1st person vs. 3rd person

[spaceboy]

gotcha, yeah we've got a couple of members here who really dislike 3rd person.  I never particularly had a preference - I was thinking that it seems when they want to really create a character they use 3rd person and when they want the user to feel it's really them then they use 1st person.  But that wasn't always true, remember Duke Nukem 3D was 1st person, but I guess his character was already created in the earlier 2D games.  Then I think  of FC2 where our playable character totally has a personality when your not playing him but when you are I don't feel like I'm playing Marty or whatever I feel like its me....Ah, enough rambling. 

[PZ]

The first 3rd person game I have played is Fallout3 in shich you have the ability to go 1st person, or by a spin of the mouse wheel, go to a variety of 3rd person view distances.  When running outside in the open, I always use 3rd person view because it gives me the greatest peripheral view (1st person is quite narrow).  On the other hand, when inside a building, 3rd person can become quite nauseating (literally) as the view bounces around.  The subsequent 3rd person games have been Assassin's Creed2 and Uncharted2 which are both well done - not the discomfort that you can experience indoors with FO3.

I guess that for me at least, it depends on the specific game as to whether or not the 3rd person view is objectionable.  From viewing the Just Cause2 video, I get the sense that for me it will be as acceptable as AC2 and Uncharted2.

[Art Blade]

ArmA2 had both, too.

[JRD]

I like to play ArmA2 in 3rd person because you can change to iron sights/scope view easily with RMB!

[RedRaven]

Yeah, in Arma2 would use 1st person when on foot. but 3rd when driving any of the vehicles.More games should have the option like A2, FO3, Stalker etc.

[spaceboy]

I think it's way better to build good characters through 3rd person though.  And I like controlling those characters sometimes even more than being first person.  Would we have Kratos if it was a 1st person fighting game, or Lara Croft etc.  I'm not sure if I'll identify with the JC2 character (Rico I think) though...

[Art Blade]

How about "it's way better to build good characters" -- regardless of the view -- than the crap we sometimes get served: I like characters to identify with (FarCry1, DukeNukem3D, Kane&Lynch, HitMan etc, even FarCry2) as opposed to anonymous ones (OFP2 -- who am I?) or even by default changing characters (CoD series).  :)

[spaceboy]

well yeah I agree kind of but sometimes I really don't want to identify such as in some FPS games I like the immersion of being non-descript.  I think though, now that I think about it, that it probably has more to do with online play.  When you are online and communicating with others via a mic you are really being yourself, not a character, and except for FC2, most of my first person games have been heavily played online.   hmmm... this is interesting.  I think I'll split the topic for a 3rd person 1st person discussion!

[Art Blade]

well done, and you beat me to it  :-X :)

Interesting, with that taken into consideration, I can relate what you think about the online aspect. I remember some FPS games I played online, and by then it was only important to me to be able to distinguish friend from foe and that whoever was on the playing field was fullbright (during competitions)  ;D When playing FPS for fun, I liked diversion aka "skins" -- modified outfits, different outfits, funny conversions of the player models (ever played against R2D2, Sponge Bob, Bobafett, John McClane etc all in the same game? :) ) and I didn't care about the "character" it used to be in SP.

But, today, I play almost only SP. There, a real character is nice for me. Maybe, coming to think of it, just as you did regarding MP, for me the role playing part is somewhat important. If there is a storyline attached to the character and if the character is somwhat colourful (not literally) and a bit skewed and turned in, I like that very much. Or, if I can create myself (typical for RPG) as in how my face looks, how I dress, maybe gender change (sometimes I play as male, sometimes as female) for the fun of it, and perhaps developing skill trees (from what I gather, like Borderlands, or FallOut3 etc).

So for me the best thing is a RPG with a lot of FPS elements. That's why I like FO3 or Stalker. But also, if the game is really cool, like Assassin's Creed, third person view is ok for me.

The very best thing to get, however, is free choice: 1st person view as long as I like it, then 3rd person view whenever I want, or the other way round, but choice is really cool.

[JRD]

You have a point there spaceboy... if it wasn't for 3rd person view, there would be no Lara Croft, no CJ (GTA VC) or Niko (GTA IV), no Altair, no Agent 47 etc...

