to massive amounts of mockery... are we a raving, mentally disturbed homeless person, or a paticularly flamboyant homosexual stereotype? We're certainly not a space marine.

Don't misunderstand this, my overall thoughts on gays aside, I'm not saying this to gay bash (on some levels it's the opposite since I'm talking about how the stereotype/behavior is actually negatively received there too nowadays).

I can understand how showing the hands when your character holds a gun, or reloads, or injects themself, or whatever is a good thing. However doing more with them to make the protaganist seem more active is going to be counter productive. Especially when your dealing with your typical action hero who is supposed to be a tough as nails gunslinger type, guys who train in the military, or even get good in general, tend to tightly control and limit their body language so as not to waste movement, and make themselves hard to read. In a FPS situation while talking to someone, even in a relatively safe area, a real warrior type, or even someone like Gordan Freeman who by now IS a warrior type through practice, is going to remain in a position where his hands are close to his weapon, even if he is relaxed overall. You know, just in case some monster smashes through the wall or whatever, because that's what happens to him. Noone who survives situations like this is going to want to be caught with their hands out in front of them to add empathy to a statement, and slow their gun draw by a fraction of a second if an ambush happens.

Military people, those who live dangerously, or even just have the right kinds of training, tend to be notable simply by the way they move, and stand even when at rest. It's something you can pick up on, and it's a HARD behavior to unlearn which is why you can oftentimes recognize when soemone was police or military even if they only did it for a couple of years and have spent decades retire. The way people in situations like this develop, is also why so many people have trouble "powering down" when a war or dangerous lifestyle ends. It's hard to REALYLY relax when you've conditioned yourself to always be on guard to some extent.

so simply... no, this is a REALLY dumb idea.

 

[shiajun]

I think it could work well with some different input interface. Amnesia: Dark Descent's interface is great. The way everything moves as fast or as slow as you are moving the mouse or in the direction you're pulling or pushing is incredibly immersive. The weird thing is it seems to happen by telekinesis. Aside from pulling up the lantern you never see the hands that do all of this, just a little hand icon the seems to grip things. It's not the same, and I know Frictional Games didn't have the budget to do this, but a combination of hands showing up when you interact with the world and moving and the rate of your input would create such a powerful bond that immersion would skyrocket.

I've lost the link, but there was a study where a people were handed some sort of VR goggles that also had devices for monitoring braing activity. Through the goggles the person was projected the image of a dummy that had a camera mounted on its head. First, to "link" the person with the body they were physically stimulated and simultanously shown through the camera while the dummy was stimulated the same way (like rubbing its arm, poking it, etc). After only a few minutes of this, if the dummy's arm was threatened with a knife or other bodily damage the person's brain fired wildly, just as if their own arm was being threatened. Imagine the connection of seeing arms and hands and feet moving in unison according to your input in a game. The feedback could make some truly shocking immerssion. Probably a bit too much, if you think about it.

Of course, this could also happen in some Kinect-like fashion, but that's not the point we're talking about, is it?

 

[Akiada]

[words]

While there is a definite style and character to how military character hold themselves, it's not how FPS characters do it currently. Look at the soldier on the left [http://www.treehugger.com/soldier-on-radio-080918.jpg]. Do you ever see your character in a FPS assume that posture despite it being really really widespread? No, you don't. At best you get the character lowering the barrel (ala Gordon Freeman), but that's still rare - most characters (these military hard-asses you speak of) seem content to point their loaded weapons at their allies.

And that is wrong. No one with even an iota of training is going to do that. And no one with half a brain will do it after being told not to. You do not point a gun at anything you do not intend to destroy is one of the fundamental rules of using a gun.

The author is not arguing for every game to show the character wielding the weapon in some wacky, unrealistic fashion, but to make the hands reflect the character. If you are a hard ass soldier your hands should act like a solider's - not like gun rests that are entirely indifferent to the notion that they're pointing the barrel of a loaded weapon at an ally or that they're pressing the barrel to the wall like some moron. Brink is good on that last point - if you get close to a wall your character lifts the rifle and only lowers it back into a firing position once you lean around the corner or turn away from the wall.

Lacking character is not a show of professionalism. It's being an emotionless set of vaguely limb-shaped objects who more often than not handle the weapon is such a fashion as to be outright unprofessional.

Also, talking with your hands need not mean waving your hands about like a lunatic. It can simply mean waving to your pal, rather than standing there stock still and emotionless. Soldiers, while well trained, are people and do remove their hands from their rifles from time to time.

