- Hylebos
- |
- Fabled Mythic Member
Posted by: Unanimate Objec
Posted by: MasterSin
Well I've seen this game Arma II with the mode DayZ and it's very similar to a FPS/RPG and you have the choice to switch from first person to third person and I don't see any bad change or if that affects the game. But I think, the capability to switch from both perspectives allows you to be more aware of your surroundings.
This is an excellent example of a game that allows great gameplay in both Field of Views. Playing DayZ is great in first-person because you can see your hands, feet, and body which makes you think you are there running for your dear life.
Then you have third-person in the game which really helps when you're sniping, peaking around corners, or just seeing what your character looks like.
As opposed to Skyrim, this third-person is much more than just aesthetics, it can be a game changer.
Skyrim was very limited in what it could do in third-person, but DayZ allowed you to drive, fly, or walk in third-person while allowing room for first-person, which makes it a very enjoyable game.DayZ is a mod of ARMA II right? I wonder if the original game had the option to swap perspectives. I don't actually know much about either game, so I should do some research.
Posted by: antony X1000
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.Yeah, cover based shooters can sometimes have somewhat awkward controls though I've found it's gotten a lot better over the years.
Posted by: POKEY CLYDE
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!I blame myself if my writing wasn't enough to sustain you indefinitely.
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.How many of them are shooters though? Just curious, I'm not exactly an expert on the different types of MMOs.
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. Yeah, I could see that happening. The third person perspective seems like a long shot, but it is a possibillity that is interesting to think about.
Posted by: shadow 2648
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 Having an opinion is fine, but lets dig a bit deeper for the sake of discussion. Why do you not enjoy third person shooters? Is there anything in particular that makes you throw your hands up in frustration? These are the questions we must ask to iluminate the problems that must be tackled for something like this to work.
Posted by: TilledMule9946
Always pleased to see wisdom here. Maybe a 97th person point of view? Or overhead?Wouldn't 97th person perspective be the same thing as 3rd person perspective? Or are you controlling your character through binoculars?
As for overhead, I don't particularly see that working well with shooters, and especially not in a Bungie game. They like their skyboxes :)
Posted by: SkilPhil
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.I'm not sure about the PC version, but interestingly enough Marathon Durandal for Xbox Live Arcade had such a feature. Unfortunately you had to hold the button down to look in that direction, you would snap back to normal as soon as you let go, which made the feature awkward to use and ultimately made it rather worthless. A quick turn would have worked so much better..
Posted by: Xd00999
Veil of Vision is my new favourite term. Thank you.Thank ChadGarion25, my older brother. I had shown him my thread prior to posting for his feedback, and he was reading that particular paragraph, which was a lot more awkward and lengthy back then as I struggled to describe what my idea would look like.
"Isn't this just like Fog of War, but for shooters?" he said.
I paused, and replied "That's a very good way of describing it, but usually with Fog of War you share vision with your allies, which would be awkward in s a shooter..."
"So it's more of a Veil of Vision?" he said.
I grinned.
"More like a Shroud of Sight."
The conversation was amusing enough to make it into the thread as a reference.
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.Indeed. Especially if you can do crazy crap like jumping onto the outside of a window ledge, firing up into the room, popping down down below the ledge to reload, and then vaulting into the room and charging.