Perhaps your argument should be, they only have one IP/franchise, rather than one game.
- Status
Perhaps your argument should be, they only have one IP/franchise, rather than one game.
Yes probably it would sound better.
It turns out even cutscenes will mostly be in FPP.
I didn't say they are bad games.
Like @SystemShock7 say maybe i should say they have one IP, and again CDPR are good developers, but that really in not guarantee that their next game is going to be great.
What did you like about the FPP in Call of Juarez over other games?
As I said, FPP doesn't bother me. If only some cutscenes are TPP that's fine. The gameplay trailer was epic in FPP.
See for me even that is bad news, i know some people going to hate me, but i was not impress with CP2077 demo, so after 6 years of waiting to hear some news of CP2077, i hear game is in FPP, demo they show didn't impress me, at lest cutscenes will be in TPP and than its turn out that even cutscenes will be mostly in FPP.
Also, things like you can drive in TPP, or you can see your character in Mirror, Photo Mod and Inventory, don't give me anything.
Nothing really game was just funny and totally arcade, i recently played Wolfenstein ii the new colossus and i got bored with game after 30 minutes, same with Deus Ex MD.
Tetris tournaments are nail-biters.
I was really bored with MD too, I played it around 3 hours. It was really strange since I'm a HR fanboy. I guess it's not really perspective or shooting on itself. There are just many other elements, that define the experience and in that respect MD just sucked. Made by largely different people from those that made HR. So I'm looking forward to a more finalized and in-depth demonstration of CP77.
I was really bored with MD too, I played it around 3 hours. It was really strange since I'm a HR fanboy. I guess it's not really perspective or shooting on itself. There are just many other elements, that define the experience and in that respect MD just sucked. Made by largely different people from those that made HR. So I'm looking forward to a more finalized and in-depth demonstration of CP77.
Last edited:
It IS better. Not for them maybe, but I don't care. I'm the one who has to buy their product. So no, they are not making it for THEM. They're a company. And I really think not putting a TPP in the game is a mistake and will cost them.
Madness for a company to try and get the biggest audience possible huh? Right.
Making a secondary option is NOT compromising on their vision. It's giving the player a choice. They are now taking that choice away, which is just wrong.
Last edited:
First: i will decide if CP2077 is game for me or not.
Second: having cutscenes 90% of the time in FPP sucks for people who like TPP, and hope that at least cutscenes will be in TPP.
Third: do i need be grateful that they have Mirrors and Photo Mode and that driving can be done in TPP, no i don't need to be, if they have functional mirror that is plus but nothing new few games did that already, photo mode sure great for people who want to make selfie, driving some people love to use car in GTA and horse in Witcher, RDR and Skyrim, i personally don't use car/horses i like to walk around game world and explore, i only use them when game force me.
Post automatically merged:
Also game don't need Rockstars level of budget, if developers want to add something that will bring them more buyers
and players, they will find a way, i am boring with this but The Evil Within 2 didn't have budget like RDR2 or GTA 5, but they added FPP later for people who wanted that.
Last edited:
To be fair, you keep going on and on in this thread about how FPP is the worst thing ever and CD Project Red are villaineous for not including third person perspective, so yeah, it does seem like this particular game might not be for you.
I think they made a solid design choice with first person perspective. Is it good that they have only FPP and not both perspectives as options? Probably, yeah.
Last edited:
What? i just say my opinion like anyone here, i say many time that CDPR is good company, i don't agree with their decision about FPP but they are good company.
Adding TPP option would not hurt people who want to play in FPP, FPP is not worst thing ever, i even say that i played FPP game before, but i don't have so much fun with them, i do have much more fun with TPP, there are many people who have fun in FPP but also many people who have fun in TPP.
If i offended CDPR i am sorry, but look around the net many support them with FPP in CP2077, but also many don't support them about that and want TPP like a option, you can't say we love to hear opinions of fans and players and we value their feedback, and than totally disregard what many of those people say.
Looks like this thread goes down the path of a circle-dialogue yet again...
To move towards a more constructive dialogue (especially since we know the game will definitley be FPP) I have a question for you all:
What can FPP add that TPP cannot, and what can TPP add that FPP cannot?
Also, what could the developers do to give you the same satisfaction in FPP that TPP usually gives you?
To start, here's my two cents:
I usually stick to TPP because FPP disorients me and, when playing long enough, gives me a headache. Still, I have played enough FPP to recognize TPP cannot give you the same sense of scale TPP gives you and TPP is not very good for everything in an enclosed enviroment. FPP also lets you pull tricks like looking at something in an dialogue and reacting to it (to use the example from the demo).
Now, I personally feel TPP is better for any form of combat, as you have more peripheral vision compensating for any missing senses. Its also better for admiring your char (minor thing for me but major for many others) but most importantly IMO its the better perspective for storytelling. In FPP you miss any body language or subte facial features your char has. One pained glimpse of Geralt when speaking of Ciri was worth more than anything he said in showing how much he cares abouth Ciri. I must admit this comes from the fact that I never see myself as the char. Its not my story, its the chars story, I'm just directing it.
What do you think?
To move towards a more constructive dialogue (especially since we know the game will definitley be FPP) I have a question for you all:
What can FPP add that TPP cannot, and what can TPP add that FPP cannot?
Also, what could the developers do to give you the same satisfaction in FPP that TPP usually gives you?
To start, here's my two cents:
I usually stick to TPP because FPP disorients me and, when playing long enough, gives me a headache. Still, I have played enough FPP to recognize TPP cannot give you the same sense of scale TPP gives you and TPP is not very good for everything in an enclosed enviroment. FPP also lets you pull tricks like looking at something in an dialogue and reacting to it (to use the example from the demo).
Now, I personally feel TPP is better for any form of combat, as you have more peripheral vision compensating for any missing senses. Its also better for admiring your char (minor thing for me but major for many others) but most importantly IMO its the better perspective for storytelling. In FPP you miss any body language or subte facial features your char has. One pained glimpse of Geralt when speaking of Ciri was worth more than anything he said in showing how much he cares abouth Ciri. I must admit this comes from the fact that I never see myself as the char. Its not my story, its the chars story, I'm just directing it.
What do you think?
Last edited:
TPP is better when you need to keep track of things around you 100% of the time, as well as observing how cool your character looks in action. I personally believe it's generally better for melee. So that's why I never play VtmB or Elder Scrolls in FPP mode, outside shooting.
FPP is better when lack of 360 view is part of presentation - what's hidden from your view is just as important as what you can see at specific moments. So-called "immersive sims" (Thief, Deus Ex, System Shock) greatly benefit from it. FPP is important when eye contact is important. FPP is generally better for shooting. FPP camera is easier to handle. For example, parkour in narrow spaces like sliding under cars would be pain in the arse to do well in TPP. Also, FPP can be cheaper in general, because you don't need to bother with animations, collisions and stuff like that.
FPP is better when lack of 360 view is part of presentation - what's hidden from your view is just as important as what you can see at specific moments. So-called "immersive sims" (Thief, Deus Ex, System Shock) greatly benefit from it. FPP is important when eye contact is important. FPP is generally better for shooting. FPP camera is easier to handle. For example, parkour in narrow spaces like sliding under cars would be pain in the arse to do well in TPP. Also, FPP can be cheaper in general, because you don't need to bother with animations, collisions and stuff like that.
I agree with almost all of this since i feel almost the same, one difference is that i see my self as the character in that world, but i am more comfortable when is in TPP, i get more connected to my character in TPP.
Again i will agree with all of this, since it is almost same as for me, in RPG i need to keep track of enemy where are my companions my surrounding hazards of my surrounding, in FPP all that would be to chaotic since your FOV is smaller.
Also melee no matter how good some system is, it will never look good in FPP, your character never going to look cool or badass in FPP when do any melee combat or melee moves, i for one love to make melee oriented characters in RPG, it is more fun It's a bigger challenge, range character are more easy and also less fun for me, i agree that FPP is better for range character since shooting is more easy in FPP, but if done right even shooting in TPP can be good.
Does this hate for FPP relate only to CP2077 or is it the same for bioshock, prey, system shock, half-life, battlefield, call of duty, dying lights, doom, dishonored, metro...?
But yeah, it's fair not to buy the game and CDPR decision will be perfect if less people playing the game on day one "because FPP" will guarantee better quality for the ones who will play. In the long run it will probably sell better this way. IF FPP will be done good, with more animations than shown in the demo. If it'll be just a random camera floating around which gets hands only when shooting or during dialogues... well, more complaints will come.
P.S. I'm not even sure that FPP sells less than TPP in general, difficult to say.
But yeah, it's fair not to buy the game and CDPR decision will be perfect if less people playing the game on day one "because FPP" will guarantee better quality for the ones who will play. In the long run it will probably sell better this way. IF FPP will be done good, with more animations than shown in the demo. If it'll be just a random camera floating around which gets hands only when shooting or during dialogues... well, more complaints will come.
P.S. I'm not even sure that FPP sells less than TPP in general, difficult to say.
Last edited:
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.
Fair enough. I've thought the same for years, then 2-3 years ago I started playing FPS and got better with time. I still prefer TPP but no problems with FPP. The only cases where I prefer FPP are during shooting (TPP usually reduces to cover system, while I like a "crazy rambo approach") 'cause you can be more precise, and when you need to give a lot of attention to details, simply beacuase camera is much closer (but then we need godamn good textures).
Last edited:
It's not about that. Nobody here is asking for a TPP only game.
Just the OPTION, the CHOICE, to play it in TPP if you want to.
Having it locked to 1 single mode I think definitely lowers the possible playerbase numbers.
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.
Last edited:
- Status