To say nothing of using them to communicate silently [http://rescuehumor.com/images/funnyphotos/swatsignals3.jpg]. While this is a joke image, it's hard to find the original and it illustrates the point well enough. Military and paramilitary units tend to utilize their hands (and other body language) to communicate when speaking would be a liability. It would lead an air of credibility to one's character if they too could do this.

Of course, this is an age where companion NPCs in shooters seem to exist largely as a means of controlling the player's progress rather than be a character in a story, so it's not like anything outside hardcore mil-sim is going to dare let you lead a breach or coordinate with your squadmates in any fashion other than being a walking turret that regenerates from gunshot wounds if it can hide for a few seconds.

 

[Therumancer]

[words]

While there is a definite style and character to how military character hold themselves, it's not how FPS characters do it currently. Look at the soldier on the left [http://www.treehugger.com/soldier-on-radio-080918.jpg]. Do you ever see your character in a FPS assume that posture despite it being really really widespread? No, you don't. At best you get the character lowering the barrel (ala Gordon Freeman), but that's still rare - most characters (these military hard-asses you speak of) seem content to point their loaded weapons at their allies.

And that is wrong. No one with even an iota of training is going to do that. And no one with half a brain will do it after being told not to. You do not point a gun at anything you do not intend to destroy is one of the fundamental rules of using a gun.

The author is not arguing for every game to show the character wielding the weapon in some wacky, unrealistic fashion, but to make the hands reflect the character. If you are a hard ass soldier your hands should act like a solider's - not like gun rests that are entirely indifferent to the notion that they're pointing the barrel of a loaded weapon at an ally or that they're pressing the barrel to the wall like some moron. Brink is good on that last point - if you get close to a wall your character lifts the rifle and only lowers it back into a firing position once you lean around the corner or turn away from the wall.

Lacking character is not a show of professionalism. It's being an emotionless set of vaguely limb-shaped objects who more often than not handle the weapon is such a fashion as to be outright unprofessional.

Also, talking with your hands need not mean waving your hands about like a lunatic. It can simply mean waving to your pal, rather than standing there stock still and emotionless. Soldiers, while well trained, are people and do remove their hands from their rifles from time to time.

To say nothing of using them to communicate silently [http://rescuehumor.com/images/funnyphotos/swatsignals3.jpg]. While this is a joke image, it's hard to find the original and it illustrates the point well enough. Military and paramilitary units tend to utilize their hands (and other body language) to communicate when speaking would be a liability. It would lead an air of credibility to one's character if they too could do this.

Of course, this is an age where companion NPCs in shooters seem to exist largely as a means of controlling the player's progress rather than be a character in a story, so it's not like anything outside hardcore mil-sim is going to dare let you lead a breach or coordinate with your squadmates in any fashion other than being a walking turret that regenerates from gunshot wounds if it can hide for a few seconds.

Actually the author is saying exactly what I am talking about. Remember we're talking about FPS games, where you generally don't see your character at all. He is saying that when you have interaction the character's hands should be visible and move in accordance to what is going on.

The exact posture is irrelevent, you dont see it, the point is that you don't see them waving their hands around in front of them even when at ease in a potentially dangerous situation.

... and yes I am aware of sign language and military hand signs, but honestly I don't think FPS games would be improved by incorperating them as a game mechanic. Though I admit it would be kind of amusing. If they go there, I think they should team up with Penny Arcade to take it all one step forward and make a villain-themed game called "Mime Soldiers" where half the game is based around first person miming with your squadmates.... I mean heck, if your going to create something that visually ridiculous you might as well go all out.

The gist of my arguement, and the point you seem to be missing, is that the bottom line here is to have floating hands pop up from the bottom of the screen or whatever far more often and just do things in accordance with the plot.

All jokes aside, one of the big reasons why they probably don't incorperate military handsigns into squad command systems for "RP purposes" in FPS games is because your character would have to put down their weapon and then resume using it in a lot of cases, or move the gun in some way that would probably prelude you to do it. In a game (which this is let's not forget) I doubt anyone's experience would be improved by being gunned down while drawing a weapon due to having been giving a "hold position" signal or something.

 

[Denamic]

I think hands really could improve immersion a lot.
Hands are the body parts we see the most of.
Whatever you do, your hands is almost always in your field of view.
If games had more interaction with the environment, it'd be great.
Say you were to walk through something hanging from the ceiling, your character's hand reaches out to shield your face as you walk through it.
Or your hand reach out to push a door as you walk towards it.
Or running into a wall, your character's hands reach out to reduce the impact.
Kind of like how the 'gentle push' in assassin's creed works, but in first person.
That'd be great.

 

[BrotherRool]

I tend to hate hands because they smash immersion. Completely and utterly. They remind you that our field of vision is wholly and fundamentally different from the field of vision presented in a game and that you aren't looking into a world, but looking into a screen into a world.

I'm sure you've seen the live-action FPS youtube video. Why is it funny? Because no-ones moves with their hands like that in real life. In real life, the sense of where you're hands are, is a mixture of peripheral vision and your brain processing the sense of attachment and control. Neither of which you have in an FPS.


Your vision isn't really square and if your hands are in the central, focussed part of your vision and directly part of how you are looking at things, you're doing it wrong. Most FPS' roughly do "hands holding guns" right. That is how it works, because the hand that is supporting the gun is a focus of your vision and you are using it to engage with the environment (And basically aim). But the minute they hold a knife, it quickly becomes a case of who does that? What the ef is wrong with their arms?

Try it now, raise your hands to roughly the height of your chin and maybe 20cms from your face. Isn't that exactly what a game shows you? When you focus on a screen you tend to ignore peripheral vision entirely. And it's not comfortable holding your hands like that.

 

[gee666]

in Brink you can change class quite easily several times in matches, one of the things SD have done is put diffrent gloves on your charecter depending on the class they are and diffrent ones for each faction so you have a quick visual que on screen as to the class you are, rather than stick a wee symbol on the HUD

 

[Grond Strong]

Agreed, this is something that has come across my attention as well. A first person shooter is supposed to be just that, seen in first person. I don't think we really take in how much we see our hands in during our daily actions. They have become so common place that they are just there, without us really taking any particular notice of them or saying, "Wow, our hands are looking marvelously textured today." But that doesn't mean they dissapear.

FPS's today, I think in general, don't give hands the credit they deserve. While they aren't supposed to be distracting, it'd be nice to see more of them in action. When performed correctly, hand motions give a wonderful amount of depth and immersion into a game that one didn't have before. Like the hands on the T.V. are just an extension of yours. It's quite cool, really.

I would also love to see the detail given to guns, gore, and sets given also to fingers, nails, and hand motions. Nothing is more laughable, unrealistic, and sometimes just stupid when a hand that looks like the Pillsbury Doughboy pops up on the screen and knocks on a door.

 

[justnotcricket]

The last thing that really struck me in terms of videogame hands were the ones in Dragon Age: Origins (and, actually, to a lesser extent in DA 2).

Seriously, what was with those? Anyone not wearing gauntlets looked like they had an outsize pair of flesh coloured rubber gloves at the ends of their sleeves. They were the freakiest things. Am I alone in thinking this? I was also recently disturbed by an occasion in DA 2 when Bethany put her had up to her mouth and it looked like she had wizened sticks of jerky for fingers. Maybe it's like some mangaka being totally unable to draw realistic looking feet. Perhaps Bioware has an issue with hands?

 

[bader0]

In general, I agree, with one point of contention...

But people can carry guns differently. Hold a pistol sideways.

But that would only work if you were playing a moron. Or a street thug, but I repeat myself. (Sights are on top for a reason, even if that reason isn't immediately apparent in an FPS with a crosshair HUD.)

you seem to have forgotten the topic completely, this is about videogames what makes them great is that they are not real. think about it what if future pistol sites were on the side to make room for some other cool new thing that needed to be on the top?

 

[realslimshadowen]

In general, I agree, with one point of contention...

But people can carry guns differently. Hold a pistol sideways.

But that would only work if you were playing a moron. Or a street thug, but I repeat myself. (Sights are on top for a reason, even if that reason isn't immediately apparent in an FPS with a crosshair HUD.)

you seem to have forgotten the topic completely, this is about videogames what makes them great is that they are not real. think about it what if future pistol sites were on the side to make room for some other cool new thing that needed to be on the top?

...like what? A fuckin' counterweight designed specifically so morons could hold the gun sideways without having their accuracy, if you'll forgive the expression, shot to shit?

Because then you're not firing sideways. Let me put it this way. Whatever side has the sights on it is automatically the top of the gun. That is because the arms are below the eyes. It doesn't matter if you're holding it "sideways" relative to the grips of traditional guns: if the gun is designed to fire like that, you're holding it properly.