JednoznaÄnÄ 3rd pohled ano, z jednoho prostĂ©ho dĆŻvodu. Animace boje v nÄm vypadajĂ podstatnÄ lĂ©pe neĆŸ ve first person.
3 Likes
I had to use Google translate and this is what i got.
âDefinitely 3rd view yes , for one simple reason . Combat animation in it looks much better than in the first person .â
I wasnât arguing for, or against third person either, i was simply informing @robpyne17 that there was already a third person thread open. So Iâm really not sure why youâre directing this at me.
Actually, your link merely takes one back to the beginning of this very same thread, way back when the number of posts were in single digits still.
Some other points in general though (not directed to anyone in particular):
Realism can be argued to death, but there is nothing very realistic about the FPV in KCD because it is like looking through a tunnelâperipheral vision is next to nothing. It is not realistic at all to be unable to see someone standing right next to you on the side. It is fairly impossible to get a realistic view in a game without having some type of curved monitor and a game that utilizes it. In photography a 180 degree view is possible with a âfish eye lensâ but it comes with the cost of mega distortion.
As I have said before, I donated to this game in spite of the first person view, but as I did so, I was also saying to myself that this would most likely be one of those games that I bought and played just to see the world, and might never actually finish the game at allâand that opinion was entirely based on the game being FPV only.
When seeing this thread for the first time, I could see a crisp, new Ben Franklin ($100 bill) finding its way from my wallet to WH for the TPV goal, but after reading hundreds of posts and finally seeing the TPV shelved for the time being, Olâ Ben disappeared right back into my wallet. For the small amount of work TPV would have taken, WH stood to bring in a lot of much needed cash, but I guess that is just not to be. Perhaps WH should have made those taking the poll vote with their dollars instead! To those who complained and made illogical arguments, maybe they could have put their money where their mouth is! Top dollar wins, so either way, WH would have gotten the financial boost they needed!
Another thought: For those who want multi-player, I think I would have to vote against the option ever being given just as rabidly as some who argued against TPV. Why? While TPV really would make little difference in the game, going multi-player would totally unbalance a game where battles were all made for single-player. Making a group of 2-6 players would allow a group to basically âsteamrollâ all the content, which has been made for single-player only. It would require monumental effort from the devs to make encounters for âsingle-player,â for âsmall groups,â and for âlarge groups.â A group of six players could basically âfacerollâ the keyboard to victory, and zerg content. So my opinion of multi-player or co-op play is a resounding âno way!â
1 Like
Yes because that post is merged from a different topic that was made on the subject made by tuseroni that is now closed.
1 Like
IIRC, the multiplayer module is going to be pretty much limited to a pvp tournament mode.
As far as i know even promised tournament mode was not promesed to support multiplayer
2 Likes
As long as I have been following there has been no planned Multiplayer of any kind, especially for Act 1.
1 Like
I donât want to see any kind of multiplayer in this game, one of reasons i pledged to this was total focus on main game and story.
2 Likes
I wouldnât use third person mode, but Iâm not opposed to its inclusion. I canât imagine it would make a worthy stretchgoal, though.
If adding a third person option is very easy for them to do. Why not?
2 Likes
First person is not more immersive, it is less immersive and more annoying. It was well done in Skyrim where you could adjust the camera from 1st person to 3rd person by scrolling mouse, I used 3rd person like 96% of the time in it.
Anyway, I have no expectations for the game anymore so I donât really care.
2 Likes
FP is far more immersive:) but OK, different people, different tasets. I, for example, dislike all games where you are forced to constantly look at your avatarâs back (Witcher series included).
Anyway:
Focus on FP was announced in the very beginning of KS campaign, so there is no reason for complains.
1 Like
Maybe in a VR headset setup it is, but on a screen itâs less immersive.
Iâm not complaining, just saying how it is, and if itâs shocking to see a dissenting opinion on this matter, then it probably needs to be said. Indeed this is not something like physics that affects everyone in the same way.
I donât like the Witcher either, tried twice but couldnât get over the combat.
1 Like
I prefer 1st person and i dont actually own any third person only games as playing in 3rd person is pretty terrible and makes games feel tiny and underdeveloped imo, but in games like Skyrim i do tend to only switch to it to see how good my character looks when i put him/me in new armour, plus being able to see my sword in my hands with all the shiny details and the cool animations up close is another reason id never play 3rd person, but if someone out there only plays 3rd person then im guessing it would be good to add it as an option
3 Likes
[quote=âmezzerliptikjay, post:800, topic:20355, full:trueâ]pretty terrible and makes games feel tiny and underdeveloped
[/quote]
Thatâs how first person only feels.
3 Likes
This is awesome! I would say that I even prefer The Witcher 3 in 1st person than in the original 3rd person view. At least for exploration I see it much better. Combat may be other thing. Seriously I think every open world game (or even every new realistic game) should include both points of view. GTAV is a good example of what I mean.
3 Likes
Ok Carter if you say so lol
but the truth is most 3rd person games do not use alot of high resolution textures because you wont be zooming in so far, just look at the 1st person mod for GTA 4 for example,
In 3rd person the game looks amazing lush but in 1st person its a completely different story especially in car interiors thats where you see the underdeveloped aspect,
and even in GTA 5 in 1st person you can tell that some things up close look pretty blurry and low resolution (although alot better than GTA 4 if you put the textures and shader quality on ultra)
I have cca 450 hours in GTA, most of it in MP, of which I played 10 min in 1st person view. The number would be similar in other games as well. And thatâs not because of 1st person view looks blurry or underdeveloped, but because it makes one sick and uneasy.
On the other hand, looking at Geraltâs back wasnât much better either. But thatâs more because heâs not a female character Iâm generally used to play 
2 Likes