FPP/TPP Perspective Thread OPEN. Be NICE.

[OneWingedHawk]

I honestly disagree with this mentality that giving choices is always better. I might ask Dota 2 or LoL devs to give me first person perspective because i use heroes that use ranged weapon, but that doesn't make sense for the game that they have created. Just because other devs have made having both perspective a standard doesn't mean every dev should follow it blindly, and that's not considering that most if not all those games have had shoddy implementation of at least one of them.

// Red Dead Redemption 2/ Grand Theft Auto 5 ~

Both have a great third person camera with a lot character animations and satisfying combat, all of that goes to the gutter when you switch to first person mode, and that's not because FPP is bad or anything it's because the game was built around third person and the clunky first person combat of the game shows that. It's not just about having tons of animation for every moment it's about how it feels on screen, how easier it is to traverse the game world, how good those animations look in both perspective.

// Fallout 4 ~

I chose Fallout 4 because i think that's the best combat that Bethesda has done, but unlike Rockstar none of their perspective stand out as super polished even though their first person combat controls better than that of Rockstar's title.

Combination of both of these perspective have always lead to sacrifice in one of them.

Also people really shouldn't compare these games to Cyberpunk in the first place, take a look at the gameplay demo. The way UI is being directly connected to character's vision and how the free flowing dialogue scene are directed to take benefit from First Person Mode. You can move your camera during these FPP scenes and have different dialogues accordingly, all of these features won't suit third person mode. Heck, even the animation during these dialogue scenes are done to benefit from FPP and would require them to frame the scene differently if done in TPP.

Even if you think the combat didn't look impressive it still *looks* better than majority of RPGs - the dodging, double jump, slide looked smooth. All of that including quality of animation is one of the best in any game of this scale. And most if not ALL of these features are built around FIRST PERSON PERSPECTIVE.

Honestly I couldn't care less if they add a TPP, TOP-DOWN, 2D camera mode, but at the end of the day camera mode should compliment the design choices that they are going for, because what they are doing with FPP is really unique and hasn't been explored at this scale and having another wonky third person mode because *OPTIONS* would mess up more
( Dialogue, level design, UI ) things as compared to other games that people keep comparing Cyberpunk to.

 

[Sild]

Yeah, I got it. As I said several times, I've seen only 2 games with both excellent TPP and FPP and those games come from the richest software house that IN THEORY could upload 35Gb of dickpicks and call them GTA 6 and still make a billion in 1 day after release. And I would buy those because they'll be the most defined dickpicks ever made, and I'm an heterosexual man who sees his own dick several times a day. Only 2 companies can do this: rockstar and bethesda. You can't compare anyone to them because for completely different reasons those companies are untouchable (even if I've GLADLY seen a big shitstorm for fallout 76), the first has unlimited budget and can afford to create different models for horses' testiculi and motion capture for every NPC in the game, the latter has an unlimited number of fanboys.

Now, have you seen what kind of gunplay is present in CP77? With no cover system, all those strifes... Imagine that in TPP, you need to make a shitoad of animations to make it look good, probably all in motion capture. And what about the dialoges? That system doesn't work in TPP, you need to make a new one, even rockstar and it's unlimited budget couldn't make 2 and the game goes to TPP during cutscenes.
The other option is to add a very cheap bethesda-like TPP, but the only company which could get away with that is, in fact, bethesda. If they showed that kind of TPP on august 26th, interest for the game would have fallen to the ground. Fairly, Imight add.

The third option is CDPR being able to invest more than rockstar (GTA V costed 260 million dollars, TW3 80), but I don't think it's realistic.

Not only that, but games build around FPP in particular have a very different way of transmiting information to the player. For example when interacting with a console, all the information required is actually displayed on that in-game console/screen with the posibility of having you navigate it's menus whereas in TPP that is not how it's done, there's just less interactivity unless every screen/console is human sized for the purpose of being readable.. There are very good reasons why a dev will opt for only one instead of multiple perpectives. Otherwise every game would have first-person, third-person, top-down etc options.

This won't be the be-all-end-all of RPG's, Cyberpunk RPG's or video games in general. My hope is that it will be the best it can be without having to cater to men-in-suits, financial problems or compromising on their vision for the game.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

Not only that, but games build around FPP in particular have a very different way of transmiting information to the player. For example when interacting with a console, all the information required is actually displayed on that in-game console/screen with the posibility of having you navigate it's menus whereas in TPP that is not how it's done, there's just less interactivity unless every screen/console is human sized for the purpose of being readable.. There are very good reasons why a dev will opt for only one instead of multiple perpectives. Otherwise every game would have first-person, third-person, top-down etc options.

This won't be the be-all-end-all of RPG's, Cyberpunk RPG's or video games in general. My hope is that it will be the best it can be without having to cater to men-in-suits, financial problems or compromising on their vision for the game.

Dead space and metal gear solid 5 had acceptable compromises for that, but I agree with you.

 

[Sardukhar]

So we had someone advocating piracy here, in this discussion, as a response to not getting a feature they want.

That poster has taken an extended break.

Leaving aside the amazing childishness of that statement ("if I don't get what I want, I'll just -steal- it!"), I'd just like to remind one and all that not only is piracy typically illegal, these are the forums for a SOFTWARE COMPANY that depends on people paying for their product to stay in BUSINESS.

These forums, here. That we hang out on. Of course, very few of you would contemplate such utter silliness, but still. Worth the reminder.

So, let's not see this again.

I now return us to our regularly scheduled, fairly pointless but still weirdly enjoyable battle on perspective. Bloodlines wins!

 

[kissybyc3]

For me it's the mode. I play very, very few FPP games, but the main difference is the type of game. An RPG should IMO not be locked into FPP. THAT is the biggest problem for me. If it was a basic shooter I wouldn't even be looking at this game. I tried enough FPP games to know I hate it, so I avoid them now. Shooters in general I don't play. But I LOVE RPGs and that's why this decision is so disappointing.

In that case I'd say let's give CDPR the benefit of doubt that they can make a FPP game that is also as fully an RPG as any other TPP RPGs out there. I know this is breaking down a genre stereotype, but I think CDPR is one of the few companies that can actually pull that off.

 

[Mebrilia]

Yeah, I got it. As I said several times, I've seen only 2 games with both excellent TPP and FPP and those games come from the richest software house that IN THEORY could upload 35Gb of dickpicks and call them GTA 6 and still make a billion in 1 day after release. And I would buy those because they'll be the most defined dickpicks ever made, and I'm an heterosexual man who sees his own dick several times a day. Only 2 companies can do this: rockstar and bethesda. You can't compare anyone to them because for completely different reasons those companies are untouchable (even if I've GLADLY seen a big shitstorm for fallout 76), the first has unlimited budget and can afford to create different models for horses' testiculi and motion capture for every NPC in the game, the latter has an unlimited number of fanboys.

Now, have you seen what kind of gunplay is present in CP77? With no cover system, all those strafes... Imagine that in TPP, you need to make a shitoad of animations to make it look good, probably all in motion capture. And what about the dialoges? That system doesn't work in TPP, you need to make a new one, even rockstar and it's unlimited budget couldn't make 2 and the game goes to TPP during cutscenes.
The other option is to add a very cheap bethesda-like TPP, but the only company which could get away with that is, in fact, bethesda. If they showed that kind of TPP on august 26th, interest for the game would have fallen to the ground. Fairly, Imight add.

The third option is CDPR being able to invest more than rockstar (GTA V costed 260 million dollars, TW3 80), but I don't think it's realistic.

I would prefear a cheap implemented TPP than be forced on FPP all the time.. And all this things you mention like the lack of cover system and things about that to me sounds just like bad design decision. There is not objective reason for this game to be FPP only even if they plan to have a narrative interactive scenery it could be implemented just by switching in FPP during dialogues and not cutting out TPP totally from the game.

Nobody here asking for TPP want a TPP only game unlike many of those that advocate for the FPP this makes me think. While FPP has his own merits i think in a game that is supposed to be an RPG first and foremost that is supposed to have a lot of customization limiting the game in FPP only is plain underwelming.

But at this rate judging by CDPR declaration i wonder how much customization will be on the game outside guns. Because in the unanswered question there is also "We will be able to have a chromed pair of arms?" but on the other side we get a lot of "The games has ton of customization you can customize your guns as much as you want" it sounds like the direction from the game went a lot less RPG first and foremost and more like FPS first foremost.

And even the character creators option were pretty underwhelming and based around presets in the demo.

 

[Sild]

There is not objective reason for this game to be FPP

There is plenty objective reason for it being FPP. A fair number of them have already been mentioned in this very thread. A response like "i don't care, i want muh TPP" is usually the reply to anyone of those...

I would prefear a cheap implemented TPP than be forced on FPP all the time

..like so.

Nobody here asking for TPP want a TPP only game unlike many of those that advocate for the FPP this makes me think

There's really not a lot to think about. It's how they chose to make their game and most people can respect that.

 

[SigilFey]

There is plenty objective reason for it being FPP. A fair number of them have already been mentioned in this very thread. A response like "i don't care, i want muh TPP" is usually the reply to anyone of those...

This is very true, though I disagree with one part.

The complication is that it's actually impossible for anything to be 100% objective. No matter how open-minded and thoroughly informed I am, no matter how many different perspectives I take the time to fully explore...I am always limited by my subjective understanding of those things. No matter how objective I'm being, it's never possible to be completely objective. And there's no reason to be. We all need to make decisions that we feel are in our best in achieving our goals. We all need to make that call. CDPR included. That decision will always be made subjectively -- especially in a creative/artistic venture. And, invariably, no matter how "popular" that decision happens to be, I'll be able to find a huge number of people that want it some other way.

The part I disagree with is that responses in favor of TPP have been limited to, "Just give me what I want." Arguments on both sides have been thoughtful and detailed, too. Both CDPR's decision for FPP and many arguments for TPP are perfectly valid.

The trouble is, some people are simply not going to get what they want. (Subjectively.) And that's life.

In the end, it's the creator's prerogative to follow their vision the way they think is best. (Also subjectively.)

 

[radiant_monolith]

I understand why people prefer Third Person nd I hope there will be some sort of mod or "Enhanced Edition" that will allow those who adored the Witcher games and simply want a Cyberpunk version of that particular genre classics.

 

[HockeyMike24]

It's been a long time since I played a really good first-person game. I normally prefer third but after seeing the demo I'm excited to give this a go.

 

[drona.667]

CDPR put a lot of of efforts with this game. Remember that even 48 minutes of gameplay footage proclaimed it that "everything" you/we see is potentially subject to change, that might be including FPP/TPP imo. I am just as comfortable with FPP only or TPP only or both but what's really important here to me how this "perspectives" integrated well within combat system, environment, story, & more.

 

[Mebrilia]

This is very true, though I disagree with one part.

The complication is that it's actually impossible for anything to be 100% objective. No matter how open-minded and thoroughly informed I am, no matter how many different perspectives I take the time to fully explore...I am always limited by my subjective understanding of those things. No matter how objective I'm being, it's never possible to be completely objective. And there's no reason to be. We all need to make decisions that we feel are in our best in achieving our goals. We all need to make that call. CDPR included. That decision will always be made subjectively -- especially in a creative/artistic venture. And, invariably, no matter how "popular" that decision happens to be, I'll be able to find a huge number of people that want it some other way.

The part I disagree with is that responses in favor of TPP have been limited to, "Just give me what I want." Arguments on both sides have been thoughtful and detailed, too. Both CDPR's decision for FPP and many arguments for TPP are perfectly valid.

The trouble is, some people are simply not going to get what they want. (Subjectively.) And that's life.

In the end, it's the creator's prerogative to follow their vision the way they think is best. (Also subjectively.)

Honestly i don't see a valid benefit for the game being only FPP i don't think the arguments made by cd projekt are valid considering some things they said that were.. well not correct to start with.. In a interview i saw a cd project red dev mentioning running in to walls as one of the reason... While we have plenty of TPP games that allows you to run dynamically on the walls way more than FPP games.. Also this whole immersion thing is totally subjective some feels immersed being forced in FPP some are not.. And showeling down our throat how immersive first person is don't change the fact that many people found this subjective again. Being bold is a thing alienate part of the community telling and deciding for them what is immersive or not is a bit arrogant and out of place.

At the moment i fail to see a single reason why the game should be FPP only even the dialogue system can be fixed by simply put the visual during dialogues in first person and leave the gameplay with a toggle allowing a player to select both visual.

Bethesda managed to do this and we all know the quality of polishing of their games is hard to believe cd projekt is unable to implement both visual in a game considering the polishing of witcher 3. Also this was supposed to be an RPG with a huge emphasis on customization and even there seems the priority is yes in customization but of weapons since they still have to answer if we will have cosmetics implants or if someone can have a pair of arms completely chromed a thing that in a game based on cyberpunk should be also important.

The gameplay demo was what it was.. A lot FPS barely an RPG based on a pen and paper. I am sorry but that's how i feel.

 

[SavageMen]

I've preferred FPP to TPP which's why I used to be negative and hesitate to play on TW3, the forced-TPP game, in past. Of course, I became a huge fan of TW3 nowadays so get used to TPP. For adopting TPP or FPP, a forced-perspective is supposed to be inconvenient for me, so at least need a way to see the customized character through a reflective objects such as mirror, glass etc if a players cannot freely select the perspective while in playing.

 

[SkyWitcher]

Cyberpunk 2077...could have been PERFECT but you needed to mess up guys...smh
I just want to ask you a very logic and resonant question:
¿WHY PUT SO MUCH EFFORT, MONEY AND FOCUS OVER CUSTOMIZATION OF YOUR NEW "RPG" IF WE WONT BE ABLE TO SEE OUR BLOODY CHARACTER 90% OF THE GAME TIME?
And I'm emphasize over this because with that is with you opened your gameplay trailer that Cyberpunk 2077 will have "A LOT" of character customization your character creator looked a lot like the ones you see over AAA MMORPG games like Black Dessert or the Saints Row franchise, but then, there you ACTUALLY see your character THE WHOLE TIME and take cool screenshots or clips with your character THE WHOLE TIME.
So aside all this excuses about "FPS is the best for history drama" you guys being stubborn about this type of view does not even makes sense to your own schemes.
Well yeah I'm a huge fan of your series hence the nickname on my account YES I'M DISSAPOINTED from this decision that hopefully you can RETHINK and approach differentely, at the end if none of our efforts to change your point of view we will need to wait for the modder community to hear our voice.
As I say Cyberpunk 2077 could have been perfect........


[Edited -- SigilFey]

 

[Mevik1023]

I've been on the third-person side myself, so I sympathize with most of the points against FPP here. They are doing it though, and I still want this game to compete with Witcher 3 as my favorite of all time. So given what we know for sure, I've had a question regarding this game's camerawork and ability to see our character.

Witcher 3 presented even the most average conversations like cutscenes. The camera would switch to a back and forth between Geralt and whoever he's talking to. If 2077 does this, would that mean we'd see our created character in full every time we talk to anyone? Given the amount of conversations in a CDPR game, that's not so bad when you think about it. Geralt's always talking to people.

Or, will your average conversations be like first-person Skyrim? Where NPCs just sort of talk blankly at the camera? The demo was almost entirely first-person, dialogue included. But those conversations were mid-mission. So I'm not sure what applies to your average "hey how's it going." Quest banter is what it is, and we'll be in control so that's still FPP. But shouldn't the many, many standing chats be able to showcase our creations?

 

[Nikola_Nesic]

Well i doubt that something drastically will change from demo, so 90% of dialogue and NPC interaction will be FPP even when game come out.

Adding both TPP/FPP would be tricky, but is not impossible if Bethesda can make half good TPP/FPP i am sure CDPR can do much much better, much smaller developers did many great games without big budgets.

Also all the talk how CP2077 is Vertical and TPP would not be good for it don't have any sense, GTA, Watch Dogs, Max Payne... many other games are vertical and still have good TPP.

 

[Tahrakaii]

I really think this decision is going to bite them in the butt if I'm honest.
We'll have to wait and see if things like that will happen with Cyberpunk, but players nowadays are all too aware of the influence they have over the success of a game. Stuff like vote bombing and such has been quite a succesful way for players to get across that they don't agree with how certain business is conducted.

 

[SarahGabriella]

I really think this decision is going to bite them in the butt if I'm honest.
We'll have to wait and see if things like that will happen with Cyberpunk, but players nowadays are all too aware of the influence they have over the success of a game. Stuff like vote bombing and such has been quite a succesful way for players to get across that they don't agree with how certain business is conducted.

How so? Games like this work best in first person. F.E.A.R. and Co. have it, why wouldnt this game?

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I really think this decision is going to bite them in the butt if I'm honest.

Nah. The perspective sells well enough on it's own.

What I consider worrisome here is how the perspective likely forces the developers hand with how they implement the RPG mechanics, because the perspective implies an "it's you" mentality to the player, when it is supposed to be the character you've created. This can affect all the facets of the game from gunplay to simply spotting stuff, and the commercial trend of doing it can well alienate a certain portion of the fanbase. It can already be seen in the "it's just an FPS" comments.

TPP would allow a more plausible way of implementing the effects and potency of character stats because the perspective distances the player from the character, and thusly failure due to stats doesn't feel personal or the game "forcing arbitrariness" upon the player.

It's not a problem for me, but it is for great many.

 

[Nikola_Nesic]

Games like this work best in first person. F.E.A.R. and Co. have it

You mean FPS games pure shooters, F.E.A.R. is pure shooter, BioShock have some ability but is just a shooter....

Shooting mechanic can be done well even in TPP, cover system work better in TPP shooters than in any FPP.