Addressing the two biggest complaints regarding First Person

[Positronica 30]

Third person looks much better than first person at low frame rates and on low end computers.

Here's my suggested solution.

While in third person = weapon down, you cannot aim anything but melee weapons and thrown items.

When crouched, the camera zooms in about 50%.

When prone camera zooms quite a bit. (about what we get when holding down +, perhaps more?)

This would force building top snipers to expose themselves to spot targets, allow third person to still be used for a lot of traveling and stealth, and I feel it would create more tension while playing in third person. Going into first person would raise your weapon.

In a game that's supposed to be about surviving a zombie apocalypse, the last thing they should be doing is gimping a widely used, and widely enjoyed game feature for the benefit of certain members who choose to focus on the non-zombie related PvP/deathmatch part of game.

There's also no need for a compromise. In strictly game terms, things are already balanced. Everyone has the exact same strategic tools at their disposal. The real issue is that the first person only crowd wants a different game, but what really takes the cake is that the game they want already exists, and instead of being happy with that, they just keep insisting that everyone else should have to play their game instead of the game they want to play.

[Bat (DayZ) 230]

DayZ is a game first, and a simulation second, which means the enjoyability of the gameplay always needs to take precedence over the realism of the simulator.

It was described from the begginning by rocket as an "anti-game". It breaks some big game design rules and is intended to be a harsh, unforgiving experience.

It's not meant to be "enjoyable" in the first place.

You're talking about "enjoyability" while I'm talking about emotions, role playing, immersion, intensity...

Also I think 3rd person is one of the reason there's so much PVP and shoot on sight mentality around. You can basically spot any player at long distances very easily, while in first person it is a lot harder to see without being seen. People are underestimating the issues caused by 3rd person.

EDIT : I'm for removing 3rd person altogether as an experiment, because it is the aim of an alpha prototype : experiment ideas to see how it works and decide whether you keep it or not afterwards.

Edited February 28, 2013 by Bat

[Clumzy (DayZ) 377]

In a game that's supposed to be about surviving a zombie apocalypse, the last thing they should be doing is gimping a widely used, and widely enjoyed game feature for the benefit of certain members who choose to focus on the non-zombie related PvP/deathmatch part of game.

That doesn't make any sense, what you just said.

First, why would removing a popular feature be a bad idea specifically in a zombie survival game?

Also, I don't see why you think that people who want third person removed are focusing on the PvP aspect of the game. Do you think there would be more PvP if bandits were unable to sit on a high roof and see any target within a thousand meters without being in any danger? Because if 3rd person is removed or balanced, then there's no more of that crowd, you'll have a lot more face-to-face encounters, where people have an option besides murder.

And just because a feature is popular, doesn't mean it belongs in the game. Do you think that all of the "Start with silenced M4 5000 vehicles" servers are a good thing? If there's an easy mode in the game, a lot of people will play it. But DayZ isn't supposed to be easy.

[sp86 508]

Do you think there would be more PvP if bandits were unable to sit on a high roof and see any target within a thousand meters without being in any danger? Because if 3rd person is removed or balanced, then there's no more of that crowd, you'll have a lot more face-to-face encounters, where people have an option besides murder.

I've played hundreds of hours of Dayz, and for all you fools harp and whine about people hiding on ridged roofs, I've never seen one. Not one. I've seen hundreds of people on dobry and visota each, I've seen people on refinery towers, hiding in buildings, closets, radio aerials, platforms, whatever. You all whine and cry about a boogeyman that doesn't exist when there's a readymade solution for you vis-a-vis first person exclusive servers. So why are you trying to kill other people's experience? What motivation do you possibly have?

Edited February 28, 2013 by sp86

[Positronica 30]

It was described from the begginning by rocket as an "anti-game". It breaks some big game design rules and is intended to be a harsh, unforgiving experience.

It's not meant to be "enjoyable" in the first place.

Describing DayZ as an "anti-game" and saying it's not supposed to be enjoyable is just marketing BS. DayZ is a game. It always has been a game. It's designed as a game. It's sold as a game. It directly competes in the marketplace as a game. It's played almost entirely by gamers who if they weren't playing DayZ would be playing a different game. Also, what big game design rules has DayZ broken? It's a sandbox survival game with a somewhat hardcore death mechanic. I'm not saying it's not a unique game, and that it's not creative, but let's be honest, it's not some sort of gaming revelation. It's not even the first sandbox survival game where you loose all your stuff when you die.

