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

Pledge/Kickstarter
#90

your rants make me single handedly like the 3rd person view even more. :smile:

but seriously, the comparison to the codex stretch goal holds, both take a certain amount of time, that could be used for other things (which holds true for almost any stretch goal).

Given that it seems nothing where you have to reinvent the wheel, I personally don’t mind having it as a next goal.
Other than time it takes nothing from the first person view and nothing ingame forces you to use it.

And some the other ridiculous comparisons - I mentioned ridiculous, right? …
But I can add more, if we have 3rd person view then they might even want to include 4th person view (you know the one, where you look over your shoulder on the screen looking over the shoulder of the char you are playing) or new weapons like …hmm… nuclear suit case bombs, craftable as minigame.
I don’t get the panic. :wink:

#91

Give me DevKit after Act I and i will disable it in my mods!

#92

Read guys…reaad
They are already using the 3rd person for the combat. So it is already there!
Nobody forces you to use it.
Don´t be afraid of change just because it´s change. (And just to make this clear: I didn´t vote for 3rd person, but I´m ok with it)

3 Likes
#93

to me it sounds like a simple thing, especially if the guys at warhorse are already working with third person view for developing. just dont use it if you dont like it. its an option that changes nothing in gameplay, to me its just a graphical feature anyway. Thinking of the horrible 3rd person combat of skyrim, noone would even bother using it. i really dont see what the fuzz is all about, get a life boys.

1 Like
#94

Than i want it in one of the updates for the alpha and not if beta is out.
(Not next update but in the future)
I want to see how “good” KCD is with that!

#95

Did you just pick random sentence of me to read?
As I wrote multiple times already. The combat was designed for 1st person. Missions have to be designed for multiple perspectives now. Because in 3rd person you just rotate the camera to see behind obstacles while in 1st person you actually have to look around a corner. It’s becoming simplified. So this hardcore game becomes casual now. It’s just fact that there’s a difference in designing a mission for 1st or 3rd person. Either way they will have to spend more money to adjust the gameplay for 3rd person too, or maybe they just neglect 1st person altogether now. And just as a result of this the game will become easier, as described above. Hurray, again the casuals won. The devs bowed to the masses and granted their wishes. Nicely done, just another 3rd person RPG!

1 Like
#96

Thank you but no…
I know that page but it said in addons it isn’t started.
jusched.exe runs two times.
And if i check on website for older or unstable/saefty version it will disable it too! :-/

#97

still cant see what you are afraid of at all. you haven’t seen the slightest glimpse of what 3rd person combat would look like in kcd, and yet you are ranting about how everything is going to be shit. thumbs up. if the third person view is allready there in a way, why dont just enabling people to have it. im quite sure warhorse won’t fuck up their project for a little bit of zooming out. They might give us an idea (maybe a short teaser) of how they think of it.

4 Likes
#98

One more quest or snow or possibility to burn the house or cut the tree,… are better for me. But this is good choice as a stretch goal for Warhorse - not so hard to implement. If hardcore player can play FPC and gameplay stay the same, this is good for all.

  • new customers
  • collision and “cheating” with TPC
2 Likes
#99

God damn it people!
It would be so nice to have at least one thread without these pointless shouting matches already… :wink:

I think Dan said it very clearly in his description- it would be an OPTION for those who like it- I believe that “option” still means that you can either USE IT or NOT.

Furthermore, he stressed that for technical reasons it will be AVAILABLE only in certain conditions. So you can still play the whole game in 1st person if you prefer it. This is no drastic change - it is only about possibility to change from which point does player view the action.

For me it even seems as better solution for such things like horse riding - when it is good to see what is around you and without everything shaking all the time. They even showed some of the mechanics considered for 3rd person view in their initial video updates to give people a better idea about how it will look…

If you rather prefer different stretch goal, you can perhaps start s poll for adding of Český Šternberk castle - it is a bit more to the south from Rataje… :wink: Naturally It would require to make some additional quests related to this locations as well, but hey!

10 Likes
#100

I am for a 3rd person view in horse riding and in exploriation of exterior. I think the 3rd person view is not the best way to do fights. Combat would be better in 1st person view for me. I agree with 1st person view in interiors.

#101

Ehm. I said severalů times, that 1st person will remain intact as it was planned and this is an extra feature on top of that. Sorry, but we are not removing anything.

12 Likes
#102

Yes, don’t you all “never worked on anything regarding programming and scripting” tell the dev how much more work this is, even if he is saying for the future $ goal, it’s not actually that much more work. full animations are already done for every npc that you see, not a big problem - already in the game. They do test and u saw (in kickstarter vid) fighting from 3rd person perspective.

