ZooBeastman

At certain angles.

Game-breaking?

Serious makes no sense in the context you are using it. In honesty I don't play many shooters; its just not my thing but I imagine many shooters which I suspect would describe as 'not serious' many people would take seriously. Besides there is still nothing preventing the use of first person servers to meet the requirements of those who don't wish to play with third person players.

Its odd, I really get that people who like first person would rather it was first person. I find it strange that the reverse isn't equally prevalent. The day "3rd person is just plain wrong" is the day there aren't third person games enjoyed by millions of people.

Again with the tired use of the word exploit when all your actually saying is using the cam = bad. No its no the same as wallhacks, no using a camera implemented by a game that offers unrealistic views of the world is not cheating, its the game. I have unrealstic views of the game world in many games, that is not cheating. Hooking into the memory and overlaying graphics where players are is very different.

Needs is a very strong word, the game would be 'fine' if it was released with the camera as is. Perhaps it could be better, but needs?

I suspect people who play Battlefield or Call of Duty would be people who like first person perspectives.

There is a difference between exploiting a bug; and utilising a feature.

You honestly believe the third person camera was not designed to be able to see from a perspective other than the characters? Why do you think it was made? You'd compare a fully implemented camera function to a physics abuse that under very odd circumstances (difficult to create accidentally) allowed you to fundamentally cheat? The mind boggles. I must remember to open my gear menu to watch my character interact with the world... what?

Probably could have found a better analogue.

I also think your positioning of the word exploit is intended to make it pejorative, which I do not see as constructive.

I don't think it would be an exploit or unfair no. Do you exploit the fact you spawn in a place with good loot or do you run halfway across the map to a worse place to avoid exploiting that game mechanic? This isn't logical, it suggests is one set of code, which makes another set of code less useful, must mean that the set of code made less useful must give hints to how the game should be played, as opposed the other code? I'm pretty sure while leaning less of the player is visible my camera will not fire my gun for for me.

I don't know how well explored this is, I know I empathise more with characters I can see than those I can not. I have never felt like it is 'me' whilst in first person. That said, the only game I really remember providing much terror for me was Myst on the Saturn.... and that was first person.

The problem with your use of the definition is you are declaring it 'unfair or underhanded' because it doesn't match your understanding of how the game should be played. In this situation it can only be used as a synonym for utilise. "make practical and effective use of." Do I exploit the fact I have a gun and the other person doesn't in a way you would consider 'unfair'? Do I exploit that I am able to still see because I am unhurt while the person I am pursuing has been bleeding and barely has visibility left? Exploiting, as in utilising a camera, to see things; which is the primary purpose of a camera (I assume that is not contestable) is not exploiting in an unfair or underhanded manner, it is exploiting only in the sense that it utilises it.

A good question would be is the third person camera as good as it can be? in gameplay terms. If the current third person camera is best in class, then changing it would be worse than the current option of allowing servers to choose. If it isn't best in class, then perhaps it can be improved; I don't just mean regarding peaking.

The thing is, the reason for liking something is largely irrelevant given the context and scale of its err... likedness (hey its late here) . We know both cameras are liked by many people; there are countless examples of games which use both. I do not understand your use of the word exploit in this situation. How is viewing someone in this manner exploiting it any more than you exploit the first person camera to view someone; you only exploit it in the literal sense; that is in no way wrong which seems to be your implication. It is not a bug which can be 'exploited' or a mechanic that is unintended, it was literally made that way. You exploit the money you get when you pass go in monopoly; that does not make it wrong; it is just not to your taste.

I actually think getting the camera something like APB would be about right, does still have the corner peaks though

While not the best of answers, 3rd person cameras can be made to feel very er... clunky when there's obvious barriers locking the camera. There probably is a more sensible middle ground. Even if the camera tightened on you significantly while under a roof (that must be measurable) you'd probably go a long way without harming the third person experience; wouldn't solve all peaks; assuming solve is the right word.

I actually agree in the sense that I believe forcing people to be vulnerable during recon is a good thing and I would start with the prone camera, just above your feet, facing forward. I'm not sure the hypothetical position you put yourself in would be much better in first person only though :p

I do not see how any of this is related to a camera perspective. I love all this stuff, I don't however see how it would influence something so detached?

This is simply wrong, it is not stupid to be unable to describe reasons for artistic or entertainment engagement in something; many people who spend great deals of time assessing very subjective matters can spend large amounts of time attempting to analyse preference. It is also simply not required given the context. There is a simple test anyone can perform relating to the discussion in this thread, simply play the game [or mod] whilst locking your character into a first person view, do the same in third and then play mixed (as I assume most people probably do). There are many third and first person games throughout the games industry, I do no need someone to tell me why Gears of War was made third person rather than first; it is totally irrelevant, it plays fun and I think we can safely (perhaps I am naive) assume the developers believed it would be a more enjoyable experience as such. We could make the same inverse suggestion that first person perspectives also offer an enjoyable experience, but neither holds a monopoly on fun and I would guess, but I confess it is pure conjecture, that people who advocate third person cameras probably enjoy third person games in general more. There is no stupidity for such people in not being able to give a precise reason, no more so than to be unable to give a precise reason of why that particular food tastes so good, or why Zeitgeist is the best track on 13 (it just is :P ). I understand the path of least resistance comment and I accept that that simply removing difficulty in pursuit of reducing frustration or pure quality of life can work against the core aim of providing a enjoyable experience, I would contend however that a want for a third person camera isn't simply because it makes an easier less confusing game; that maybe true for some people but I would not suggest that is the only (or even major) reason third person is so prevalent. I find it highly unlikely that if it was first person only I would play it for any great length of time, this is purely based on having played games from that perspective previously and generally finding the experience lacking from an entertainment perspective. I can say why I like third person games though I wouldn't declare it stupid for anyone to be unable to explain why they like or dislike something, I'm not entirely sure liking something requires a rationale. That said, I like to be able to see my character doing things, I feel like I have a greater connection to what my avatar is, the pain he is suffering, the shit he is crawling through when I can see it. -edited obvious typos

I think there's still a lot of ignoring that people simply find the 3rd person fun. It doesn't really matter so much why they do, just that they do. Nearly every video I've seen from GamesCom is 3rd person. Some people just like being able to see their character. Some people have their fill of 1st person shooters elsewhere (and some the reverse). Yeah it might be easier, yeah it might not be as authentic but that doesn't make it less fun to everyone. Fun is very subjective. We all have our lines to cross, I'd be disappointed if there's a way of avoiding night; I like night, I think my most fun experiences on dayz have been at night. If there are servers without night I'm sure more people will play there and that's bad for me on my lonely night servers. I appreciate however that some people will simply have more fun in that environment, The most valuable thing in entertainment is fun. Fun is subjective, some of us find hard things more rewarding, some find it frustrating and pointless. It's very much an each to his own kind of thing. We all have our own DayZ and I hope the Standalone will be capable of providing the majority of people with a play-mode they recognise and enjoy or rather I hope the Standalone provides everyone the experience I enjoy :P

Its a good video and I agree with all his points. However I just don't find playing games in first person particularly fun and that doesn't really seem to have been touched upon. I suppose there's always the "well play a different game" perspective but that works both ways. That said I would really like it if you could only see players / zombies in your line of sight, as in others just aren't drawn. I feel much more protective of a person I can always see than one whose eyes I am looking from (Maybe someone could write a book on that...)