Nobody Seems To Be Raving About FPP

+
Status
Not open for further replies.
You're welcome to this opinion but I can't say I agree with it. I won't fault a game developer for taking a more transparent route, openly discussing a feature and/or asking for/receiving feedback on it and then in the end not using it. It comes off as insisting they must begin with their starting point, or vision of the game, and stay with it. As if it's some static approach. I don't think this is fair to them. It's not realistic or reasonable either. Things change.

The developer should be cut some slack in this area. Maybe they thought something would work better one way but as things evolved and came together realized it worked better another. If they really put passion and effort into the game, and I sincerely think CDPR does, they've earned this freedom.

It's the exact same deal with areas like car customization or features supposedly being "cut". People see this and assume it means the game is losing content. As if those features and functionality were fully implemented and in their finished state then cut out of the equation at the last minute. Nothing was lost here. It just means things changed in the design process. It happens.

If anything I'd rather see things go the other way, in fact. Game devs be a bit more forthcoming with what they're trying to achieve, how those views shift over the development process, etc. Unfortunately, this often means they get slapped around in the video game "media" and from players alike. This is probably why they often aren't so free with sharing.

Of course! I fully agree with your here Dingo. In most cases, I too think that developers should be both encouraged and applauded for being transparent.

However, to ItsDacisco (OP's) question and my point: This transparency has drawbacks too and I'm elaborating on them. The reason why these reviewers aren't commenting on how great/terrible the FPP is, and why it is a "controversy" to others, is because the transparency in development has allowed those passionatly following that development, to get understandably disappointed when it takes a direction they hadn't hoped for. The influencers - more likely to be invested only transiently - have no such attachment.

Let's be clear though: It is transparency that causes disappointment, and it's CDPR which is being transparent. Ergo, CDPR has caused this disappointment, or "controversy". But it's a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation when it comes to this. Transparent or not, CDPR would've caused some disappointment either way, but on the whole, I agree that transparency is still the preferable option. As long as CDPR is willing to put up with the drawbacks of transparency, they should keep doing it.


That said, you didn't completely misread me. In an ideal world, transparency is best and I agree with you on paper, but I would be willing to argue against transparency in cases like this and how CDPR should sometimes be excused from being so, if we were to prioritize player expectations ahead of transparency. That's an argument for another thread though. Maybe we'll start a "transparency" topic after/if they lock this one down. :ROFLMAO:
 
You know what the funny thing is? All these people talking about FPP being the best option cause it is more immersive will be those same people who drive in TPP instead of FPP.

Just saying....

I don't think that's a fair comment.

The first person driving is not close to being as good as a first person driving game. Aside from the poor handling, it doesn't provide on screen/road navigation, the peripheral vision is poor. They need to improve it if they want people to use it. I use first person driving in Far Cry no problem.
 
Actually about actual FFP, I'm really worried about how they seems to have chosen not to push FPS players out of their habits instead of aiming immersion (and so realism) as they said (for exemple wielded weapons in the FOV even when not used).
 
I like that they went with full first person perspective. I like it a lot. I understand why they made it important for immersion. I just sincerely hope there are many good opportunities where I am able to see myself, like a mirror in public bathrooms or something like that. I don't mind being in first person 99% of the time, but I would like some chances to really see myself from all angles if it's possible, but it's up to CDPR you know, I trust them on this one. Maybe V can wear vr glasses that are connected to a hovering little camera drone that flies around V, granting them third person perspective, and allowing them to take very nice pictures, mid movement like running through the city or wilderness? Essentially an in game-full-cannon lore-accurate method of achieving third person?
The whole camera thing seems kind of weird though, even in the world itself unless your character was a reporter, or journalist of some sort. Why would they randomly have that tech? just so CDPR can explain 3rd person? It's not that serious, if they wanted it they would've kept it in minus all the weird "canon" explainations
 
That said, you didn't completely misread me. In an ideal world, transparency is best and I agree with you on paper, but I would be willing to argue against transparency in cases like this and how CDPR should sometimes be excused from being so, if we were to prioritize player expectations ahead of transparency. That's an argument for another thread though. Maybe we'll start a "transparency" topic after/if they lock this one down. :ROFLMAO:

In other words, it's ideal for them to be transparent in a perfect world. Since it's not a perfect world and people will run to the pitchforks on a whim it's better to be... less transparent? Fair enough :). This is kind of what they do in a lot of cases too. For this very reason.
 
The whole camera thing seems kind of weird though, even in the world itself unless your character was a reporter, or journalist of some sort. Why would they randomly have that tech? just so CDPR can explain 3rd person? It's not that serious, if they wanted it they would've kept it in minus all the weird "canon" explainations

Yeah he's basically telling them to add third person with a not so clever story explanation.
 
Yep. First-person only but when hey, when we drive we get third-person. What gives, huh?

Coming from Mass Effect and Fallout this will forever be a pain-in-the-neck for me. The rest of the game better be good :LOL:
 
Most of things we do to our bodies irl are to appear to others in a certain way. We can't see a tatoo on our backs (or pink theet O.O) but we have it to generate a social impact and statement of our personality before even knowing each other, or we might do it for our own beliefs, but in the end it affects our social interactions. These details in the game should affect social interactions in a sense, not to be pointless. Even if we can't see such features in a mirror. Or else it's a waste of time. My wife forgot she had a tatoo in the back of her shoulderblade she had made when she was 21, she was like "oh yeaaa I forgot! Does it still look good?". Of course it does but she doesn't care about it at all.
That's really cute! I'm sure your wife cares, because she asked you "does it still look good" trust me, she cares :)
That's really sweet though. You found secret hidden developer easter egg tattoo, and your wife is the story writer, tattoo artist is the graphics designer. That's so "video game" :)(y)

Yes, people wear things and prepare their appearance because they know others care, but it feels good when people also perceive themselves as looking good because it's psychologically satisfying and pleasing to know that you are "good". It's a good feeling, so while it is also very good to know others see you as "good" it's also important to me to be able to see myself in-game and say "yes this is me, I look good, and this makes me feel good"

just in case, this is not a pride/ego related phenomena. It is something else more innocent and peaceful.
Post automatically merged:

Actually about actual FFP, I'm really worried about how they seems to have chosen not to push FPS players out of their habits instead of aiming immersion (and so realism) as they said (for exemple wielded weapons in the FOV even when not used).
I'm not sure I understand. Can you please reword that and clarify? I'm missing an important piece of context, or I have failed entirely to understand. Thank you for your patience with me :)
Post automatically merged:

The whole camera thing seems kind of weird though, even in the world itself unless your character was a reporter, or journalist of some sort. Why would they randomly have that tech? just so CDPR can explain 3rd person? It's not that serious, if they wanted it they would've kept it in minus all the weird "canon" explainations
I agree with you, perhaps there is a reason why V acquires the camera drone? I'm talking like a small drone the size of a small pastry snack, maybe half the size of a cup cake or something. Maybe V needs the drone at some point in-game in order to record a new brain dance for someone, and after that point V gets to keep the camera drone and use it to make more of their own braindance? Maybe for the entire game, 3rd person video in motorbike and car are not available until the point where V acquires the camera drone? :shrug: That way, there are real reasons, and real cause and effect.
Post automatically merged:

Yeah he's basically telling them to add third person with a not so clever story explanation.
Well I hadn't been inspired yet to elaborate further and expand upon the idea, but KingRevolt inspired me by pointing out logic based reasons why my idea was flawed, allowing me to learn from my mistakes and improve upon the idea, resulting in a seed that has further blossomed into something more special than if they had never contributed their opinion of my post, so I am grateful to KingRevolt for their contribution to the discussion. :) (y)
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure I understand. Can you please reword that and clarify? I'm missing an important piece of context, or I have failed entirely to understand. Thank you for your patience with me :)

There are some things in FPS games that are more a remainder of old games like Doom that actual things you see IRL.
For example the "always on screen" weapons.

Players have habits of that because of games, but from an immersion PoV it's not realist, meaning not immersive too.
 
Actually about actual FFP, I'm really worried about how they seems to have chosen not to push FPS players out of their habits instead of aiming immersion (and so realism) as they said (for exemple wielded weapons in the FOV even when not used).
There are some things in FPS games that are more a remainder of old games like Doom that actual things you see IRL.
For example the "always on screen" weapons.

Players have habits of that because of games, but from an immersion PoV it's not realist, meaning not immersive too.
Okay now I fully understand, and I agree. :D I think it's interesting how there is that one scene where V is giving the chip from meredith to the gang to purchase the flathead spider bot, and she hands them the chip from outside of the view of the screen. It looks funny and cute and looks weird, but also adds to the immersion in a cheesy but very cute and professional way in a weird sense, but I really appreciate how it is a thing that can actually happen and it adds to the experience. As for weapons always on screen, I guess it helps and I like it, as long as it's not overwhelming and taking over the whole screen, but it does help me a lot so that I know what weapon I'm using so that I'm ready in case something bad happens.
 
Right. The more I really think about it, the more I realize I don't think I'd get nearly as much enjoyment from the game if it had TPP? I think as a game where you are the protagonist it makes much more sense to experience the game as if you were actually in it, hence FPP. Games in which you're controlling an already established character such as Geralt, or Breath of the Wild would just be, imo. Less enjoyable from a gameplay, and design standpoint.
 
Right. The more I really think about it, the more I realize I don't think I'd get nearly as much enjoyment from the game if it had TPP? I think as a game where you are the protagonist it makes much more sense to experience the game as if you were actually in it, hence FPP. Games in which you're controlling an already established character such as Geralt, or Breath of the Wild would just be, imo. Less enjoyable from a gameplay, and design standpoint.
I totally agree, but just like in real life, I want good opportunities to see myself in recordings I take of myself from an external perspective, mirrors, and other similar things. If the goal is to make it realistic and life-like in the perspective, I crave for CDPR to go all the way and let us see ourselves just as often as we would in real life. :shrug:
 
I totally agree, but just like in real life, I want good opportunities to see myself in recordings I take of myself from an external perspective, mirrors, and other similar things. If the goal is to make it realistic and life-like in the perspective, I crave for CDPR to go all the way and let us see ourselves just as often as we would in real life. :shrug:
We don't see ourselves in third person though? If the game took place in a setting that seriously lacked reflective surfaces for whatever reason I would be a little concerned too! But, it doesn't. People getting nervous because you CDPR decided to deviate from the industry standard is quite strange considering we can still see our character in the equipment menu haha! I can imagine animating the character model in multiple perspectives, in a way that satisfies the players would be a long and tedious process, so I don't really mind that they cut TPP because I know what my character looks like (me), and as long as game physics are on point, and animations are on point, I don't mind FPP
 
Its already been pointed out that there are an abundance of reflective surfaces. ie mirrors, pools of water that you can see yourself in so not being able to see your self that spent so long making is rather moot. pluss get to see your self in inventory screen as well
 
You know what the funny thing is? All these people talking about FPP being the best option cause it is more immersive will be those same people who drive in TPP instead of FPP.

Just saying....

We mostly choose driving in 3rd because it's much easier with WAY less restricted view (cabin/dash blocking).
FPP is the most immersive view, and arguably easier to control / shoot etc.

I want isometric view when it comes to VR.
 
We don't see ourselves in third person though? If the game took place in a setting that seriously lacked reflective surfaces for whatever reason I would be a little concerned too! But, it doesn't. People getting nervous because you CDPR decided to deviate from the industry standard is quite strange considering we can still see our character in the equipment menu haha! I can imagine animating the character model in multiple perspectives, in a way that satisfies the players would be a long and tedious process, so I don't really mind that they cut TPP because I know what my character looks like (me), and as long as game physics are on point, and animations are on point, I don't mind FPP
Real life takes place in first person perspective... correct? please forgive me if I am misunderstanding.
Its already been pointed out that there are an abundance of reflective surfaces. ie mirrors, pools of water that you can see yourself in so not being able to see your self that spent so long making is rather moot. pluss get to see your self in inventory screen as well
Please share source of information with me? This is already confirmed? I am desperate to know more please :D
 
Just wondering: Am I the only one bugged by the fact that the NPCs animations are better than V's?
Outside of the melee animations making melee attacks look a bit weightless and lacking in impact the first person animations looked fine to me :shrug:

Can't say the thought ever crossed my mind. It's a bit difficult to make that comparison I feel.
 
Outside of the melee animations making melee attacks look a bit weightless and lacking in impact the first person animations looked fine to me :shrug:

Can't say the thought ever crossed my mind. It's a bit difficult to make that comparison I feel.

Actually, "first person animations" are the problems, normally you make the exact same moves whatever you see it from your own eyes or if someone is filming you with a camera.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom