This thread is growing too fast. In case we want it to be useful for Dan and Warhorse we should probably explain our opinion briefly, clearly and concisely and don’t discuss it or especially don’t digress to off topic.
I would even advice one post per person attitude.
Just my two cents.
Wtf? No!
Please read again what I wrote.
Btw, I posted the link to the mod and now you are seriously asking me if I think it’s possible?
Come on, dude!
We will get the exact same tools the devs use for developing the game themselves.
And they already use 3rd person for developing purposes.
Sry, I had to repeat myself over and over again.
But I will stop it now because it seems he doesn’t understand what I mean anyway even though I think I got my points across. 
I would switch to third person every now and then when I think it might look better or I want to have more overview but I guess I will be playing in first person 80% of the time. A video would be helpful to see what you mean by third person camera exactly.
If you choose not to implement this and to set another streatchgoal it wont matter much to me though.
I didn’t read the whole thread of 245 posts, but yes, do it, please. It would improve the game a lot for me
As for the other stretch goals, I’d really like game fully open to modding (possibility to add or even create new maps, scenarios…) Like in Flashpoint/Resistance and ArmA series… 
I’d be rather careful about patches and updates to the original game. I hate when the game actualizes itself each week (and all the saves stop working and so on). This killed better games than KC:D.
Go play any other game on the market if you want 3rd person view. This shouldn’t be that case … “should be unique game and yet it is just another 3rd person view rpg”.
and… SO WHAT?? you only think about your self… used to play 1st person view games…
What it “should be” is what Warhorse decides it’s going to be. If that means they think it will benefit from TPV in some way after all, that’s their choice. It’s not on you to tell others “go play something else instead.”
I’m sorry you are used to just for super mario cart, but there is obviously more people who are not ok with it and want promised first person rpg as was intended from the beginning. But anyway having the third person view as a stretch goal is the biggest bummer.
I will play with 1st person. If there 3th person it is ok for me and maybe I will use it sometimes to look at the outfit of my character, but I do not need it.
I must have missed the memo that they’re scrapping FPV entirely or making it subpar just to add a TPV option in certain cases.
My thoughts exactly. 400 000$ for a 3rd person view makes no sense, they should use that money to make the game even more immersive and realistic.
like your idea of expanding the assortiment of armor and weapons better than this 3rd person camera proposal that indeed makes little sense…
Also i’m dying to play a game where I can play a decent bard,since i’m a musician in real.
Music is the real magic after all
I still think we don’t need any more specific stretch goals.
In the last week people pledge more than $36.000 alone without adding to a specific stretch goal. Why did they do so? Because they wanted to support Warhorse in making this game as good as possible and because they want to be part of open and “early access” development.
Imho it would be enough if Warhorse just told everybody that every additional buck goes directly into making the game better in every possible aspect.
Every possible addition to the game from now on should be based on Warhorse’s internal decision whether it profits the game and its vision. Of course they can ask us for feedback, that’s cool. But no need to make stretch goals that possibly make it to the game (or not), especially if it’s something of which the devs aren’t even convinced themselves…
I would be ecstatic to see a 3rd person view option!
After what Dan wrote, that they already use 3rd (and we saw that in video) in some cases, do you think that it will cost 400k? Dont twist facts please.
It won’t cost $400k+ to do, even if it does end up the next stretch goal. Besides, the overall cost of the game is much more than just what we’ve all helped raise. An extra $100k or so might sound like a lot, but with the cost what it is I don’t see that making a huge difference. Another $500k does add up, though.
Point is, I don’t think it’s fair or accurate to look at each stretch goal as “It costs exactly this much to add blah.”
I agree with LordCrash…Perhaps its better if they scrap specific stretch goals from this point on…
and focus more on making the game better in every aspect…
Its better to focus on content for sure.
A 3rd person camera will be modded in anyway
And having it as a stretch goal now is a missed opportunity to make this an even better game imo.
How can you not understand that if this is a stretch goal which will cost so little that there would be more left to make the game more immersive and improve core features?!
Should they add something that would actually cost 400k? Would that improve the core features? NO! Why? Because all the money goes into the new fancy feature (little exaggeration here but I hope this will enlighten some ppl).
C’mon it’s not rocket science…
i don’t think third person is vital. I would rather have early gunpowder weapons implemented.
