- Hylebos
- |
- Fabled Mythic Member
Posted by: lime013
You brought of great points throughout the article, but I think Bungie does want to reinvent the first person shooter (as well as many other aspects of video games).
First of all, I don't think Bungie would want to stray too far away from what made them so successful, which was the first person shooter known as Halo (obviously). But they were also successful with other FPS games like Pathways into Darkness or the Marathon series. Also, Bungie didn't move on from Halo because they were tired of the first person shooter genre, they were tired of the Halo Universe;A very fair point that I cannot deny.
They wanted to make something new because they had an idea and wanted to peruse it. But, Halo wasn't really your traditional first person shooter to begin with.
As any fan of the Halo series would know, when you get onto a vehicle or a turret (save the front seat of the Warthog in Combat Evolved or the Falcon gunner in Reach), the perspective of the game switches to third person. So Halo sort of bridged the gap between the two shooters.Eh, while Bungie does take advantage of the third person perspective with vehicles, I personally wouldn't quite call it a bridging of the two shooters. I wrote this article with infantry combat in mind, I didn't particularly have much of a problem with the way that they had done vehicles beyond some of the more recent additions to the series (for example, I feel strongly that there was no need for Armor Lock to instantly destroy a splattering vehicle, that's just a waste). I always assumed that if they did vehicles in Destiny, they would do it in the third person perspective. But go on...
Anyways, in your post, you mention how Fallout/The Elder Scrolls let you play in both perspectives, but was mainly an first person shooter, and vice versa for Battlefront. This doesn't mean Bungie has to pick one or the other, this means that they can expand, or reinvent, what they did in Halo and make a shooter that combines these elements in major ways. Now in my opinion, they can approach this in two ways: toggle or set. Instead of elaborating on those two aspects, let's just dive in to the most likely possibility of how this could work.
Imagine this: Halo combined with Uncharted (or Assassin's Creed). Sounds pretty cool, huh? But what is even cooler is that this could work. Instead of limiting the third person aspect to vehicles, why not expand it to the environment? This means that, just like in Halo, when not interacting with anything, you have the basic first person shooter. But now let's incorporate cover into this. A first person cover mechanic sound great on paper, but would not work well in-game. That is why it would need to stay as a third person interaction, just like the Warthog or the Banshee. Then, after you exit this interaction, it goes right back into first person. But that's probably been done before. Now we have to expand on this.
I remember you saying in your original post that you find first person environments to be bland because you cannot interact with them in the way that you can in games like Uncharted and Assassin's Creed. But hat if we introduce this aspect of gameplay via the first to third person transmission that I've been talking about. Now environments can become more elaborate, interesting, interactive, creative, and cool without losing that famous first person gameplay. If this is incorporated into the game, now you can approach a building or a mountain and scale it in third person, then after you're done, smoothly transmission back into the comfortable first person mode.
Well, that's just my two cents on what I think there going to do, but once again, I loved how you broke down and analyzed those genres; It really helped develop my understanding of the two.Hmmm.
I could imagine that a little bit. When I was writing the thread, I imagined that it might be a bit difficult to implement controls for both a shooter and a platformer using the same 15 buttons, so I thought about putting in a part that went along the lines of "What if you could simply holster your gun by holding X which sort of swapped you from combat mode to exploring mobillity mode?". With your idea, said "combat mode" would occur from the first person perspective (which many people who have posted believe is better for combat), and then said "exploring mobillity mode" would occur from the third person perspective.
I could imagine it working, but I could definitely see a number of problems. First off, constantly swapping from first to third person as you enter or exit cover could be a tad jarring. It might work for vehicles, as ideally you aren't jumping in and out of your vehicle repeatedly, but in a firefight, constantly having the camera bust through your skull to resume the first person perspective might be a little too busy.
Second (though I'm not sure if this pertains to your original idea as it's more of a problem with my interpretation of it), if there is a seperate mode for first person combat and a seperate mode for third person exploring, I'm concerned about situations where someone is low on health, so they holster their gun and parkour away in third person mode. For the other player to follow them (since I've split the controls for combat and mobillity), he'd need to also holster his gun, which buys enough time for the first person to have his shields recharge. I mean, people hated how you could just sprint away in Reach, I don't imagine this working unless you could keep in step with the person while also firing your gun at him.
That's just what I can think of off the top of my head, though I imagine there's other stuff involving environment design. I'll give it more thought, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, it's very interesting to think about.
Posted by: Verachi
As much as I love third person shooters, I really don't want Destiny to become one. I like FPS a lot more. I love games such as Gears of war and Assassins creed but I can't stand their multiplayer, I only like them for the campaign.I know what you mean. While the third person perspective could be really awesome for exploration and such in the campaign, I would be hesitant to implement it if it meant that things on the multiplayer half of the game would suffer, as it is the multiplayer that tends to keep games alive and going.
Posted by: GPK Ethan
The problem with third person games though, is that it's insanely hard to immerse yourself into the story and make you feel like you are the character you're playing. Or is that just me? (i.e. lets say Reach was in third person; I would never be able to take myself seriously as Noble 6. I would never believe that I was him, which is exactly what Bungie was trying to do.)I think it's different for all of us. Just from playing Dark Souls, I've felt very immersed, I'm not sure if it's the atmosphere of the game or if it's simply because I've looked over the back of my character for so long that I've begun to commiserate with his plights (OH GOD THE 40 FOOT TALL GOLEM IS GOING TO SMASH MEEEE!).
I definitely feel that giving the player the abillity to customize the look of his character aids the immersion. I never had a problem in Reach looking at my Spartan and thinking to myself "Yeah, that's me." Watching someone else play the campaign as their own Spartan on the other hand was very jarring.