A lot of people are afraid about that, because the games they have played from a 3rd-person view were ugly, characters had strange animations, or controls were uncomfortable. The creation of a good game from 1st-person is much easier, because you only have to model the weapons. There are [only a] few animations and few problems with synchronization of movement and animations. You just copy Quake. But what I am missing in 1st-person games is the lead hero. You can’t see him, you can’t feel that you are him* and you can’t watch all the actions that he performs. Finally, all the 1st-person games look exactly the same.
We will use 1st-person controls in a 3rd-person view, with motion-captured animations and it seems that it will work well. If not, we will think about something else.
No, I disagree mate… I personally feel as though we’ve made it really quite clear that for the vast majority, the notion of allowing TPV was acceptable. And that’s made zero difference to the outcome.
I’m definitely an advocate as you can see from my comments below. But @McWonderBeast and I (along with many others) clearly just feel as though we’re now flogging a dead horse.
The initial Poll was poorly worded and left the outcome quite ambiguous. Regardless of that however, if you look at the results, the majority of voters either supported, or were not directly against having TPV as an option. Even with that, the decision has seemingly been made.
If they really wanted to get a definitive and final community response then they’d go back to the polls. But this time word it so that there is very little ambiguity.
Q: Would you support the notion of KC:D having a Third Person View camera option available?
1.) Yes
2.) No
What are you disagreeing with me on? I said if most of us wanted it, they’d change it, then I said most of us aren’t in favor of it. Where’s the disagreement?
Whilst I would theoretically support an optional third-person view - if the devs could solve all the associated issues, like how to balance 3PV with 1PV gameplay - it’s pretty clear that it’s not going to be in the base game at this point. The game is already behind schedule, and I’m sure the devs have plenty of other things to work on which are far more critical. Perhaps it might be added later in a content patch, if there’s enough demand for it, and if the devs have time? Or in the next installment of the series (assuming the first game is successful)?
"There’s also the potential for virtual reality, as CryEngine supports it and Warhorse, the developer, has an Oculus Rift dev kit. But the tricky issue of motion sickness will need solving first. ‘We are going to support it,’ Vávra says. 'What I don’t know yet is how much work it’s going to be or if it’s even possible to avoid the motion sickness with the type of game we are making. With, for example, horse riding in first-person, it could cause motion sickness now even without the VR!’ Vávra says he suffers motion sickness from VR so it’s something he’s sensitive to."
You’d think @hellboy had some pull within WH and can make third person happen
The relevance is simply that Dan appears to be an advocate of Third Person, and that the community caused his knee buckling reaction. His soul is suffering. Can’t you see?!?!
For a game thats over a decade old and has no direct correlation to the current title or developer, other then Daniel Varvra? wow that’s some compelling confirmation bias.
Daniel Varva the creative director, the person who more then likely had the original vision to make a first person experience in the first place.
I don’t know if you’ve been following the same development everyone else has but Dan does not buckle to the cries and opinions of others.
It’s his unwillingness to compromise his vision that lead to this title not being picked up by mainstream game developers and thusly being funded via Kickstarter.
I’m pro TPV, as an option to facilitate things like free-view and panning around.
This ‘option’ in my theoretical world, wouldn’t impact FPV combat, mini-games or other critical game mechanics. And would just be usable during free roaming activities within the game world.
Not overly sure why people would be against that, so what are your objections mate?
but thats like comparing apples with Bred.