Don’t worry entitled baby boys, your game can run from start to end in 1st person (in dialogues you see your character - design wise, maybe it makes sense to have 3rd person, when it’s happening in cutscenes already). Exploring, horse riding is pretty good in 3rd person. Designing quests in open world rpg based on player being only capable playing in 1st person? Yea, that’s how it works. Complex AI of Npcs, many variables + one more - 1st person written quest - Yes, exactly how it works, bravo… That be about 3x times more work than 3rd person i imagine.

One more thing, this is not your private simulator, where you can do exactly everything from real life. It’s a game in realistic setting (time period, enviroment, architecture, quests, motivation of npcs). Do some people even know that there will be stats? Perks? Similar to let’s say - Fallout New Vegas?

3rd person cannong also be turned off for fights, how that would work? It can be turned off for inside places, for obvious reasons. But… outside, you are about to fight, it goes into 1st person, u run away from the encounter and now what? Switch back to original view, stays in 1st? Each time it detects fight it forces switch, don’t seem like fun to me.

Iv played skyrim in Every single fight in 1st person, same in all new Fallouts. It’s a choice, that’s a positive. Game won’t change because 3rd person. I don’t see a reason that the directionals can’t be in 3rd person, you have block button (reaction click or hold) and mechanically controlling directions of attack won’t change in 3rd person, how exactly would they?

Some entitled people just want you to have the same experience as them, nevertless that the choice is totally not effecting their own gameplay. Some posts made me click that 3rd person is dream coming through, even that i won’t touch it while playing 90% of the game.

1 Like
#103

I said, that 3rd would not be available in interiors, so the problem with looking behind corners would not be that bad, but its a fair point. And we would not need to change anything else. We already use 3rd person for combat during testing (we need to see both characters animations if they fit) and our 1st person animations look good from 3rd person as well. If we had to do some extra anims I wouldnt be offering this, it would be too much of a work.

9 Likes
#104
#105

D’oh!
Thanks for the alert! Done.

1 Like
#106

Yes, pledge didn’t have that.
But what it had was a explicit statement regarding 3rd person.
Short version: NO!

It’s called flip-flopping.
That’s why I ask: what will be the next point to dismiss?

Ok, so you think it’s funny when you give money to someone and all of a sudden a key feature is changed, which even has been stated to be not up for consideration.

You are not the first guy telling me that.
And you are also not the first guy who doesn’t get what I described multiple times already.
(in this thread)

So, here again:
It’s not about whether I can choose 1st person or 3rd person.
I grasped this concept when I read it the first time.

The point is, it will require additional work.
Which means it will cost extra money and extra time, hence the stretch goal.
That’s the first part.
The second part is: they denied 3rd person right from the beginning.

Now they want extra money, so they can spend it on something which wasn’t part of the deal to begin with.
To this I say: NO!
(which is basically what they said in the Kickstarter campaign, just to repeat that fact once more)

Of course, you pledged less money and can shrug your shoulders and say: "Whatever."
But I can’t shrug that off so easily.

And btw, in the videos they showed the horse animations not the 3rd person view per se.

Yes, I think they should better spend the money on refining core mechanics even more or add content, for example, in the form of buildings as you suggested.

If people really want 3rd person they can enable it via mod tools pretty easily without Warhorse worrying about money, time and proper implementation.

#107

I’m wondering why people get angry about this. Sure it was announced as first person rpg but what’s the big deal about it if they can add it easily?
First things first: I would only play first person as it was intended first for more immersion, but if someone wants 3rd person alright why not?
Surely you wouldn’t want to have this option if it delays the development process and stuff, but as already mentioned they have it anyways… It’s a nice trade off, as it comes with cryengine anyway so it would just need “a little bit” of polish (sure it’s more work than not doing it) but come on… A lot of people want it and if even the developers see it as feasible, let them do it… It’s also a nice stretch goal to get a little workload off them, as it’s clearly less work than having completely new features… They already put in so much that I’m actually a bit worried about more goals being added…

6 Likes
#108

please stop yelling. we all heard you. most of us have stopped paying attention to you. but if you could please send me the links to images, videos, text, etc that EXPLICITLY said this was 1st person only, forever until the end of time. it was absolutely IMPLIED that it would be first person, for immersion, but as Dan points out many people suffer from motion sickness and that’s not fair to those who want to play but can’t because of it. I’ve been following since kickstarter as well, and i’m definitely not taking personal offense to this like you are. options are great, and clearly they are LISTENING to their community and this is one of the stretch goals that is possible for them and in high demand. sometimes it sucks to be in the minority but you also need to respect others’ opinions/points of view.

@Dr3adN0ughT couldn’t agree more with your last post.

3 Likes
#109

and yes i’ve seen their banner on their home page, i know what it says. that, however, is not an explicit contract for the way the game will turn out. not when we all know this is still in development, has stretch goals, and is generally a work in process. and since 3PV would be an option, that banner/image still holds the same weight & truth as before this idea even started.

© 2015 Warhorse Studios www.warhorsestudios.cz