FPP only cutscenes might be a deal-breaker for me

+
Status
Not open for further replies.
FPP porn is very popular, especially with VR being much more commonplace. Not sure why people think this would be a nightmare, it's done all the time in the industry.

Also some of these comments are super cringy, and I hate that buzzword

All the time? I know only GTA did it before Cyberpunk. It gives CDPR a nice opportunity to do something different.
 
Don't generalize. I don't have any opinion on witcher since I haven't played any of them. Or, I tried playing them but didn't maintain interest for long.

I am here because of Cyberpunk 2077, nothing else.
its not a generalization, its a realization to the fact that if witcher didn't do well they wouldn't have the resources to make CP2077. I try to not have a myopic point of view therefore, in the witcher TPP worked(or atleast have an option for TPP). Why not stick with what people liked? Just curios, why exactly are you here for CP2077, alone you say?
 
Last edited:
its not a generalization, its a realization to the fact that if witcher didn't do well they wouldn't have the resources to make CP2077. I try to not have a myopic point of view therefore, in the witcher TPP worked(or atleast have an option for TPP). Why not stick with what people liked? Just curios, why exactly are you here for CP2077, alone you say?

I've never play the Witcher and I'm not interested in it at all despite people who claim iTz dA GRaTest gAME eVeR!!!!

I'm on the Cyberpunk forum because I'm interested in Cyberpunk, no other game. And I want what is best for the game. A vertical landscape and shooting mechanics, first person was the obvious choice.

The developers gave you a great game I'm sure you enjoyed for many hours. Allow them the freedom to make something new. This isn't their final game. There will be others if you don't like it.

As for cutscenes at first I wasn't sure. I thought it might be better to have them in TP. But then I remembered one of my favorite games Far Cry 3. That game was praised universally for its cinematic storytelling, and it was literally done all through first person. So if you believe CDPR have as much talent as Ubisoft, then they can make a great game in FP.

The TP cutscenes were always going to be small in number. The only game with A LOT of cutscenes that is open world from what I can remember is GTA 5. Everytime you spoke to someone it was a cutscene. Other than that cutscenes in open are either told from the camera perspective (FP or TP) or they happen sparingly.

It's good because it keeps with the consistency. Going from FP to TP every mission would annoy me.
 
Far Cry is joke game, nothing special or great about them, you end up on some place where one or two crazy person try to kill you and that's it.
No great story, no great character development, nothing it is fun joke game, so cutscenes can be in FPP, since 99% of the time you don't really care about it.

In RPG with good story, a lot of fun interesting characters, TPP cutscenes add much more, you see your character facial expresion, how he react to events, it add more cinematic feeling that just enhanced the whole cutscene,

So yeah, maybe FPP cutscenes are great for pure shooters like Far Cry, but for RPG i think is just big fuck up.

Also about sex scenes i am sure CDPR will not do full porn scenes, so that will also be weird from FPP.
 
I've never play the Witcher and I'm not interested in it at all despite people who claim iTz dA GRaTest gAME eVeR!!!!
Claimed in the same sense as you've claimed that ↓
...first person was the obvious choice.

---

Just curios, why exactly are you here for CP2077, alone you say?
I can imagine that some gamers, while not interested in fantasy games, are very intrigued by the cyberpunk genre and would like say their piece just like the rest.

---

Furthermore I think we should be more carefull about discussing camera perspective during gameplay, considering that at least two threads are already closed due to the continuous arguments of that specific subject.
 
Last edited:
I think it's appropriate to draw parallels between W3 and Cyberpunk. As others have said, without the success of W3 (highest rated game of all time by user score, on Metacritic) the making of Cyberpunk would hae been impossible. It's also likely that a significant portion of the playerbase is here because of those Witcher games. Sure, they will also draw in a big FPS crowd, but they're, in my opinion, a very fickle bunch.

Remember Anthem. Before release, there was so much hype around that game, especially on reddit. Everyone believed that it will revolutionize the looter shooter genre. It was mostly the old Bioware RPG fans that remained sceptical about it, but if you aired those concerns, you got downvoted to oblivion. And then, a short time after release, the whole community did a complete 180. Everyone was salty, mocked, whinied and bitched. That big crowd that came for Anthem moved on to Division 2 or Destiny after not even 2 weeks.

The point is, that FPS crowds are often fickle because shooters are dime in a dozen. The RPG crowd is often a lot more passionate and loyal to their IP's. There are simply not enough narrative focused singleplayer RPG's, with choice(!), coming out nowadays for them not to be. RPG's like that are slowly dying out. They are simply too expensive to make, compared to most genres.

I think when it comes to the perspective there are 3 camps. Camp 1 are the CDPR fanboys/girls, they unconditionally trust that whatever CDPR makes is going to be great. That group exsists mostly because of CDPR's gamer friendly approach and the goodwill garnered by the Witcher games. Camp 2 are the the FPS'lers, they just want to play a nice shooter in a stetting that interests them. But as I said, I believe, that this group will be the first one to jump ship when they don't like something (gunplay for example). Camp 3 would be the RPG enthusiasts, they are pretty vocal because they don't have many alternitives when it comes their genre. They probably loved the Witcher games and are very sceptical about changes on a winning formula. But I believe that they're more likely to tough it out if the game doesn't live up, because, again, little in the way of alternatives.
 
Can we please go back on topic, which is FPP cutscenes.

Otherwise the thread will end up on our "to be closed soon due to off-topic" list.
 
Another off-topic post deleted, so treat this as last warning - one more off-topic post will cause this thread to get locked.
 
Last edited:
Far Cry is joke game, nothing special or great about them, you end up on some place where one or two crazy person try to kill you and that's it.
No great story, no great character development, nothing it is fun joke game, so cutscenes can be in FPP, since 99% of the time you don't really care about it.

In RPG with good story, a lot of fun interesting characters, TPP cutscenes add much more, you see your character facial expresion, how he react to events, it add more cinematic feeling that just enhanced the whole cutscene,

So yeah, maybe FPP cutscenes are great for pure shooters like Far Cry, but for RPG i think is just big fuck up.

Also about sex scenes i am sure CDPR will not do full porn scenes, so that will also be weird from FPP.
Don't know why everyone is interested in the sex scenes. I don't care because I'll never use them. I find romance in games weird.

[edited off topic content]

Look at Mirrors Edge Catalyst, the FP cutscenes were much more exciting than the TP stuff.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

This guy is right. Not only is he right, but the explenation from CDPR for why they went with 1st person perspective for Cyberpunk is BS.

Patrick Mills/CDPR said:
In this game we wanted to put you in the shoes and in the body of the character you're controlling, so you feel like this is your character. First-person was one way to do that.

Unless the game is a VR release and sells with a bodysuit or some fantastic new and expensive technology, nobody is going to feel like they are the person in the game. This is the silliest concept in gaming ever. Everyone knows they are not the person in the game. Unless you have a super vivid fantasy life 1st person "immersion" just does't exist and is no different than 3rd person at all. As the person above mention in the steam community post, 1st person mechanics is a very aged technology compared to everything else of development in the game world the last 20 years. It's simply not realistic and doesn't feel or look like being in your own body. If CDPR cannot mimic this (eyes, head and body all move seperately), then the decision to go first person is indeed a poor decision. Most 1st person games can't even mimic the movements of an actual human being. Even most 3rd person games can't, but some did (MGSV). Moving around like some ghost with tunnel vision is highly unlikely to make a game better or more immersive.

I would understand it if CDPR had made an amazing new 1st person mechanic, but from what I can see and understand it is not. So why do it at all?

CDPR devs said:
Secondly, the developers felt that a first-person perspective offered a greater sense of immersion.

It's not the perspective that creates the immersion, it is the story and the gameplay (and ironically even the character)! Duh! You of all people should know that! Witcher 3 was one of the most immersive games I've ever played. For weeks on end I WAS Geralt and I was immersed deeply in the world of Gerlalt. I visited the places he visited, I did the things he did. And that was all down to a great story, great gameplay, great locations, great music and great characters. I think there is little or no reality or proof in saying 1st person games are or can be more immersive than 3rd person games, perhaps it is often the opposite even. It depends entirely, but personally I think it is down the the world, characters and surroundings. MGSV was perhaps not very immersive, but Death Stranding was, and that's a 3rd person game. Just to mention examples from one game creator, since I also happened to name this one as the one who actually made realistic human physiology and animations.

CDPR devs said:
Additionally, you have a greater immersion," Mills said. "And we can do some environmental stuff from first-person that you wouldn't be able to do in third-person.

Yes, you can be more sloppy. You can void making the character have any similarity to a human. You could just as well make it be a football and nobody would notice a difference. Just make some animations for the few times you actually look at your arm or your leg or whatever. You can probably also get away with a sloppier environment since people cannot naturally look 360 degrees around in 1st person.. This is actually the problem in the first place.

Ok, the problem with 1st person games is that they are not made in 3rd person perspective and then changed to 1st person view. This I think explains very well the poor human anatomy of 1st person games and the sloppy and weird looking surroundings. Instead of trying to build a world that mimics how things actually look in the real world, they try to mimic how things look through the human eyes and end up with some things looking like some acid trip or something like that.. I think this design logic is why things just aren't right in the 1st person world generally. The perspectives are all wrong and as a result everything seems to end up not being realistic at all and the 1st person view doesn't look like it is in a real world with a body in the same world and surrounding elements scaled and working relative to that body. Ok, perhaps CDPR and Cyberpunk2077 will not have this issue. But an example is ofcourse that in most 1st person games you can jump 2 meters straight up into the air but you cannot do something as simple as lay down on the ground and crawl. That's what I mean by they designed it as a first person game, not seeing how it would look as a 3rd person game. In fact I think most 1st person games would look ridiculous in 3rd person. Floating ghosts and all. I tried mimicking in my own room how a character from a first person game actually moves, it was hilarious and impossible.

CDPR devs said:
If nothing else, I think it's going to be really cool when you're walking around the city and you look up, which is something that in third-person doesn't really feel right.

Is this CDPR way of saying characters in Cyberpunk2077 actually can move their head, eyes and body seperately? That certainly relives some concerns.

Anyways, I think it was a mistake of CDPR to make Cyberpunk2077 a 1st person game. And I am not the only one concerned with that. I might get Cyberpunk2077 despite being a 1st person game, but that's just due to Witcher 3, nothing else, and it will be at price reduction.

It would be awesome if 3rd person view was an option in the game. I don't know how that cannot be possible, it should be fairly simple.
 
Last edited:
This guy is right. Not only is he right, but the explenation from CDPR for why they went with 1st person perspective for Cyberpunk is BS.
Threads merged. Topic has been discussed to death, but feel free to read varying viewpoints in this thread or any of the following locations:

Addressing the FPP issue without sacrificing cyberpunks artistic vision.
FPP/TPP Perspective Thread OPEN. Be NICE.
A little breakdown of why FPP will work very well in Cyberpunk 2077
FP VS TP - perspective matters
In Defense of the First Person Perspective
Perspective Thread: Third Person vs First Person debate goes HERE.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom