Poll: What should be our next stretch goal? What about 3rd person camera?

Pledge/Kickstarter
#422

I believe there can be a marriage between the 2 and still have a consistent game design.
Think your horror movies example…
In a matter of life and death you see how the character is in panic in 1stP to build a certain tension
(in 1stP danger can come from any angle and they want the viewer to experience this fear,as 1stP has the power to immerse the viewer in the moment…1stP is indeed used to make the player/viewer see through the eyes of the character)
Then the next shot you see is the characters chest being pierced by a butcher knife in a 3rdP
(immediately you understand what is going on/how the situation and other characters impact the main character, and that is key when it comes to 3rdP)

I don’t agree that using both would be an immersion breaker,on the contrary I think.
I think when applied in the right gameplay moments…you can become the character(seeing the immersive(/traumatic/exciting,…)moments through his eyes in 1stP
and witness the impact of the story/world on him 3rdp visually)
Using both allows them to both tell a great story where Henry has a place in
yet at the same time 1stP allows for a deeper personal connection
understanding him on an emotional level.

Perhaps its time that games stop treating 1stP and 3rdP as different genres
And instead start using both as tools to create an epic experience

1 Like
#423

I don’t think it’s that easy to compare movies and games. In movies you are the spectator by default. The only thing that changes are camera angles. But you can never leave your role, even when watching through a person’s eyes in a 1st person perspective.

Games are interactive experiences which offer a different emotional connection to the player character. That’s either caring, being or a mix of both (like I’ve explained before).

I think we have to disagree here. To me that is inconsistent design and an immersion breaker by defintion. That may work for some people who can easily switch between caring and being or already apply both levels to their character anyway. For everyone else it’s much more difficult (you have to think outside the box here, your own experience with games is not enough!).

They are not different genres but different takes on a gaming experience. For some people it might work to connect them but you can’t say that it strengthens immersion. Tools are indeed the right word, but not for creating immersion but for combining elements that usually don’t work together well and diminish immersion. Immersion is created by consistency, that’s really a fact. Game designers who value immersion do literally everything to create that consistent experience (by narrative, visuals, audio, art design and so on). You can of course say that it’s possible to combine 3rd person and 1st person. Warhorse actually really plans to do so. But not to increase immersion (because this is basically impossible) but to be able to combine a grand epic story with a 1st person medieval tourist spectator mode. That’s some kind of experience and it may have its points, but immersion is definitely not one of them, also that was claimed by @hellboy from the very beginning.

#424

I know one is the spectator by default in movies…and that games are interactive experiences.
Also I think just because you have a role,doesn’t mean you should always be in controle
Its unrealistic;sometimes we can’t prevent things from happening
I’m sick of being the hero that is always right on time to save the day by coincidence in RPGs…
The interactive game experinece has to be a mix of both caring and being in a realistic fashion.

The “consistency” you think is required,I would see as the usual and monotonous game design,I think…
Games have been really going to hell lately in my opinion
Pretty graphics and all but lame content,boring same-old story,…
I keep my hopes up for this one though as it seems promising

To end with Warhose plans to "combine a grand epic 3rdP story with 1stP medieval tourist spectator mode"
I surely hope its more than that…I hope we get to see parts Henry’s emotional experiences through his eyes.
I do believe 1stP and 3rdP can be combined to suck the player into the story and to create a closer emotional bond to the character
(how do you actually quote on this forum?)

#425

@Tipsy Just Select (“highlight”) the text you would like to quote, and an option will appear to “Quote Reply”. If you click it, the tags will be written for you in your reply.

Hope this helps. :wink:

1 Like
#426

What about the ability to start the game amongst the Pagans instead?

1 Like
#427

I think the game works really well as a first person only game as it makes it fully immersive and more realistic. I would love to see diversity of arms with stuff like halberds, pikes, warhammers all those other cool but slightly underrated weapons making an accurate appearance in this game.

3 Likes
#428

Well, after a few days of pondering I’ve finally voted - No third person option.

It was a toss-up between that and the ‘I’ll play in first person, but live and let live’ option, but the more I thought about it I really can’t see how this can be implemented without negatively affecting the first person elements.

Adding third person view is opening a can of worms IMO; there are so many extra considerations which have to be made and I think that the first person mode will almost certainly end up suffering as a result in the long run.

I’ve listed my concerns previously in this thread and can think of more which I could add to those, but don’t want to bloat this post.

4 Likes
#429

Dayz and Arma is has multiplayer version. But in this Game KCD its not problem with 3 person!

#430

GTA 5 FPV seems to have gained high praise.

2 Likes
#431

Agreed with your last thoughts. I think it should definitely switch to first person when conversing or fighting. But it is always nice to be able to see your badass character walking around town or riding a horse.

#432

How exactly it would affect 1st person in any way?

#433

@Wenceslaus

I don’t have time to write a monster reply right now, so please read what I’ve written previously (in this thread).

Here are a few quick points though:

Two separate systems - Everything will need to be considered from both view points from now on. It’s no longer good enough to just work well from first person. A quick example: sword fighting from first person without a HUD would be a possibility as it’s much easier to see the direction of the enemy’s blade. Archery also needs no HUD from first person. Maybe Warhorse wouldn’t want to go HUD-less, but if they did want to, gameplay-wise, they have the option to do so when only considering the first person viewpoint. Again, if the game were only third person, a HUD-less health system of blood on the character or via animations can be used; this wouldn’t work for first person however, so either you need to do twice the amount of work or come up with a compromise solution which is often less ideal than the camera specific one and takes more time out of the design and testing budgets. These are just a couple of HUD only example, the same applies to all elements of the game.

Balancing combat and stealth - In third person you can see behind you, giving an unrealistic degree of situational awareness. Regardless as to whether you prefer this or not, it’s very different to what you see from first person. This will change how difficult the combat is and again means it has to be balanced for two separate systems, or a compromise reached for both. From TPV, you can ‘look’ around corners (cheating with the camera), whereas first person requires a proper lean system and completely changes the feel of the stealth mechanics.

Camera specific options - I’d like to see helmets obscure the view in first person and sounds become muffled and exaggerated. This isn’t just more immersive, but has large gameplay implications; you’ve better protected, but have far less situational awareness. Imagine wearing a full suit of armour in a rainstorm, the reduced visibility through the visor and the loud sounds of the raindrops on the helmet. Pop into TPV and it’s a totally different experience. Having a third person option mucks this up (both restricted view and sound effects) and again means two separate systems which both need testing. This isn’t just visual and aural, but affects gameplay as well. (EDIT: Another example, akin to that of the helmet visibility, would be blocking with a large shield obscuring your view from first person, but not at all from third)

Fall back option - Some things are hard to get right from first person, such as horse riding. With a third person view available as an option there will be the temptation to skim over difficult areas and fall back to the third person ‘default’ riding view as is done in many games. I don’t want to see this. I don’t want more external cameras for my racing game, I want an improved first person system.

Collision and camera clipping - There will be issues with collision; as Dan mentioned interiors can be a problem and are often made over-sized for third person games. He said that first person might be forced on in interiors as a solution, but then you have an awkward system which allows TPV in combat in some places, but not in others etc. Some people will moan about this and dev time will no doubt be spent seeing how hard it would be to implement. I’d rather that time was spent on other things.

Again with the clipping issues - Regardless of whether TPV is denied for interiors, there will be some issues in exterior locations too. This will again eat into dev time, either through more coding or artists having to setup specific camera collision meshes.

Better experience from a single viewpoint - You can make a better, ‘purer’ experience when you’re tailoring it to just one viewpoint IMO. All the things mentioned above can dramatically change the way the game feels and is played, but by having to make both views work you muddy the water and exclude the possibility of certain gameplay elements which would only work from one viewpoint.

There are other reasons too, but I’m too busy right now to go on. Already written too much as is - So much for a ‘quick’ reply! :).

4 Likes
#434

nice,some excellent points in that review I think,like
"the world is much higher resolution,detailed and fuller in 1stP"
In a clip of Kindome come I’ve seen gorgeous details,sometimes simple things like a very realistic and pretty cool pool of mud…I’ve been wondering if 1stP wouldn’t do such gorgeous details more justice than 3rdP…

and as he says in this review about 1stP
"it makes the experience more intense"
at the part where he’s talking about escaping the cops and jumping over a fence
"it feels like its taking longer to get to/in the car,you feel more panicky,…"

That affirms my thoughts about it:1stP not only helps you to see through the eyes of the character,
it also helps you to identify with the character(you won’t lose interest in the character as easily i think)
,it allows you to create an emotional bond to the character,you can experience the thrill of the moment like you were the character yourself…

In contrast to that I think 3rdP has the strenght to position your character in a story/world
with the better situational awareness;it allows you to see how external factor affect your character over time

Its not a choice for consistency between caring 3rdP or being 1stP
Being 1stP allows the player to be more involved with the character,
As you then start to care more for the character,you are more concerned with his position in the story/world.
So I think both caring and being are as important and belong together

#435

This is individual. For me, there is no difference between 1st and 3rd view in this matter. Im the character no matter the view and I care for the character and his actions in both equaly.

1 Like
#436

Yes, but not everybody wants that. And it only works if the whole experience is catering to that. If not it’s just a kind of uncanny experience, and not immersive.

Yes, it is. It’s actually this basic choice which is the most important. The problem is that you have to leave your own view to be able to understand that. For most people it’s not a decison they make for themselves whether they care about a character or become a character or both. It’s an unconscious process based on their emotional state and the empathy they are capable of. Forcing the player to even switch between different states of being and caring can seriously break immersion for some and even worse.

