In Defense of the First Person Perspective

+
Status
Not open for further replies.
I said this in another thread, but I feel it's also very suited for this thread as well, so I'll toss it here as well:

* * * * *
I don't quite think people understand the amount of work that goes into incorporating multiple perspectives for animations and game mechanics.

Let's run through a quick exercise to think about this for a minute. Consider the wall running mechanic in this game. First person animations would need to incorporate what you see when your limbs move, your grip on weapons, interactivity with objects or surfaces in the environment, etc. Pulling back into TPP, having extremely complex mechanics "just work" would actually require a metric shit ton of extra work. For every FPP animation your character can do (as I'm sure they don't want you to just utilize the animation sets of NPCs in the game), you now have to craft a TPP animation to match that. That is quite literally twice the amount of work for something that, me personally, would not enjoy even remotely as much. I don't walk around in the real world with a camera floating above my head. I use my eyeballs.

What about HUD elements that are cyberware-specific? What about on-screen overlays that are thematic? What about melee? These are all monumental tasks in and of themselves to execute well in a single perspective, let alone multiple ones. If we take a look at games that include both perspectives -- GTA V, Bethesda games, etc. -- the alternative perspective in view typically suffers in quality from the other. Fallout 4 plays and feels pretty good in FPP, but TPP they just feel janky. GTA V plays and feels really good in TPP, but pretty baseline when it comes to FPP. There are sacrifices you have to make when developing these types of things -- both of them take obscene amounts of time to implement and create to a high level of quality.

It's really not as simple as "well there's a photo mode planned so clearly everything is in place for this to work!". Unfortunately, that's just not how any of this works.

Would I want both if I had the choice? Of course. But investing all that time and work into something that will ultimately end up being an upskirt camera for 99% of the people using it, I don't think the devs feel it's worth it in the end. Outside of the rare cases of people who are genuinely affected by motion sickness from FPP media, it will ultimately become a non-issue. There are remedies that can be implemented to ease motion sickness, anyhow.

At any rate, enough rambling -- this is not the time or place to start flaming or feeling entitled. This is art, after all, and CDPR doesn't owe anyone anything. If they felt that making this game a turn based RTS was the best way to tell their story, they'd still manage to find incredible success with that because they are a very talented group of folks. Have a little faith. Literally every journalist I've seen talk about this game has had nothing but praise and awe to share -- no one in those conference rooms are storming out of them or throwing temper tantrums because it's a FPRPG.

EDIT - Also, it's confirmed that you will see your character in the character/inventory menu, as well as while driving cars/motorcycles, and during cutscenes -- which I'm sure there are a LOT of. Sounds good to me.

/end rant
* * * * *
And yet Rockstar did it.
 
LOOK AT THIS
I 100% agree with her. I was able to play, finish and enjoyed Deus Ex HR but i couldn't play more than 15 minutes of HL 2, Dying Light or Wolfenstein w/o wanting to vomit even though I wanted to play more of them. And its the same thing she said about Doom for me with Far Cry 5, sometimes I can play it without a problem sometimes its the naseau.

Also even if I didn't get motion sickness I would much rather be able to pick which option that I enjoy rather than the dev trying to shoehorn me into "this is the way we think you should play it" bs I am the one giving you money for your game I should be able to pick which perspective I like. and the impression I am getting is they are saying we are doing it because we think you should see it this way and not that its because they do not have the manpower and resources to give both options.
 
Last edited:
I'm one of "those" who likes both perspectives and doesn't throw a forum tantrum when developer isn't catering to my every whim.

And I'm perfectly fine with it in Deus Ex. Why? Because I always get to play as Adam Jensen, and he Always looks the Same, he Always dresses the Same, he always Talks the Same, always playing as Exactly the Same Character.
Hell, and I'm glad for it, I'd be bored of him if I had to stare at his grumpy ass for more than 5 minutes.

But this is one of the most utterly baffling, nonsensical decisions I've seen any developer make: Let's make a Game that Exemplifies Attitude, Customization and Style and Not let player actually See it! ( or heavily restrict it)

I think on foot exploration third person should be an option, and would quell down 90% of complaints. Is it that hard for CDPR to do something like this?

Combat, I agree, works better when developers decide to focus on only one perspective and I fully support CDPR's decision on this.
 
And yet Rockstar did it.

With GTA V? Sure. But at what level of quality? Those FPP animations were pretty mediocre, at best.

The point is, implementing these types of features are no easy task. They require massive amounts of work, for what will essentially become an upskirt camera for the majority of people using them.

Sometimes you gotta pick your battles.
 
With GTA V? Sure. But at what level of quality? Those FPP animations were pretty mediocre, at best.

The point is, implementing these types of features are no easy task. They require massive amounts of work, for what will essentially become an upskirt camera for the majority of people using them.

Sometimes you gotta pick your battles.
They have already come out saying this is intentional and not because "its no easy task" or they dont have the "resources"
http://www.ign.com/articles/2018/06...77-cd-projekt-addresses-first-person-backlash
 
They have already come out saying this is intentional and not because "its no easy task" or they dont have the "resources"
http://www.ign.com/articles/2018/06...77-cd-projekt-addresses-first-person-backlash

Oh, come on. Now you're just being dishonest and manipulating the conversation to fit your agenda. The guy didn't even speak about how much work it would be or whether or not they had the resources. Not stating something at all does not automatically imply it's invalid. I promise you -- implementing this type of feature would absolutely require a TON of work. It would either take away from other areas of the game to stay on schedule, or it would be delayed because of it in order to get it implemented at a high quality.
 
No TPP? Finaly!

First of all TPP is simply annoying in combat. It reveals stuff that otherwise would be hidden behind obstacles, basicaly making player immune to surprise attacks or backstabs. It made in sense in Witcher games - Geralt is a mutant with superhuman perception. Here, we will play normal human being.
Another thing is that it is not intuitive. Even with locking camera. You need to remember to lock it every time you want to focus on one enemy. And what if there are four of them?
When you are turning around and hit an obstacle POV always shifts because camera needs to adjust. For me it's simply annoying.

FPP is more natural, gives more combat options for people who design the game. Flanking attacks, backstabs might actualy work. Cybernetic implants like Kiroshi MonoVision (increases FOV type of eyes implant) will be actualy useful in FPP. Same with audio implants. In TPP you simply won't need that because you can everything anyway. Cyberpunk game without cyber eyes? No.

Another thing is that they used immersion argument.
With FPP you will focus on other characters and your surroundings. You won't spend three hours staring at your character or wondering if it looks cool. It won't by like in Skyrim in which 80% of modding scene is useless texture/models mods that don't upgrade gameplay at all.
Another thing are mentioned already implants. When I turn on IR I want to see it with my own eyes. I want to feel like I'm turning it on. I want to see how this smartgun is locking on my target.
And I want to look up and see those skyscrapers! We are talking about city here. Much less open spaces than in Witcher. Much more stuff going above our heads. It will be much more overwhelming from FPP than TPP.

It's probably best decision RED's could've make.
 
As long as the first person movement doesn't make me feel like some weird floaty head and has some substance to it's movement and the gunplay has a great feel to it, like Destiny, then I am all cool with it. But if this turns out like Deus Ex then i'll be crying in a corner for one eternity.
 
No TPP? Finaly!

First of all TPP is simply annoying in combat. It reveals stuff that otherwise would be hidden behind obstacles, basicaly making player immune to surprise attacks or backstabs. It made in sense in Witcher games - Geralt is a mutant with superhuman perception. Here, we will play normal human being.
Another thing is that it is not intuitive. Even with locking camera. You need to remember to lock it every time you want to focus on one enemy. And what if there are four of them?
When you are turning around and hit an obstacle POV always shifts because camera needs to adjust. For me it's simply annoying.

FPP is more natural, gives more combat options for people who design the game. Flanking attacks, backstabs might actualy work. Cybernetic implants like Kiroshi MonoVision (increases FOV type of eyes implant) will be actualy useful in FPP. Same with audio implants. In TPP you simply won't need that because you can everything anyway. Cyberpunk game without cyber eyes? No.

Another thing is that they used immersion argument.
With FPP you will focus on other characters and your surroundings. You won't spend three hours staring at your character or wondering if it looks cool. It won't by like in Skyrim in which 80% of modding scene is useless texture/models mods that don't upgrade gameplay at all.
Another thing are mentioned already implants. When I turn on IR I want to see it with my own eyes. I want to feel like I'm turning it on. I want to see how this smartgun is locking on my target.
And I want to look up and see those skyscrapers! We are talking about city here. Much less open spaces than in Witcher. Much more stuff going above our heads. It will be much more overwhelming from FPP than TPP.

It's probably best decision RED's could've make.
So please tell me where all this hidden stuff is revealed by TPP here.
And it is a single player game right why would it matter or affect you if someone else could pick the perspective they enjoy/ can tolerate etc?
 
i prefer 3rd person view in rpg games. i like to see the world (mainly open world) and my modified character in a 3rd person view. im pretty bad in fps shooter games (mainly open areas) where its hard for me to know where my enemies are coming from but for pc players it will be a bit easier because of headset i guess. I hope they give a switchable option in future. a 3rd person with photo mode would have been awesome also :3 . But i will still buy the game anyway for the respect i have for the company and the game looks awesome ;) .
 
Last edited:
So please tell me where all this hidden stuff is revealed by TPP here.
And it is a single player game right why would it matter or affect you if someone else could pick the perspective they enjoy/ can tolerate etc?

Oh, in this case it's even worse. Instead of seeing too much, character is blocking big chunks of screen especialy when aiming, which for me basicaly disqualifies the game.

And yes, it does matter even in SP game. Because gameplay and especialy combat has to be designed differently.
Instead of half assed two POVs it's better to have one, properly made and developed with entire game designed around it.
 
I dont get it, what works for you might not work for others. People are saying the trailer gave GTA vibes, well at least in GTA you as the player have the option to play it with what works for you whether that is FPP or TPP. There are very few games that I can stomach in FPP as I get really nauseaus from motion sickness.
Doesn't increasing FOV help at all? I mean, it's a real shame FPP makes you nauseous, but I doubt they'll be able to get all gameplay elements working in TPP. Think for example about an eye that gives you a HUD, I don't see how you'd make that work in TPP without sacrificing immersion. You'd still get a hud, but that's not the HUD your character is going to see.
 
There's no actual need to defend first person as camera perspective isn't a big deal in the first place and isn't going to automatically make the game better or worse. As long as the camera works, then things are fine.
 
I don't know about you guys but the only way I like to look at my character is in the inventory window. That is the only perspective I need to truly enjoy all the character customizations I have made.
 
What a lot of people seem to forget, is that with first person view you have a very important aspect that will work better than in third person. I am talking about the HUD. I can imagine there will be lots of info projected in your field of vision at some stages of the game. Do not forget we are talking about Cyberpunk, so I guess at some stage we will have lots of implants giving loads of information. Having a big blob (body) in your FOV would make it very problematic to project that info without disturbing that blob and all possible stances and locations it could be. That info would be pushed to the borders of the screen, making it difficult to see all the data at one glance.

Also - I think sneaking (line of sight) and aiming weapons works a thousand times better in first person view. For me I am more IN a world when I see stuff in first person view. It makes it far more personal, and it makes me feel I am personally there in stead of some avatar representing me. For me it intensifies the game play, and gives me the feeling I am really there. To be honest - I prefer first person view for these reasons.

About motion sickness. Well - I get it that there are some people having difficulties with it. From what I understand (and as a personal experience), it's not in every game. For instance - I got motion sickness in some parts (hovercraft scenes) of Half Life 2 (so I get what people are talking about). I am perfectly fine, however, when playing the "Older Scrolls" games. I think it depends on the way the first person perspective is implemented. Let's not forget that you live your daily life in first person perspective, and I guess the overwhelming majority of us do that without having motion sickness. Motion sickness in games is mostly dependent on the speed of movement, blur and field of view. I get motion sickness if my movement is too fast, or my field of view goes to fish-eye-like proportions. Tuning down my mouse movement and adjusting my field of view (most times default FOV and slower mouse movement works for me), makes a game perfectly playable in first view.

I have seen comments that you cannot play an open world game or/and RPG game from a first person perspective. Sorry, but I must say that's complete rubbish. There are countless open world or/and RPG games that are played from a first person perspective (I already mentioned the "Elder Scrolls" series as an example), so that kind of arguments have no real value because they are proven false.

So - at the end I have no problems with first person view. I think that people that, just like me, have motion sickness under certain circumstances, just have to try the game if it is released. We all know that you can get your money back very easily if you buy the game on GOG or Steam, so that should not be a problem. Personally I think I will be fine, and maybe those people that think they will have motion sickness will be surprised. Who knows?
 

Guest 4311839

Guest
I dont understand this backlash. Cyberpunk is not Witcher 3 and i don't remember CD saying they will only make RPG games and only in 3d person. Of course if we would check the first reveal trailer dam it could be something like Baldur's gate. Those who cant play fps because of motion sickness i get it, shit sucks. But if dev want to make game how they wanted to make, they cant please everybody and if you will try you will fail. And why for the god sake you would want to make CD to start pleasing all, maybe now they should put battle royal mode for those you don't like rpg elements. And asking for 3rd person and first person is lame. Its really not dat easy and most of the time feels clanky(hitman,skyrim,gtaV etc).

I get it people you thought it will be Witcher 3 in Cyberpunk universe and we will see Ciri in it. But it's new IP have some faith in developer. CDPR don't budge in lets hope for great game something who will live up to original dues ex back in the olden day's :D
 
I said this in another thread, but I feel it's also very suited for this thread as well, so I'll toss it here as well:

* * * * *
I don't quite think people understand the amount of work that goes into incorporating multiple perspectives for animations and game mechanics.

Let's run through a quick exercise to think about this for a minute. Consider the wall running mechanic in this game. First person animations would need to incorporate what you see when your limbs move, your grip on weapons, interactivity with objects or surfaces in the environment, etc. Pulling back into TPP, having extremely complex mechanics "just work" would actually require a metric shit ton of extra work. For every FPP animation your character can do (as I'm sure they don't want you to just utilize the animation sets of NPCs in the game), you now have to craft a TPP animation to match that. That is quite literally twice the amount of work for something that, me personally, would not enjoy even remotely as much. I don't walk around in the real world with a camera floating above my head. I use my eyeballs.

What about HUD elements that are cyberware-specific? What about on-screen overlays that are thematic? What about melee? These are all monumental tasks in and of themselves to execute well in a single perspective, let alone multiple ones. If we take a look at games that include both perspectives -- GTA V, Bethesda games, etc. -- the alternative perspective in view typically suffers in quality from the other. Fallout 4 plays and feels pretty good in FPP, but TPP they just feel janky. GTA V plays and feels really good in TPP, but pretty baseline when it comes to FPP. There are sacrifices you have to make when developing these types of things -- both of them take obscene amounts of time to implement and create to a high level of quality.

It's really not as simple as "well there's a photo mode planned so clearly everything is in place for this to work!". Unfortunately, that's just not how any of this works.

Would I want both if I had the choice? Of course. But investing all that time and work into something that will ultimately end up being an upskirt camera for 99% of the people using it, I don't think the devs feel it's worth it in the end. Outside of the rare cases of people who are genuinely affected by motion sickness from FPP media, it will ultimately become a non-issue. There are remedies that can be implemented to ease motion sickness, anyhow.

At any rate, enough rambling -- this is not the time or place to start flaming or feeling entitled. This is art, after all, and CDPR doesn't owe anyone anything. If they felt that making this game a turn based RTS was the best way to tell their story, they'd still manage to find incredible success with that because they are a very talented group of folks. Have a little faith. Literally every journalist I've seen talk about this game has had nothing but praise and awe to share -- no one in those conference rooms are storming out of them or throwing temper tantrums because it's a FPRPG.

EDIT - Also, it's confirmed that you will see your character in the character/inventory menu, as well as while driving cars/motorcycles, and during cutscenes -- which I'm sure there are a LOT of. Sounds good to me.

/end rant
* * * * *
Only thing i find flawed about your argument is that the game has multiplayer. Your friends or enemies will see you doing the wall run animation and I'm certain it would look smooth on their end so why would it look any different to you. You wouldn't have to create new animations probably polish them up a little maybe but not make new ones. Then again I don't claim to be a game designer I'm just using common sense but maybe it doesn't work like that who knows.

EDIT: NVM I was wrong game doesnt have MP
 
Last edited:
I can't believe this is going to be yet another FPS "rpg". :confused: (n) (n)
That is by far and wide the most boring type of game you can possibly make.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom