FPP/TPP Perspective Thread OPEN. Be NICE.

[Guest 4149880]

Actually I didn't saw such problem since a long, long time ago, when there was aim problems in games using both perspectives, and I suppose in lazy FPP games there is probably animation problems if translated to TPP (but C2077 doesn't look like a lazy game), but aside of that I see nothing.

That's why I'm asking about precise exemples of what could be such things that have to be redone to switch perspective.

Im saying in terms of how the game is built.

Well, animations for both would need to be top-tier. You could argue that 2077's FPP animations so far are... lacklustre, of course, and I'd probably agree (they are smooth enough, but there's not enough animation for interacting with the environment). But theoretically, in a game that aims to do both perspectives justice, it would be an expensive and time consuming process. And not sure if it would be worth it. I imagine a lot of people that claim to hate FPP will buy the game anyway. Not all, surely, but the remainder might not generate enough in sales.

And, of course, in this case, there's the difficulties associated with adapting the Interactive Scene System into TPP, and the player being able to see things via TPP they wouldn't in FPP (thus making it more difficult to set up things like ambushes, surprise car attacks, etc).

Can you design a game like 2077 with both perspectives in mind? Surely, yes. But at this stage in development, or even at last year's stage in development, I highly doubt it would be as simple as adding an optional mode, despite what many people believe.


To be fair, we actually don't have any evidence that they are smaller parts of the game. In fact, if CDPR keeps to their word by allowing players to usually have multiple paths through a mission (some of which/many of which may even be nov-violent), I'd argue that shooting may just be a very small part of some people's games. Which is not to say it will never happen. But it would not surprise me if I could spend most of my time talking, exploring, sneaking, hacking, and engineering and a smaller part going all shooty shooty bang-bang.

I'd hoping for pure stealth/passive options to be a major part of the game. Generally stealth is the easier route, but personally I think it should be more difficult but more rewarding. Full blown shooter aspect should be the easier approach as its fairly straight forward and wont take much to blow through an area, probably.

 

[KakitaTatsumaru]

Well, animations for both would need to be top-tier. You could argue that 2077's FPP animations so far are... lacklustre, of course, and I'd probably agree (they are smooth enough, but there's not enough animation for interacting with the environment).

Actually, I usually saw FPP as an excuse for nor doing good character animations. But since it has been said (if I remember well), that C2077 will have good animations, it should pose no problem, as a good animation is good no matter the view.
The fact that most games doesn't use natural animations in FPP is one of the things that gets me off of immersion anyway.

And, of course, in this case, there's the difficulties associated with adapting the Interactive Scene System into TPP, and the player being able to see things via TPP they wouldn't in FPP (thus making it more difficult to set up things like ambushes, surprise car attacks, etc).

I personally don't see using the fact that the player is limited to a soda straw view is good design. And unless the character TPP is really far away, it shouldn't make the player aware of things he wouldn't if he was physically there, as TPP is basically one way to make the player as aware of his environment that his character should.

Can you design a game like 2077 with both perspectives in mind? Surely, yes. But at this stage in development, or even at last year's stage in development, I highly doubt it would be as simple as adding an optional mode, despite what many people believe.

I'd argue that shooting may just be a very small part of some people's games. Which is not to say it will never happen. But it would not surprise me if I could spend most of my time talking, exploring, sneaking, hacking, and engineering and a smaller part going all shooty shooty bang-bang.

I'm totally with you on that!

Post automatically merged: May 28, 2019

Im saying in terms of how the game is built.

That's what I said: always vague, never precise things.
Points of view are just that, points of view, so as long as the game play like some kind of immersive sim there should be no problem having one view instead of the other.

Actually Snowflakez gave an example, even if I consider it an abuse more than good design (like a gamemaster using his personal knowledge of a player flaw against him even when the enemies he is using actually doesn't know about such flaw).

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

The fact that most games doesn't use natural animations in FPP is one of the things that gets me off of immersion anyway.

100% agreed.
Animations, in particular if interactive, are what make me feel immersed in a game. It feels like I'm doing that action? Then I'm immersed (together with as little suspension of dibilief as possible).
[...]

Edited. -Drac

 

[Sild]

Actually, I usually saw FPP as an excuse for nor doing good character animations. But since it has been said (if I remember well), that C2077 will have good animations, it should pose no problem, as a good animation is good no matter the view.
The fact that most games doesn't use natural animations in FPP is one of the things that gets me off of immersion anyway.

Actually Snowflakez gave an example, even if I consider it an abuse more than good design (like a gamemaster using his personal knowledge of a player flaw against him even when the enemies he is using actually doesn't know about such flaw).

And that's part of the problem. People that clamor for TPP usually see FPP and everyting build around it as "flawed" when it couldn't be farther from the truth.

I personally don't see using the fact that the player is limited to a soda straw view is good design. And unless the character TPP is really far away, it shouldn't make the player aware of things he wouldn't if he was physically there, as TPP is basically one way to make the player as aware of his environment that his character should.

Can you design a game like 2077 with both perspectives in mind? Surely, yes. But at this stage in development, or even at last year's stage in development, I highly doubt it would be as simple as adding an optional mode, despite what many people believe.

Not really, an immersive-sim mindset between third and first person is the difference between Hitman (1, 2, 3, Blood Money) and Deus Ex HR/MD. Great games (some of the best in my opinion) but quite different from each other in terms of overall user experience. Games that present the player with a problem and then give them tools that could be used to solve the problem, featuring constrained environments that are highly reactive. These basically coined the phrase "small as a puddle, deep as an ocean" and the best, subjective way to experience these is in first person. Besides, you can't really look behind every nook and cranny in third person let's be honest here, and if they decide to not place things in hard to see places because of third person, that is a design decision directly influenced by chosen perspective.

 

[evilhippo]

FPP is not more immersive, actually seeing your character is. It was a serious mistake to go FPP only.

Wild though it was, there are very good reasons why Hardcore Henry is not the preferred way of doing visual drama

 

[AsadaShino0821]

FPP is not more immersive, actually seeing your character is. It was a serious mistake to go FPP only.

Wild though it was, there are very good reasons why Hardcore Henry is not the preferred way of doing visual drama

You can control yourself, not just watching (the fps of movies and games are very different)

I hope that CDPR can stick to its own philosophy and make fps rpg belonging to CP2077.

 

[KakitaTatsumaru]

fps rpg

As long as you say FPS RPG instead of either FPP-RPG or RPG-fps, consider me as your sworn enemy.
I mean it.

 

[Sild]

As long as you say FPS RPG instead of either FPP-RPG or RPG-fps, consider me as your sworn enemy.
I mean it.

Chill dude

I would've gone mental if I'd have taken it too heart every time someone said it. There are even people calling Doom an.. W8 for it.. FPS Shooter

 

[SigilFey]

I think it's very important not to assume we know what CDPR has actually done. Nothing but the tinest taste of the game has been revealed publicly. And we all know that looks can be very deceiving.

For people that simply don't care for FPP mechanics at all...well...there's not much to be done about that. That's what this game is. (There are a lot of people that can't stand TPP mechanics at all. Many of them still played TW3...and loved it! Can't please everyone; silly to try.)

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I like FPP RPG’s. I really do. But I have this thing with them, that they need to work the right way systemically and have the right kind of balance of content. Latter is in accordnance with the focus of the game. For Might&Magic X, it’s combat and puzzles, for example.

Bethesda’s games kinda sorta have a right idea, but there’s so much wasted potential (tons and tons of it) and RPG depth sacrificed for accessibility (both systemically and narratively) that they fall into being just huge empty husks.

If Wizardry 8 was less of a combat grinder and had more focus in interactivity, it might just be the best RPG there is.

I’d hope to once see a studio that took the versarility and mechanical intrigue of the core genre seriously, instead of focusing solely on some high drama storytelling and chasing the cheap thrills crowd with their mechanics.

It’s a pipedream, but... I suppose it’s worth dreaming.

 

[KakitaTatsumaru]

It’s a pipedream, but... I suppose it’s worth dreaming.

"And you're a big dreamer."
Sorry, almost sound like one of C2077 punchline.

 

[Watermelonkfc]

No point in debating TPP dudes and dudettes it aint gonna change oof.

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

"And you're a big dreamer."
Sorry, almost sound like one of C2077 punchline.

It fits.

 

[DannyCortz]

I don't want it. FPP is fine. If they even implemented as another favor. Make it optional or whatever.

 

[Sfoglia_Grezza92]

Always said that I totally respect CDPR for taking that decision (CP2077's demo looked way more immersive than TW3), but the most immersive videogame I've ever played is RDR2 in TPP and not because of camera, but because of animations and how gameplay is linked to them: you want to drink cofee? every time you push a button arthur drinks a little bit (3 times for a cup), same for soup. You want to brush your horse? same. You want to walk down a slope? You need to do it slowly and carefully because physics in the game regulates how safely you can do it and calculates the right animations: if moving too fast you slip and fall down the slope on the rocks. You open a door and arthur's hand actually pushes the door, the faster you are the faster he opens it (if you run into it he uses his shoulder). TLOU2 looks like will follow the same path (as TLOU did 6 years ago).
CP2077's demo partly showed the same concept during dialogues (extremely immersive with all those animations), but lack of animations (= immersion) during "normal" gameplay (opening doors, picking items up, while using the reflex booster had the animation, which is great). I hope they improved it, because I believe FPP by itself is not immersive if it feels like a floating camera most of the time.

Completely agree with everything , in a FPP game "Animations" are ( at least for me ) the most important part , because those animation helps you ( the player ) to feel more alive in the world .
using elevator - opening doors - picking up weapons - drinks etc.. it can't be all done just by clicking a button of the mouse/controller , also walking through a crowd ( like you see in some assassin's creed ) would be very cool in FPP if done right , considering how many people we saw in the Demo.
I really hope that few of these animations will be added the next time CDPR will show us the game again
E3 2019 don't let me down

 

[Rengekiyo]

I don't care tpp or fpp i'll give it a go.

 

[AsadaShino0821]

CDPR can learn (Escape from Tarkov Animation is very exquisite, really worth learning )

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

As I always say: few quick re-usable animations, easy to make, immersive as fuck. I don't buy that something like that needs millions to be done.

If CDPR doesn't add contextual animations (doors, picking items up, buttons and keypads) it's simply because they don't want to and all the "maximize your immersion" was a huge bullshit.

 

[Sild]

If CDPR doesn't add contextual animations (doors, picking items up, buttons and keypads) it's simply because they don't want to and all the "maximize your immersion" was a huge bullshit.

I'd argue animations for every single thing isn't really necessary for the broad sense of being immersed. It could even have the opposite effect and lose its novelty fast, having control taken from you for that split second over and over and over again while your character decides to spend too much time pressing a button or picking up a mag. The thing with contextual animations is they don't take into account the possible urgency of any given situation, or lack of, thus breaking immersion. Indeed, a far cry from "huge bullshit"

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

Fair enough. It's very subjective, I guess.
I don't see why they did all those animations for dialogues then if they don't want to be consistent, but hey, it's not me who is making the game.

Just to make it clear: in my vision CP2077 is closer to an immersive sim so like in DE you don't pick up all the trash you find (inventory is limited) and there's no need to do it because weapons are not like in looter shooters. So you won't see that animation continuously. Of course it's my vision and very unlikely to happen: "TW3-in-first-person-feeling" was shown in the demo and probably will get to the final build.