#437

There wont be 3rd person view in buildings, minigames, archery… etc. Just at open spaces, melee combat an horse riding.
I think thats sure thing, not just possible solution.

3rd person view does not need HUD more then 1st person. That could stay for both IMHO.

About that immersion - 1st person already restrict your vision an surrounding awarness a lot so I think that 3rd peron view is more realistic in close combat. Yes, I would like that effect in helm but still, the 3rd person view could be an option.

That problem with sneaking - well thats problem, yes.
But the 3rd camera could be done in many ways - not all are really that usefull.
It is singleplayer anyway. I cant care kess if anybody wants to spoil his/her game by cheating.

About better experience - the first person camera is main and I believe it would be same whenever they implement third person camera as well or not.

#438

Yes,ofcourse you care about his actions in both equally in the games you have played
Because games have rarely used 1stP and 3rdP as tools to intensify how attached a player is to a character,
shifting the focus for the right content,while keeping the strenghts of both 1stP and 3rdP in mind.

maybe its something I’d prefer individually
As some people would say switching between 1stP and 3rdP can seriously break immersion…
And they can be right,if badly implemented.Perhaps that would be one of the risk of adding 3rdP
But with combined strenghts of both they can make an awesome game I believe

Rarely have games used the strenghts of 3rdP and 1stP to compose a game,which must also make it hard to understand.
whether they care about a character or not is an unconscious process based on their emotional state and the empathy they are capable of.
And because its an unconscious process 1stP and 3rdP can actually be used as a tool to grasp the player if applied right.

what if
any external influence would be displayed in 3rdP…when someone ties your character up and throws him in a basement for example,story with other npcs would be potential external influence,the choices you make sometimes bear an external influence
Anything that is the personal experience of the character is displayed in 1stP;
exploration,combat(with exception the large scale battles where the army is the external factor in winning/losing),
The personal experience of being tied up in a basement,…

#439

Disregarding the debate from a player’s standpoint (realism, sneaking, etc.), I think that it could potentially affect the development of the game.

I say this because of something Rockstar Studios said in the article posted by @snejdarek,

Putting players into the first-person, and to do it right, requires much more than simply repositioning the camera. Rockstar North has adapted GTA 5 extensively in order to create an independently satisfying and authentic first-person experience.

“You have to change pretty much everything,” reveals Nelson. “I mean, if you want to do it right. We have a very solid third-person animation system, but you don’t just put the camera down there and expect to see the guns, aim, and shoot. All those animations are new when you switch to first-person, because it all has to be animated to the camera, to make it feel like a proper first-person experience that I think people would expect. All the timings have to be re-evaluated.”

Now, granted we are all talking about the exact opposite conversion, however I imagine that it comes with its own set of challenges.

I’m well aware that @hellboy has assured us that they already use a third person camera to test the animations, but using a TPV camera for testing and viewing animations, and using one for actually playing the game are worlds apart.

Please take the above as it’s meant… not as fact but as my inference and speculations from the article and from the statement made by an already well-established and successful video game company.

EDIT: Changed “with a similar set of challenges” above to “with its own set of challenges” to more accurately reflect what I originally meant.

2 Likes
#440

Ok, but still… he did not only assure that they use a third person camera, but as far as I remember he talked about how first person camera is the hard one - so it would make sense then why Rockstar talked about “changing pretty much everything”.

And dont worry, Im rather curious about others opinion and also trying to test mine ind debate than trying to convict anyone… so facts, speculations, inference, hunch - I respect them all.

1 Like
#441

Oh for sure :wink: I’ve read several of your other posts, and if there’s one thing you don’t appear to be, it’s unjustifiably rude. :slight_smile:

I was just wanting to reply to your asking how it would affect 1st person in “any way”. I’m not sure I agree with @RGS that it would negatively affect the first person, but I do believe that it will affect it in some way.

I do honestly think that there are bound to be some moves or gestures or whatever that simply cannot work the same for both views. Meaning that, if this assumption is correct, they will have to do at least a few extra animations. Whether this means hours, days, or weeks is up for lots of debate, and I don’t really want to speculate on it. However, one has to admit that there is some measure of extra work, and the amount is likely significant enough as to not ignore.

I’m going to go out on a limb here and plainly say that I’m in the “Not even optional TPV” boat, and I do understand that to some it could seem selfish. But that’s not the intent. I’m simply very curious to see what @warhorse can do when not worrying about any other view. My very first instinct was to say, “Sure… I won’t use it but what the hey… more power to you.” But the more I thought about it, and about what I really wanted, the more I came to the conclusion that I really just want them to focus on one view.

If I were backing the greatest Indie version of Dragon Age, and the studio said they wanted to make a definitive Third Person adventure, chances are I’d likely be curious to see what they did there too, and were the debate to come up I’d say I’d be fairly likely to vote for them sticking to their original vision too. Not out of any sort of spite or idea of superiority, but simply out of creative appreciation.

© 2015 Warhorse Studios www.warhorsestudios.cz