Bungie.net Community
This topic has moved here: Subject: Destiny Discussion: Keeping things in Perspective
  • Subject: Destiny Discussion: Keeping things in Perspective
Subject: Destiny Discussion: Keeping things in Perspective

Posted by: Puma Knight
You make some excellent points, Hylebos.

I prefer FPS, myself, but as you said there are pros and cons to both. However, there is one main point I would like to argue. That of first-person mobility.
Posted by: Hylebos
Unfortunately, platforming elements don't really work out well in the first person perspective; there are far too many elements that compete for your attention. On one hand, you're above a bottomless pit, and you want to be looking down at your feet to ensure that you make the jump to the next platform. On the other hand, there's an alien on the other side of the chasm who is taking advantage of your predicament to turn you into swiss cheese. If you take your reticle off the platforms to aim and fight, you fall to your death. If you keep your focus on the platforms, you cannot defend yourself. First Person Platforming doesn't blend with First Person Shooting because you are incapable of looking in two different directions at the same time. However, that problem doesn't exist in the third person perspective, where your expanded vision allows you to aim at your foe while keeping an eye on the platforms.

So as you can see, the first advantage of the third person perspective directly enables a second advantage: Mobillity. With the expanded vision to properly spot edges, platforms, and environmental hazards, a developer can give the player the increased mobillity that he needs to properly navigate a more complex and interesting environment. Furthermore, if you design your game so that the mobillity is easy to utilize but difficult to master, then you have added yet another element of skill to the gameplay. A strong player will be able to flow quickly through the most convoluted of maps, allowing them to outrun and outposition their less skilled opponents.


Some games have pulled of first-person platformers quite well. The biggest example that comes to mind is Mirror's Edge. The entire game was a first-person platform game that focused on mobility and managed to pull it off spectacularly. If anything, being in the first-person gave you a greater feel and awareness of the environment. Granted, gun use by the protagonist was minimal, but still worked quite well. Adding extra mobility to an FPS could make players focus on maneuverable advantage than just pure firepower, causing any confrontation to be even more intense.

Also, you talked about adding skills within the game. Yes, having to master new skills can be difficult, but doesn't that just add to the enjoyment of the experience? Humans are wired to desire achievement or advancement. When we see that we are getting better at something, we tend to enjoy it.

What I am trying to say is that having a game in the first-person does not limit the mobility of the player. I believe that Bungie's new game will be in the first person and hope that they will include extended mobility in it than was given in the Halo series.
Alright, I watched a speed run of the first four levels of Mirror's Edge last night, and while there wasn't a ton of combat (for obvious reasons), I've got a good idea of how the platforming works. So, I wasn't too far off from my earlier analysis. It appears that not every environment is super sterile, and the red pipes and ramps and such is "runner vision" which kicks in as you get closer to the object.

It also seemed like most the action occured directly in front of the player. It didn't seem like there were situations where you were strafing and fighting while attempting to jump, which probably makes sense, as this game is a platformer first and a shooter second.

But I could possibly see mobillity working out in a first person shooter. Even something as simple as a double jump (that has to be used wisely to get the most out of your jump or to make certain jumps) and the abillity to grab onto ledges to pull yourself up would be amazing. I could imagine leaping out of a window, grabbing onto the window ledge of the next building, popping up to kill an enemy in the next room, and then vaulting over the ledge to continue inside.

I still think it would be a lot more awkward though. You said this earlier:Also, you talked about adding skills within the game. Yes, having to master new skills can be difficult, but doesn't that just add to the enjoyment of the experience? Humans are wired to desire achievement or advancement. When we see that we are getting better at something, we tend to enjoy it.Offering difficult skills to master does add a ton of enjoyment to the game, but if that skill is frustrating to learn, then the entire process isn't going to be enjoyable right?

From playing Halo, there were always some cool jumps on certain levels, but it took a long time to memorize the exact timing of the jump to pull it off. Sure, if I could look at my feet and find the right place to stand before jumping it would be a lot easier, but at that point I'm not able to fight back while preparing for the jump. And unlike in Mirror's Edge, I won't always be in a situation where I'm running directly towards my opponent while attempting a jump, and there won't always be a colorful ramp that is exactly measured out to be the right distance to jump from.

In the third person perspective however, I'd have just enough vision to either side to attempt those jumps while strafing, and have enough vision of the floor around my character to see where to stand when I'm about to jump without taking my reticle off my opponent. You'll notice I said that the mobillity should be "easy to learn, but difficult to master". The easy part comes from having extra visual information which makes things a lot more forgiving for beginning players who don't have the map muscle memorized.

We shall see. More mobillity would be an acceptable outcome in either the first or third person perspective, and I am interested in seeing the route that Bungie shall take. If you have any more examples of FPS's with expanded vision, then I would love to hear them so I can take a look at them.

Posted by: IRISH 249
I expect it to be revolutionary. Perhaps expecting too much? Well Halo CE was revolutionary so I think Bungie is up to the task.

Great thread.
Only by holding Bungie to impossible standards will they begin to meet them :)

Posted by: Old Papa Rich
Is it because of the visual perspective? I don't know. I just know how I felt playing those games. I was John Marston. I was Batman. I was Commander Sheppard. That's quite an investment. I love Halo. It's one of my favorite games of all time. But I don't think I ever had that intense of a feeling playing Halo like I did these other examples.
I know what you mean. In particular, playing Dark Souls cemented for me just how immersive the third person perspective is. You'll notice that all my examples of the "feed back loop" that occurs in the third person perspective are subtle references to the Ornstein and Smough boss fight, which was one of the most immersive experiences I've ever played in a videogame. It put me on the edge of my seat to play that fight, it was so beautifully done...

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
However, if they went third person, had more of an open world dynamic, made the first WoW competitor since... WoW and did all of this on a console, the critics would have a hard time criticizing them. Sure, they could still make comments about the monotony of the continued Space Theme but all they could do was point out how Bungie is doing something they're clearly amazing at doing.
Hmm... I'm not sure if WoW would exactly be competing with this game, as Destiny is a console MMO-Style Shooter and WoW is a PC MMORPG.

Heck, we don't even really know if there will be an expanded player cap. I mean, you would think that there would be one since they called it "MMO-Style", but they literally could have just been referring to the persistant elements and the client based mission structure... it worries me because I'd love to be able to play with more than 16 people at a time...

Posted by: SkilPhil
I think the weaknesses of first person gameplay often resemble our own weaknesses, I dont want to be able to see behind me because I can't in real life unless I physically turn around.
Eh, that's never bothered me too terribly. Afterall, while the first person perspective resembles our own weaknesses, it doesn't resemble our strengths either. While we can quickly snap our heads to a certain position and react to what's coming in the blink of an eye, there just aren't enough buttons on the controller to do that in a videogame (unless Bungie's next game is Kinect friendly).

It just seems like in a game where you play as a super soldier that doesn't resemble our own weaknesses as humans (you know, jumpping 10 feet into the air and getting back to full health in a few seconds after being shot with bullets), having expanded vision isn't too much of a stretch. Videogames exist because we can't do these sort of things in real life, right?

Working down the comments, I'll reply to more as I go along, and feel free to reply back!

[Edited on 08.24.2012 10:11 AM PDT]

  • 08.24.2012 10:10 AM PDT

Posted by: HylebosPosted by: antony X1000
I always find that the third person perspective makes things feel really clunky in a shooter. Maybe that's just because I heavily favour shooters using first person, but it definitely feels like they play more fluidly in that perspective to me.
I know where you're coming from, but I'm not entirely convinced that it's neccessarily a fault of the third person perspective but rather that developer's implementation of it. Were there any specific games you had in mind that demonstrated this clunkyness?
Gears of War and Ghost Recon both come to mind. Both are great games, but I find both use quite an awkward control scheme (at least in my opinion). This may not directly be a fault of the third person perspective, but of certain elements typical of the genre. A good example are the cover systems that both games use, which from what I remember use buttons which are also used for other functions, although please correct me if I'm wrong. Again though, the fact that I find the control schemes hard to use may be due to the fact that I'm too used to shooters using first person.

I wouldn't oppose a game mainly using the first person view, but switching to third person for certain things, like vehicles in Halo, or to use the cover system example again, taking cover in Rainbow Six. Obviously driving and taking cover are much better in the third person perspective.

  • 08.24.2012 10:31 AM PDT

Ugh...

First on a BWU.. yeah, I'm cool.

ODST;MYTHIC Screenshot winner! One of the first to get their hands on the mythic map pack.

Damn you! I read it all! I was so engulfed in reading I forgot that I had a pizza to cook. I blame you if I starve!

On to what I think; I don't like 3rd person in PvP competitive games. It can work for a single player experience, it works for platformers. But the disadvantages in multi-player are abundant. You've done a good job at listing them. So I won't go into that.

You've also said that Bungie has a WEALTH of knowledge in the First Person perspective. I don't think they would abandon that. Now your main argument against this is, they have the potential to do something no one else is doing. That they'll revolutionize, and they can't do that with a first person game.

I disagree. A 3rd person MMO type game. That's not revolutionary. A first person one however, I don't know of many games that are of that genre. The former, there's tons.

I don't think they'll switch from the first person perspective. I think they'll innovate in other ways. I don't know exactly how, but I'm thinking in a giant open world multi-player on the console mixing story with competitive multi-player kind of thing.

  • 08.24.2012 12:13 PM PDT

Ah, someone leaked. Now to find the leak and.... plug it.
With justice.

I use coup 5
Never Played halo 1 = Invalid opinion
Bloom isn't whats broken, its your idea of what good is and your opinion
Thats like saying uber nerf armor lock because like 20 percent of the community hates it. Oh wait..................

Ok first off

THAT IS A WALL MAN
thats bigger that the version 2.0 cortana 5 speculation thread.

that aside.
i personally feel that taking the game down a 3rd person view path would be a bad idea. maybe im just being close minded but i have Never enjoyed a shooter in 3rd person.
/opinion

[Edited on 08.24.2012 4:14 PM PDT]

  • 08.24.2012 4:13 PM PDT

Half of what I say is true. The other half are also lies.


░█▀▀ ░█▀█ ░█ ░█▀▀ ░░█▀▀ ░█▀█ ░█ ░█ ░░░
░█▀▀ ░█▀▀ ░█ ░█ ░░░░█▀▀ ░█▀█ ░█ ░█ ░░░
░▀▀▀ ░▀ ░░░▀ ░▀▀▀ ░░▀ ░░░▀░▀ ░▀ ░▀▀▀ ░

Always pleased to see wisdom here. Maybe a 97th person point of view? Or overhead?

  • 08.24.2012 4:36 PM PDT

Posted by: A Bit Of Zero
This thread would have appealed to me more if it was written with crayons.
Posted by: King Dutchy
I broke one of the cords for my X11s because I couldn't get past the final American course in Doritos Crash Course.


Posted by: Hylebos
Posted by: SkilPhil
I think the weaknesses of first person gameplay often resemble our own weaknesses, I dont want to be able to see behind me because I can't in real life unless I physically turn around.
Eh, that's never bothered me too terribly. Afterall, while the first person perspective resembles our own weaknesses, it doesn't resemble our strengths either. While we can quickly snap our heads to a certain position and react to what's coming in the blink of an eye, there just aren't enough buttons on the controller to do that in a videogame (unless Bungie's next game is Kinect friendly).

It just seems like in a game where you play as a super soldier that doesn't resemble our own weaknesses as humans (you know, jumpping 10 feet into the air and getting back to full health in a few seconds after being shot with bullets), having expanded vision isn't too much of a stretch. Videogames exist because we can't do these sort of things in real life, right?


Yeah I agree to a point, but the whole point in immersion is to encourage you to relate or at least imagine the fact you can jump ten feet and recharge your health without saying 'this is ridiculous'.

Having a balance between what is possible in real life and what isn't, is probably one of the most important balances in action/adventure gaming.

I think that's maybe why FPS's are (arguably) dominant in this particular genre, you get both ends of the scale, a first person perspective (very personal) of an unusual environment with unusual abilities (very alien).

I'm not saying FPS is better, its a personal choice, I'm just saying having expanded vision instead of a first person perspective, despite the setting or abilities, can still makes quite a big difference in terms of immersion and how you relate to the game.


Also on a side note, its interesting you mentioned snapping your head as a strength which isn't used, the new Counter Strike: Global Offensive allows you to snap 180 using RB which I haven't seen before.
Like you say though, it still takes up a button that could be used for better things, just thought it was a coincidence you mentioned it.

[Edited on 08.25.2012 7:46 AM PDT]

  • 08.24.2012 9:55 PM PDT

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
Since I may have rambled a bit, I'll try to restate my main point: with the third person perspective and the idea of MMO characteristics in a game, you can allow a decent amount of customizability that gives people all the identity and immersion they would've gotten out of a first person perspective. First person games use their set of tools to have you be immerse within the game, and third person games have another one, but they can be equally as effective.
Seems reasonable, even with what customization existed in Halo Reach I was able to create a Spartan that I recognized and thought was me.

Posted by: Izak609
By the way, third person does not give you a greater field of vision (FOV). FOV is measured in viewable degrees from the viewer. When you move into third person, the character is no longer the viewer.Ah, but who exactly is the viewer? Is it the pixels that are drawn onto the television that we call the "character", or is it the human being that sits in front of that television?Neither, in this instance. The "viewer" is the point at which the image is being broadcasted from, in the game. It's basically where the TV is in the game world.

Like I said, FOV is no longer measured from the character's placement when not in first person, as where he stands is now irrelevant to the FOV.
Now we're arguing semantics >_>

Posted by: Sven Nietzsche
An example of a exceptional 3rd person shooter HUD is the one seen in the Dead Space franchise. I particularly enjoyed the use of the characters armor to show health/power. If Destiny ends up as a 3rd person shooter, I hope Bungie employs this technique in some way.
I always did like the idea of a minimal HUD.

  • 08.25.2012 9:20 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Mythic Member
  • gamertag: Kalriq
  • user homepage:

Twitter.
WyIdfyre: 'lol, who the hell would even wear those?'
AuSam: 'lol, who the hell would even have sex with dogs?'

-K-

I'd love an SPS (Skyrim Person Shooter), when I can happily switch between first and third person, for the sake of ease of combat, but also to appreciate how awesome I look, and free roam stuff (if of course, free roam is present.)

  • 08.25.2012 10:41 AM PDT

Good read. Great article.

  • 08.25.2012 11:00 AM PDT

Hey I am a big Bungie fan ever since I played Halo 2. I love the series, I love Bungie. I have made a few Bungie logos in my metal shop.

I can't wait to see destiny.

  • 08.25.2012 11:06 AM PDT

I acknowledge my user name is stupid. However, I promise I'm not.

Disclaimer: The latter is a lie.

Really interesting thread, Hylebos. I also agree with other users in that a possible melee system could shine within a MMO game.

  • 08.25.2012 11:19 AM PDT

My name is Mark Mezzetta and I was a beta tester for Bungie's game Oni and Take Two's game Myth 3: The Wolf Age.

Bungie has done third person perspective before with Oni.

If this game is a massive multiplayer shooter, then I have no doubt it will be first person perspective. We probably will have a choice for a first person or third person (especially for vehicles), but the standard view for a shooter (especially in a vast environment) needs to be first person.

  • 08.25.2012 11:22 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Exalted Unexplainable Member

Posted by: Hylebos
Posted by: Izak609
By the way, third person does not give you a greater field of vision (FOV). FOV is measured in viewable degrees from the viewer. When you move into third person, the character is no longer the viewer.Ah, but who exactly is the viewer? Is it the pixels that are drawn onto the television that we call the "character", or is it the human being that sits in front of that television?Neither, in this instance. The "viewer" is the point at which the image is being broadcasted from, in the game. It's basically where the TV is in the game world.

Like I said, FOV is no longer measured from the character's placement when not in first person, as where he stands is now irrelevant to the FOV.
Now we're arguing semantics >_>
My intent was not to argue. I was not trying to make any sort of point of why third or first person is better. Think of this as me just saying you spelled a word wrong, nothing more.

The original post says third person is "expanded vision", that you get a "much larger view of the battlefield", and calls it "extra visual information", but third person does not do any of that, and I see the point you're making when you say that. What third person does is bring some arguably more concerning visual information to the player, at the cost of other visual information.

  • 08.25.2012 1:18 PM PDT

I acknowledge my user name is stupid. However, I promise I'm not.

Disclaimer: The latter is a lie.

It would be funny if it was a RTS game after reading you guys squabble.`

  • 08.26.2012 6:24 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Do not waste your tears, I was not born to watch the world grow dim. Life is not measured in years, but by the deeds of men.

Posted by: goldhawk
We should know better, because we are better.

Veil of Vision is my new favourite term. Thank you.

I think 3rd person could work well. However, most 3rd person games these days are cover based Mass Effect and GoW being the most prominent. If Bungie went with 3rd person, I think people might subconsciously drop back into their routines of fire and hide, even if there is no cover aside from standing behind a wall. I think that if the action is to keep moving quickly, the players need some sort of way to circumvent that cover. A parkour system would be beneficial. You could hide behind a stone wall come hell or high water, but your wall means nothing if the other guy climbs up onto a roof and drops grenades through the skylight. A combination of a cover system and the ability to navigate the maps rapidly could work out well.

  • 08.26.2012 7:32 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member

I understand nothing because my life is a conspiracy.


Posted by: pfhor007
Bungie has done third person perspective before with Oni.
Well that was Bungie West, so they were a different studio with a different vision at that time.

  • 08.26.2012 7:42 AM PDT

What goes here??

Good read!

  • 08.26.2012 7:52 AM PDT

My name is Mark Mezzetta and I was a beta tester for Bungie's game Oni and Take Two's game Myth 3: The Wolf Age.

Posted by: lime013

Posted by: pfhor007
Bungie has done third person perspective before with Oni.
Well that was Bungie West, so they were a different studio with a different vision at that time.


...and 5 members from the Oni team are still with Bungie (David Dunn, Chris Butcher, Lorraine McLees, Curtis Creamer, and Joseph Staten).

  • 08.26.2012 9:42 AM PDT

Posted by: Enormous Corgi
Posted by: Unanimate Objec
There's no way Nate Hawbaker's favorite hero is Alan Stuart


ALAN IS A BEAUTIFUL MAN!


Posted by: Xd00999



It being first or third person with freedom of movement would be tremendously awesome.

  • 08.26.2012 11:33 AM PDT

Posted by: Izak609
What about... second person!? :D

MAIN BODY:I mostly prefer first person. But I wouldn't be discouraged if Destiny's third person. Yes, first person is common in shooters. But isn't third person just as common in MMO's?

Although third person does have some benefits to your vision (as you see a little behind yourself and around corners), the benefits are unnatural, and therefore set unnatural rules for combat, making the game a little more difficult to understand, less believable, changing the combat itself (and the level of experience players can reach, in my speculative opinion).

Not to mention that third person has flaws in it's perspective. In third person, your ability to see into the distance is worsened by how far behind your character the camera is. Don't forget about all the annoying occasions where the camera finds a little hole where it could completely blind you for a split second. And although you see around your character better, your character is constantly blocking a portion of the center of your screen. And if you push the camera further back (making the character take up less space), you make the player's vision even more unnatural, worsen his ability to see into the distance and give your camera more chances to find those blinding holes.

REPLY TO OP:By the way, third person does not give you a greater field of vision (FOV). FOV is measured in viewable degrees from the viewer. When you move into third person, the character is no longer the viewer.

And I can actually move and shoot quite fluidly in first person, even better than I could in third person, as I know where the center of my mass is in first person, but have to judge where between the character's feet the center is in third. Perhaps it's also because I'm used to judging how tall my character is, so third person doesn't help so much with that.

PS:I suck at writing. If you read this long, boring, and opinionated post, thank you for baring with my complete disorganization.


I agree. Also, as you said, camera distance results in unfavorable difficulty seeing far away. Bungie is bound to add split-screen (as they always have), so with even smaller screens it'll be a challenge to spot targets just a couple hundred yards out.
Imo, first person functions better than third person, but this opinion is probably quite biased.

[Edited on 08.26.2012 2:42 PM PDT]

  • 08.26.2012 2:42 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Do not waste your tears, I was not born to watch the world grow dim. Life is not measured in years, but by the deeds of men.

Posted by: goldhawk
We should know better, because we are better.


Posted by: Unanimate Objec

Posted by: Xd00999



It being first or third person with freedom of movement would be tremendously awesome.

I'm thinking Assassin's Creed level of freedom of movement. Imagine being in the area the size of one of AC's multiplayer maps, but everyone has guns. I think that would be fun.

  • 08.26.2012 2:57 PM PDT

Key


Posted by: Xd00999

Posted by: Unanimate Objec

Posted by: Xd00999



It being first or third person with freedom of movement would be tremendously awesome.

I'm thinking Assassin's Creed level of freedom of movement. Imagine being in the area the size of one of AC's multiplayer maps, but everyone has guns. I think that would be fun.

Maybe I'm reading your post wrong, but it looks like you've forgotten about the dragons?

  • 08.26.2012 2:59 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Do not waste your tears, I was not born to watch the world grow dim. Life is not measured in years, but by the deeds of men.

Posted by: goldhawk
We should know better, because we are better.


Posted by: CrazzySnipe55

Posted by: Xd00999

Posted by: Unanimate Objec

Posted by: Xd00999



It being first or third person with freedom of movement would be tremendously awesome.

I'm thinking Assassin's Creed level of freedom of movement. Imagine being in the area the size of one of AC's multiplayer maps, but everyone has guns. I think that would be fun.

Maybe I'm reading your post wrong, but it looks like you've forgotten about the dragons?

Dragons would ruin map control worse than the jetpack. Everyone gets a hydra or wyvern instead.

  • 08.26.2012 3:02 PM PDT

Key


Posted by: Xd00999

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55

Posted by: Xd00999

Posted by: Unanimate Objec

Posted by: Xd00999



It being first or third person with freedom of movement would be tremendously awesome.

I'm thinking Assassin's Creed level of freedom of movement. Imagine being in the area the size of one of AC's multiplayer maps, but everyone has guns. I think that would be fun.

Maybe I'm reading your post wrong, but it looks like you've forgotten about the dragons?

Dragons would ruin map control worse than the jetpack. Everyone gets a hydra or wyvern instead.

Dragons are the enemies...? I'm not sure what game you're talking about but it's not Destiny.

  • 08.26.2012 3:06 PM PDT

Non facete nobis calcitrare vestrvm perinaevm.

Posted by: Achronos
You imply a level of control over Halo: Reach matchmaking that we no longer have. Or, in your vernacular, it isn't our shiznit anymore.


Active 9/1/11, Heroic 12/25/12

The 3rd person perspective is a great way to differentiate Destiny from most of the shooters on the market. Bungie has been emphasizing how they want to create something totally new since they left Halo, I really hope they don't create another FPS. The only problem about the 3rd person perspective is the gameplay that is currently dominating the genre. Cover based gunfights are getting old, if Bungie does decide to go with 3rd person they need to radically change they way they play.

  • 08.26.2012 3:44 PM PDT