But when there is no character as in 1st person, you are the one, that's YOU playing...

I clearly see how it would affect MP even not playing online...

The other side would be 3rd person games where you customize your character as in many RPGs....

[mmosu]

So for me the best thing is a RPG with a lot of FPS elements. . .

That's Borderlands to the letter.  It's also worth noting that BL relies heavily on first person but the personality of the character is not lost since you constantly hear them talking to themselves - chuckling whenever another headshot happens or grunting approval when opening a weapons chest.  You get a clear sense of who the character is while still not seeing very much of them. 

[Art Blade]

I bet I'd be playing it right now if the graphics were a little more FC2'ish and less cartoonish. Not that it's badly done, but...

I really like "reality" or "believable images" these days because it is finally possible to create those. Back in the day it didn't matter much how a game looked because it was simply impossible to create that kind of reality you can now admire in games like FarCry2, NeedForSpeed:Shift, even older titles like Kane&Lynch, FallOut3, HitMan:BloodMoney (which had both 1st and 3rd) and so on.

So I can stand 3rd person view if everything else is eye candy, and yet I'd still prefer 1st person over 3rd person because it feels more like being inside a virtual world seeing things with and through your own virtual eyes, rather than hovering around in your own back and watching yourself doing stuff. I don't need to be my own guardian angel  ;D Yet it is cool, sometimes, to watch yourself doing something spectacular or to check your freshly acquired leather armour and the likes, from a step back (3rd person).

When I drive a car in games, be it FC2 or TDU or NFS, I really can't do in 3rd person view what I am able to do while in 1st person view. And to me it feels silly to steer a car with a real wheel and manual H-shift and pedals if I have to watch a matchbox car on the screen that reminds me of those remote controlled toys. I like to drive it, not to watch myself driving it. If I shoot, I want to look down the barrel of my gun and in the eye of my opponent rather than watch myself playing, like a puppeteer.

Don't get me wrong, I don't care what everyone else does, I don't say 1st is better than 3rd person view, all I say is, this is just me and what I like :)

[fragger]

Games like Tomb Raider and Assassin's Creed have to be 3rd person really, because of how they w@&k and the things the character can do, eg. clinging to and strafing around ledges, which wouldn't really translate very well into a 1st person view. I quite enjoyed the first few Tomb Raider games, though that may have had as much to do with watching a girl from behind as solving the puzzle elements ;D

I thnk it's simply that some games are better suited to 1st person, some to 3rd. It also depends on personal tastes. I tend to come down on the 1st person side myself, as I get a stronger sense of immersion in those games, but still really enjoy a 3rd person game if the gameplay is strong and engaging.

As to the establishment of solid characters in 1st person games, I thought Valve did a pretty good job with Gordon Freeman in the Half Life games, even though he never speaks, and all you ever see of him is his hands holding weapons. However, the way the other characters in the game talk and relate to him makes you feel as though you're a character, even though you never actually do anything "characterish".

One approach I like is in Deus Ex (1), where you play in 1st person mode until you engage another character in conversation, at which point the game changes to a cinematic-style 3rd person view, complete with dialogue-triggered switching camera angles. As soon as the conversation ends, it switches back to 1st person again. I thought the player's persona of "JC Denton" was a very good bit of character creation. But then Deus Ex is a unique game in that it's a successful marriage of both FPS and RPG, and does both equally well.

[Art Blade]

I can fully relate (apart from the fact that I never played Deus Ex), and I agree with you that there are games that won't suit 1st person well (I believe Assassin's Creed wouldn't be half as good if you had to swing a dagger and whip out hidden blades for a stab and deal with groups of people in 1st person view). Climbing and jumping looks cool in 3d person view :)

Although I didn't play Mirror's edge (yet I watched some in-game vids), I know it's a 1st person view game, and that is probably an example of that it may w@&k, still, even if it's more likely a genre of a 3rd person game. Playing that kind of game as 1st person is probably the key to its success (if you liked it) and an explanation of why some didn't like it (who might have if it were 3rd person)

[JRD]

So for me the best thing is a RPG with a lot of FPS elements. . .

That's Borderlands to the letter.  It's also worth noting that BL relies heavily on first person but the personality of the character is not lost since you constantly hear them talking to themselves - chuckling whenever another headshot happens or grunting approval when opening a weapons chest.  You get a clear sense of who the character is while still not seeing very much of them.

Funny, for me is the opposite... I like a FPS with a few RPG elements.
I like interactions and a few choices like choose how my character looks like, what weapons I can upgrade, a few items to trade, whether I should take a mission or not, choosing to kill someone or let him dissapear, trading and that's it. But when it comes to level up, full customisation with charisma, strenght and the points system and hundreds of paths to take I get a bit bored... too many options  ::)

Not that RPG aren't good, but a typical RPG with all its elelments is not my cup of tea really. Maybe that's because I never got into FO3 much.

Again, it's just my opinion, no right or wrong here!  ;)

[Art Blade]

What makes this discussion very interesting for me is that it makes us find out more about our tastes and preferences. The more you think and read about it, the more you get yourself sorted :)

Some of the thoughts posted here made me think again, and see a bit clearer where my own preferences are. Now that you posted your thoughts, I can't say that I don't understand you, hehe. Actually, if a game offers a lot of choices, it might indeed lead to my next game being a simple one. :)

Maybe it is like this, for me: If a game offers enough interesting features and if the gameplay is good (man, thinking of Aces over Europe, good idea but horribly done) I might deviate and play something I usually won't. Good example is OFP2 or even ArmA2, war sims, usually not my cup of tea, yet I did play them due to several rather interesting gimmicks (OFP2: ballistics, see how bullets don't hit in the middle of the crosshair) and "open world" environment (in hindsight, ArmA2 was better in that area, but it was bugged, OFP2 wasn't bugged, but it lacked open world).

The games that really get me hooked need to be programmed well. A badly programmed FPS won't keep me playing, while a well-programmed 3rd person very well might (Assassin's Creed 1 and probably 2). An RPG like MassEffect(1) would have got me playing a lot more if it also had FPS characteristics, yet it was 3rd person only, and it had what you described: TOO many choices and stuff, and maybe not enough freedom we get out of real open world games.

So I think to me the overall most important thing these days is true open world, then somewhat realistic appearance (FC2'ish rather than Borderlands' style), followed by 1st person view at least as a choice (toggle 1st/3rd), and only then I'd choose between RPG and FPS. I guess a good RPG is more tempting regarding immersion, but FPS are quicker to get in and out, as in "let's play a round of XY now."

Hard to say, really, considering all the above, and all the posts so far :)

[Ricamundo]

I 've never kept my opinion on this topic a secret. It's first person or forgettaboutit for me. ;) Third is too passive, you're  a spectator, its like watching a movie imho.

I've played lots of driving games, shooters, and a few flying games, and i've got to be in the car, or cockpit, or holding the weapon, or its just not right to me. End of. :)

[mmosu]

Art, you beat me to the punch again - I was also thinking of Mirror's Edge when I was reading fragger's post  ;D  That's another "love it / hate it" game which I definately think couldn't have been successful without first person - the parkour wouldn't have had the effect they were going for without it.  Plus it was a big early undertaking on the PS3, with one of the first big graphical tests of the platform and a lot of hype riding on the release as well - the devs needed to deliver something dramatic and different, and in that respect, I think they chose wisely with first person and overall it was a success.

For me, I don't necessarily have an unqualified preference for 1st or 3rd.  As long as the perspective is chosen well and for the right reasons, and it works well with the game mechanics, then I will enjoy it.  Usually point of view is not a critical issue for me.  I've played games where I felt a particular view was chosen to cover the games shortcomings - if this is done cleverly I can overlook it and even appreciate why it was done - but if done poorly, or even worse, if the view was carelessly choosen and makes the problems in the game more obvious, then it can become a deal breaker for me.

Funny, for me is the opposite... I like a FPS with a few RPG elements.

Now that I think about your post JRD, I feel like Borderlands could be better classified in the category you are describing - the FPS elements definately take precedence over the RPG elements.  There is leveling up, skill trees, and the like, but the options are not so vast and varied as in pure RPG's - basically, there aren't so many choices that you get lost.  Thought I would clear that up for myself  ;)

[Art Blade]

Hehe, sorry for beating you to Mirror's Edge :)

What you just said to JRD made me smile...

Funny, for me is the opposite... I like a FPS with a few RPG elements.

Now that I think about your post JRD, I feel like Borderlands could be better classified in the category you are describing - the FPS elements definately take precedence over the RPG elements.

as opposed to:

So for me the best thing is a RPG with a lot of FPS elements. . .

That's Borderlands to the letter.

Quite a game, isn't it ;D ;D ;D

[JRD]

Geez... now you got me!

I'm definitely a FPS fan and I also like 3rd person adventure/shooter games.
Having a few RPG elements is a good thing when the dose is enough to bring some diversity and choices to gameplay but never too much as to make me consider each and every action I take because IT WILL change the way the game unfolds considerably.

So my point is: it has to be a shooter (1st or 3rd) and even better if I can have some choices along  the way like FC2, ArmA2, STALKER etc...

If it's a RPG with a 1st person view, it is not the kind of game I am really fond of.

I guess that the whole full customization and levelling up thing is a bit too much for me. To be able to change you appearance and customize your guns is great. Also, to be able to team up with some sort of faction, guild, clan or whatever, leading ultimately to making their enemies yours, is also great. STALKER does it, FC2 could've done it as well, ArmA2 also brings those elements into gameplay... all of those are FPS with a bit of RPG element with it and its great!

I also have Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic installed and some said its a great RPG... don't take me wrong folks, the game is great, but to watch as my character fights and then having to ask a lot of questions to a lot of people only to figure out a dozen ways I can choose to go made me drop the game quite early!!

I'll w@&k my way into the game again soon... I love the star wars theme! Maybe I'll change my mind about RPGs, but so far, in my humble opinion, this is not the genre I like to play!

[Art Blade]

Now you got ME  ;D

I realise I have the same problem as mmosu, when he could recommend Borderlands as either an RPG with lots of FPS elements and as an FPS with few RPG elements.

Now that I consider that and your post, I admit I don't really know which is which. But I think I'm in the same boat as you with regards to FPS that have a few RPG elements in it. In contrast to you, I do play real RPGs as long as they have some fights in them (Oblivion) and the more the better (FO3) and all of those RPGs I played (I think) had the option to toggle 1st/3rd view. The one that didn't was MassEffect(1) which had 3rd person only and had more RPG than shooter elements, at least to me it felt like that, maybe due to the lack of 1st person view.

Haha, this is funny :)

[mmosu]

What you just said to JRD made me smile...
Quite a game, isn't it ;D ;D ;D

You caught me  ;)

Seriously though, what JRD said made me think about it in a way that hadn't occured to me before.  I had never previously considered a distinction between a "FPS with RPG elements" and a "RPG with FPS elements", but now I realize there is a big difference.  Ads had billed Borderlands as an "RPS", or "role-playing shooter", and I think that's a very descriptive term for what it is.  When I answered Art's origninal post I wasn't thinking about which was the bigger piece of the puzzle, RPG or FPS -  so, in hindsight, FPS with RPG elements is definately the better description imo - final answer  ;D

[Art Blade]

definitely?

;D

Yeah. RPS... good idea to call some games that. And I understand your final answer  :)

[mandru]

I'm pretty easy to please. If it's a good game and plays well I play it.  ;D

When the worst part of a game is getting your character to do what you want then it doesn't really matter if it's 1st or 3rd person it just makes me want to crack the game disk with a hammer.  :-*

[mmosu]

Uughh - that reminds me of Prototype.  Recently started playing it on a friends recommendation, and I had to stop - Alex Mercer handles like a steam locamotive with rusty wheels on one side.  I realize some people might like that because it makes it seem like he has all this inertia when he moves, but it made doing the waypoint missions infuriating.  I can't tell you how many times I overshot my target, or couldn't slow down and turn fast enough, or he just did something completely different from what I was trying to make him do.  Needless to say, I'm no longer playing Prototype...it's a frantic, frustrating game and there is just not enough there to make me see past that.