87 réponses à ce sujet

[Cyberarmy]

simfamSP wrote...

Since when was Gothic first person?

That troubles me too, as someone finished the game numerous times and evem with comminty patches i havent seen such a thing.


In any Gothic game!

[LeandroBraz]

I don't hate FPS, I would be willing to play a ME FPS, but the thing is, I love ME TPS gameplay, I'm not willing to sacrifice this in exchange for a FPS. I would be okay with a spin off FPS, but I expect ME4 to be the good TPS/RPG I know...

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Eurypterid wrote...

I've seen this stated a number of times in discussion about FP games.

I find it has the exact opposite effect for me. Nothing throws me out of a game faster than FP perspective since I find it disorienting, extremely difficult to judge distance/depth, and it's like looking through a small window. Not at all life-like, IMO. I hate FP perspective bad enough that I'll bypass almost any game if it doesn't also offer a TP viewpoint.

The point is in reality you have to handle things and decide in first person (not much different to reality). So it enhances your ability to observe, deal with and be cautious. 3rd Person is like you're controlling a robot/creature from above (too easy).

Fantasy RPGs are better to be 3rd Person, but Sci-fi RPGs better be 1st person.

I prefer 3rd person in racing games, but I also like far above camera in RPGs like NWN.

[Andarthiel_Demigod]

No problems with FPS games, I actually love some of them eg.Thief, Bioshock etc.
It's more individual games that I find dull or lacking(Crysis for example). 

[sympathy4sarenreturns]

My guess, Kaiser, is that EA has a piece-meal approach, thinking that a list of games can counter and nearly meet CoD revenue with a laundry list of games to compensate, even though initially one would recognize cost may be a tick higher. You highlighted some brilliant and accurate points. Mass Effect is likely part of that cog....we already know a first-person multiplayer game was on the table before getting scrapped....before ME3

Modifié par sympathy4sarenreturns, 21 novembre 2012 - 02:57 .

[sympathy4sarenreturns]

I love the Fallout argument. Can we scrap regular shooting and go primarily V.A.T.S.? Wait....no?

[Eurypterid]

Legatus Arianus wrote...


The point is in reality you have to handle things and decide in first person (not much different to reality). So it enhances your ability to observe, deal with and be cautious. 3rd Person is like you're controlling a robot/creature from above (too easy).

Fantasy RPGs are better to be 3rd Person, but Sci-fi RPGs better be 1st person.

 

I find this argument lacking.

How does it 'enhance' your ability to be cautious or to observe? I don't find that at all.

In what way is a sci-fi RPG different than a fantasy RPG other than the setting/genre? I see no reason a sci-fi RPG is 'better' as a FP perspective. As I stated, this does not work for me whether the setting is sci-fi, fantasy, streampunk, or anything else.

[bmwcrazy]

I seriously don't understand why this is such a big deal to you guys.

Some games work better in first person since it's more up close and personal. Some games are better in third person like strategy, role playing, and fighting games.

I certainly wouldn't pass up a good game solely because it's in first person.

Modifié par bmwcrazy, 21 novembre 2012 - 04:00 .

[Dominus]

How does it 'enhance' your ability to be cautious or to observe?

As far as I can tell, it doesn't. If it did, options like glowing quest items(i.e. BioShock) would not exist. However, I'll always prefer first-person for a number of reasons. When I play, say, a more Narrative-Based Video game, I'd prefer to see it as if I were really there. You mentioned first-person feels like looking through a small-window, and I'd say quite the same about third-person. I don't feel attached to said character(s), I'm just watching them and manipulating them from a distance. I can still greatly enjoy a game from that perspective, but isn't my favorite by default.

I see no reason a sci-fi RPG is 'better' as a FP perspective.

Objectively, it isn't. Just a set of different tastes from different sides of an audience.

Modifié par DominusVita, 21 novembre 2012 - 04:15 .

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

How does it 'enhance' your ability to be cautious or to observe?

IT DOES. Comparing NWN to Skyrim at FP ... I see enemies coming from everywhere in 3rd person view, I'm not surprised, I don't panic, I might even yawn! ... But if I play Skyrim, when I'm in a hall or on a hill I have to be always cautious or I might get backstabbed. This is too much to bear, so 3rd person is favorable.

In Sci-fi games things aren't much better but you have badass guns and lots of shield and stuff. If you play first person you do enhance your abilities (still sometimes get surprised) ... If you play 3rd person, the experience is easy and boring.. in some games lame.

It's a psychological matter about causing you watch your back, observe here and there, the possible danger and excitement. It's important for martial arts, hunting and survival skills. But indeed you can say now lolSUBJECTIVElol

Not convincing? ... whatever. 

Modifié par Legatus Arianus, 21 novembre 2012 - 04:48 .

[Selene Moonsong]

^ Third person allows for one thing that FPV does not: peripheral vision. FPV is always limited where you are looking. It also makes up for a lack of discreet surround sound audio, and FPS does cause vertigo issues with many people, myself included.  FPV does not add any more 'realism' than TPV.

As for NWN, The common view is Isometeric, rather than TPV, but it is not an action game in the same way a game like Mass Effect is, it is a combat strategy RPG.

FPS may well be fun for many, but others wish not to be physically discomforted or even made ill when playing a game.

Modifié par Selene Moonsong, 21 novembre 2012 - 09:58 .

[Dominus]

At the end of the day, both have pros and cons, and I don't think the fans will be able to agree if one is objectively 'better' or 'worse'. It's true though that you have a far better awareness of your surroundings through third person. Not all games would've been a wise idea in FP, either - I couldn't imagine playing an RTS in first-person. I think a C&C game was slated to try that out once called "Tiberium", and ended up getting canned.

Modifié par DominusVita, 21 novembre 2012 - 05:14 .

[ObserverStatus]

It's not that I hate shooters, I just wish that RPG makers would hybridize the genre with something different for a change. Real time strategies perhaps.

[Eurypterid]

Legatus Arianus wrote...


IT DOES. Comparing NWN to Skyrim at FP ... I see enemies coming from everywhere in 3rd person view, I'm not surprised, I don't panic, I might even yawn! ... But if I play Skyrim, when I'm in a hall or on a hill I have to be always cautious or I might get backstabbed. This is too much to bear, so 3rd person is favorable.

In Sci-fi games things aren't much better but you have badass guns and lots of shield and stuff. If you play first person you do enhance your abilities (still sometimes get surprised) ... If you play 3rd person, the experience is easy and boring.. in some games lame.

It's a psychological matter about causing you watch your back, observe here and there, the possible danger and excitement. It's important for martial arts, hunting and survival skills. But indeed you can say now lolSUBJECTIVElol

Not convincing? ... whatever. 

Nope, not convincing. Sorry.

At the end of the day, I think Dominus nailed it. As far as your example of the TP vs FP, one of the big reasons I prefer TP is I like seeing the battlefield from that view (isometric or third, it's all good to me) so I can plan tactics and strategize. It's what I prefer in my games.

I'm not saying FP is bad or wrong. If you like it, more power to you. It means you have more games to choose from that you'll probably enjoy. But I just can't enjoy a FP game nearly as much as a TP or isometric game, if at all. And I've tried, believe me. So any game that offers FP-only is almost invariably a waste of money for me. I don't enjoy them. No matter what 'advantages' people may put forth for the FP view, it just doesn't work for me.

So, yes, subjective. Very much so.

[Maria Caliban]

I 'understand' a person's aversion to FP perspectives the same why I understand an aversion to strawberry ice cream. Other than the viewpoint making them ill, I classify most reasons given as being post hoc justifications.

DominusVita wrote...

I'm personally not opposed to the idea, but I get the feeling that the fanbase will be too skewed in
voting for that possibility to get a majority in favor of First-Person.

The ME fans would buy ME 4 even if EA substituted a leaf of cabbage for the game CD.

Yes, people would complain, but that's always been the case.

[Quixal]

I personally dislike FP perspective. Does that make it bad? No. I am just much less likely to buy a game if the only option is FP perspective. Others prefer it or are fine either way so the game will sell no matter my personal stance.

[Eurypterid]

Maria Caliban wrote...
Other than the viewpoint making them ill, I classify most reasons given as being post hoc justifications.

Kind of like most reasons for why FP is better? 

[sympathy4sarenreturns]

What some people REALLY want is for Mass Effect to be like Halo. If it does not apply to you, simply ignore. But that's a fact.

[Maria Caliban]

Eurypterid wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...
Other than the viewpoint making them ill, I classify most reasons given as being post hoc justifications.

Kind of like most reasons for why FP is better? 

Yes.

Selene Moonsong wrote...

^ Third person allows for one thing that FPV does not: peripheral vision.

I disagree.

http://forums.forzam...9/original.aspx

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 22 novembre 2012 - 05:25 .

[naughty99]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

Arcian wrote...

But the point is to have FP and TP perspectives you can switch between at any point in the game. As a result, people can play in the perspective they prefer best.

Or do you guys hate optional choices?

I am 100% down with toggles if they're well done.  But that's the criteria.  If they're well done, and that's a resource cost.  FP and TP perspectives affect FOV and camera at least.  I'd rather have one well-done perspective than two half-assed ones for the sake of variety.

Usually there is no toggle, you just scroll your mouse wheel to zoom in or out. It does seem to require doubling up on the player animations and weapon models, however.

Modifié par naughty99, 22 novembre 2012 - 06:27 .

[masleslie]

Fidget6 wrote...

I don't play too many FPS's because they literally make me dizzy and nauseous for some reason. If I REALLY like the game I'll play as long as my body will allow me to before I feel like I have to puke. Pretty much the only first person game I play regularly is Mirror's Edge. 

I'm with you on that. Mirrors Edge is hugely underated & arguably the only first person game with a reason for it. The first person added to the tension, restricting your view till the last second as you were running toward the edge of a roof. In most games first person is used either to appeal to a particular market (which is generally not the Mass Effect audience) or quite frankly because it's quicker & cheaper to develop because there is less animation required. Neither of these are good reasons to use first person in a Mass Effect game. In fact it would likely sink the franchise as far as it's existing fanbase is concerned.

[masleslie]

Eurypterid wrote...

Grubas wrote...
First Person Perspective is more immersive, since puts you at eye level with the characters you interact.

I've seen this stated a number of times in discussion about FP games.

I find it has the exact opposite effect for me. Nothing throws me out of a game faster than FP perspective since I find it disorienting, extremely difficult to judge distance/depth, and it's like looking through a small window. Not at all life-like, IMO. I hate FP perspective bad enough that I'll bypass almost any game if it doesn't also offer a TP viewpoint.

Pretty much how i feel. The first peson does nothing to help you relate to the character. In fact first person games have been notorious for 'sketchy' characterisation at best, as it is generally accepted that the audience will always know they are playing themselves in the game.

No first person game has effectively managed to deal with the distortion toward the edges of the screen at certain angles. No first person game has managed to give the player anything like a real life peripheral vision. No first person game has allowed you to change your view by turning your head naturally without changing your direction of movement. Some of those problems also affect third person but to a far lesser extent. They are also compensated for by the artificial sense of peripheal vision that you get from moving the viewpoint back three feet or so. There is simply no benefit to first person view over third person except for the fact that some people like it!

Modifié par masleslie, 22 novembre 2012 - 09:52 .