You're talking about "enjoyability" while I'm talking about emotions, role playing, immersion, intensity...

You can talk about those things, but ultimately all the things you listed are only of value in-so-far as they contribute to the overall enjoyability of the game. People play DayZ for one reason, and that's that at that moment in time, they derive more satisfaction form playing DayZ than in doing some other option, such as playing a different game or watching TV. Simply making a game more intense, or more immersive does not necessarily make it more fun. If DayZ was perfectly immersive, and as intense as a real zombie apocalypse, no one would play it, because a real zombie apocalypse would suck to be a part of. Unless people are playing a simulation for training purposes, then you need to find the right balance between keeping it real, and keeping it a game.

Also I think 3rd person is one of the reason there's so much PVP and shoot on sight mentality around. You can basically spot any player at long distances very easily, while in first person it is a lot harder to see without being seen.

I'd say that's highly debatable. The amount of PvP and KOS in DayZ is caused by a multitude of factors, such as it being the only real endgame, no need for group tactics vs. zombies, all the high end loot being really only of use against players, the ARMA 2 engine allowing everyone to be an amazing sniper, no penalty for griefing, the ability to affect other players anonymously, and the fact that at it's core, DayZ is still just a PvP shooter with zombie trappings. Third person view may contribute to PvP by making it easier to spot and track players better in certain situations, but there's also players who use the better awareness granted by third person view to avoid other players. I don't know about you, but in my playing of DayZ, the player encounters that most often result in someone opening fire is when the two of us have stumbled upon each other by surprise in close quarters, thus greatly reducing are ability to evaluate the situation. The restricted awareness of first person view would definitely increase such situations.

People are underestimating the issues caused by 3rd person.

I'd say it's the opposite. Third person view has been in the game from the beginning, it's an option that virtually every server has chosen to keep active, and through all that DayZ has gone on to become a mod that's eclipsed it's base game in popularity. I think the anti-third person crowd are a LONG ways from proving that DayZ would have done even better if it had been mandatory first person only on every server.

EDIT : I'm for removing 3rd person altogether as an experiment, because it is the aim of an alpha prototype : experiment ideas to see how it works and decide whether you keep it or not afterwards.

It already has been removed as an experiment, and the servers where it's been tried don't attract players. Only about 1/10th of 1 percent of the playerbase chooses to play on first person only servers. If playing the game where everyone is forced to use only first person is such a better gameplay experience, why has virtually the entire playerbase rejected it continually? I mean, it's not like this is a new argument. There's usually at least one active anti-third person thread on the boards every day, with plenty of posts hyping the superiority of first person only play. Any player who spends even a minute looking at the options in DayZ Commander or Play Six knows that first person only servers exist, yet almost no one chooses to play the game like that. Not to mention players who want to try out first person only can do so on any server just by not hitting Enter on their numpad. What further experimentation do you think there needs to be?

[Clumzy (DayZ) 377]

I've played hundreds of hours of Dayz, and for all you fools harp and whine about people hiding on ridged roofs, I've never seen one. Not one.

That's because they're all on roofs, out of sight because they don't need to expose themselves since they have 3rd person.

I was once playing with someone, and we got shot at by a sniper on a rooftop in Cherno. He got to the floor underneath the guy, and they just sat there, locked in a stalemate, because they both knew where the other was, because they had 3rd person. That's the kind of "Experience" that I want removed from the game. Or two guys, one inside of, say, a firestation, with another just outside the door. The guy on the outside can't go in, the other guy can see his every move. If the guy on the inside moves for the other door, the guy on the outside can shoot him while his back is turned. Do you really want this kind of an experience in the game that badly?

If we had Halo-style motion sensors in DayZ, 75% of the servers would use them, and people would tenaciously defend them. Does that mean they should be in the game? No, because DayZ is not the type of game where you know everything you need to know.

Just because you don't have any personal experience with what I'm describing, doesn't mean that there aren't similar situations that are only possible because of third person, and it certainly doesn't mean you should go around insulting people.

[pmjkerr 76]

I wonder if the people that whinge about 1st person limitations are the same that whinged about the new soda and canned food that was introduced this week.

dat_contradiction

[sp86 508]

That's because they're all on roofs, out of sight because they don't need to expose themselves since they have 3rd person.

Yeh, okay.

I was once playing with someone, and we got shot at by a sniper on a rooftop in Cherno.

You didn't scout.

He got to the floor underneath the guy, and they just sat there, locked in a stalemate, because they both knew where the other was, because they had 3rd person.

You didn't maneuver.

That's the kind of "Experience" that I want removed from the game. Or two guys, one inside of, say, a firestation, with another just outside the door. The guy on the outside can't go in, the other guy can see his every move. If the guy on the inside moves for the other door, the guy on the outside can shoot him while his back is turned. Do you really want this kind of an experience in the game that badly?

I don't mind it at all because I understand the the avatar through which I'm acting is far more limited in its ability to move and observe than I am. Third person allows you to compensate for that loss.

If we had Halo-style motion sensors in DayZ, 75% of the servers would use them, and people would tenaciously defend them. Does that mean they should be in the game? No, because DayZ is not the type of game where you know everything you need to know.

So what? There's hundreds of 500 vehicles, custom load-out, 24 hour daylight servers. I don't like them, so I don't play on them.

Just because you don't have any personal experience with what I'm describing, doesn't mean that there aren't similar situations that are only possible because of third person, and it certainly doesn't mean you should go around insulting people.

The plural of anecdote is not data. And I haven't insulted you yet.

[Clumzy (DayZ) 377]

I wonder if the people that whine about 1st person limitations are the same that whined about the new soda and canned food that was introduced this week.

dat_contradiction

You're not really calling anyone out on anything if you're criticism is based entirely on an assumption. I don't understand at all why people got so agitated about the mod cans being added. Sure, it doesn't really fit the setting, but it was just a nice shout out to people who have helped out in the community.

[Clumzy (DayZ) 377]

Yeh, okay.

...Okay?

You didn't scout.

How could we have? They were completely hidden on a rooftop. That's the point I was making.

You didn't maneuver.

Actually we did, but the problem is that the people on rooftops can see anything with no danger to themselves.

I don't mind it at all because I understand the the avatar through which I'm acting is far more limited in its ability to move and observe than I am. Third person allows you to compensate for that loss.

If you can tell in real life that someone inside a building has turned their back, then I'll take back everything I say. This game is going for authenticity, isn't it?

So what? There's hundreds of 500 vehicles, custom load-out, 24 hour daylight servers. I don't like them, so I don't play on them.

I don't like them either, so it can be pretty annoying when it takes 10 minutes to find a server where you start with standard gear.

The plural of anecdote is not data. And I haven't insulted you yet.

Actually you did, you called people that share my opinion "Fools" that harp, whine and cry. I didn't say I had data, but just because you've never seen a rooftop camper doesn't make you right, either. The fact is that these things do happen, and I don't think that they belong in DayZ. I don't think that third person needs to be removed entirely, either. Just make it balanced, so it becomes a matter of preference, and not looking over walls. I would think that at least half of the people who play third person wouldn't bother with it.

[pmjkerr 76]

You're not really calling anyone out on anything if you're criticism is based entirely on an assumption. I don't understand at all why people got so agitated about the mod cans being added. Sure, it doesn't really fit the setting, but it was just a nice shout out to people who have helped out in the community.

I wasnt calling anyone out, I was thinking out loud. I agree about the cans and found it pretty amusing at all the faggotry that came along with it.

My post was merely a rhetorical questio and quite off topic.

Sooo OT: Nothing wrong with having the option for both 3rd and 1st. Leave it up to the server hosts to cater for both sides of the argument.

[Positronica 30]

That doesn't make any sense, what you just said.

First, why would removing a popular feature be a bad idea specifically in a zombie survival game?

Well, first off, removing a globally popular feature is a bad idea in any game. (Note: this has to be a measurement of the feature's popularity across the entire playerbase, taking into account that different players are going to have different subjective levels of affinity to a certain feature.) And secondly, my reply was in response to a post that was arguing in favor of gimping third person view entirely from PvP based arguments. DayZ is primarily a zombie survival PvE game, with PvP as a consequence of it's open, hardcore world. The PvE game is far and away the game's focus, though, and thus design decisions should be made with how they will impact PvE taking priority over how they will impact PvP.

Also, I don't see why you think that people who want third person removed are focusing on the PvP aspect of the game.

Because when it comes to PvE, a player's choice to use first person or third person has no impact on someone else's gameplay, and a player who doesn't like third person in his PvE experience can play entirely in first person on every server in the game. The ONLY reason to argue for the removal or gimping of third person view is for PvP reasons, or because you're a narcissist who can't stand the thought of other players not taking your advice on how the game should be experienced.

Do you think there would be more PvP if bandits were unable to sit on a high roof and see any target within a thousand meters without being in any danger? Because if 3rd person is removed or balanced, then there's no more of that crowd, you'll have a lot more face-to-face encounters, where people have an option besides murder.

As someone above me posted, how often have you actually seen what you describe occur? To be honest, I can't think of a single time that I've been ambushed by a bandit in such a situation. 99% of the times I've been killed by another player it's been by a sniper at extreme range, or a sudden surprise run in with another player where we both stumble upon each other at close range. Sure, in theory third person view can grant some significant ambush advantages, but only if you absolutely have to stage the ambush from a very specific location. Pick any spot on the map, and there's likely a ton of locations from which you could stage an ambush with little chance of being spotted without needing to use third person, and the locations that only work if you use third person probably have worse escape routes, too. The point being, that I think it's a stretch to paint third person view as some sort of exploit that's drastically influencing the nature of PvP in DayZ.

And just because a feature is popular, doesn't mean it belongs in the game. Do you think that all of the "Start with silenced M4 5000 vehicles" servers are a good thing?

I don't enjoy playing on those type of servers myself, but I'm guessing the multitude of players who do frequent those servers think that they're a better gameplay experience than the vanilla servers. And who cares if they do? It doesn't impact mine or your gameplay. If anything, it helps our gameplay experience, 'cause their support of the game leads to a larger investment in development and expansion on the part of BI.

If there's an easy mode in the game, a lot of people will play it. But DayZ isn't supposed to be easy.

"Easy mode" is subjective... and as I stated above, DayZ is supposed to be fun and enjoyable to play. That's all that matters. Granted, that's a subjective measurement, too, but the best way to maximize enjoyability for the playerbase is to give server operators and players more options, and not less, on how they experience the game.

[Clumzy (DayZ) 377]

Well, first off, removing a globally popular feature is a bad idea in any game. (Note: this has to be a measurement of the feature's popularity across the entire playerbase, taking into account that different players are going to have different subjective levels of affinity to a certain feature.) And secondly, my reply was in response to a post that was arguing in favor of gimping third person view entirely from PvP based arguments. DayZ is primarily a zombie survival PvE game, with PvP as a consequence of it's open, hardcore world. The PvE game is far and away the game's focus, though, and thus design decisions should be made with how they will impact PvE taking priority over how they will impact PvP.

DayZ may have started out as a PvE experience, but that is no longer what it's defined by.

Because when it comes to PvE, a player's choice to use first person or third person has no impact on someone else's gameplay, and a player who doesn't like third person in his PvE experience can play entirely in first person on every server in the game. The ONLY reason to argue for the removal or gimping of third person view is for PvP reasons, or because you're a narcissist who can't stand the thought of other players not taking your advice on how the game should be experienced.

Well, yes, the choice of third of first person is most significant when looked at from a PvP perspective, but that is a big part of the game now. You could say the same things about anyone arguing in favour of 3DP.

As someone above me posted, how often have you actually seen what you describe occur? Yes. To be honest, I can't think of a single time that I've been ambushed by a bandit in such a situation. 99% of the times I've been killed by another player it's been by a sniper at extreme range, So in any of the situations where you were sniped in a city, how do you know it wasn't this happening? or a sudden surprise run in with another player where we both stumble upon each other at close range. Sure, in theory third person view can grant some significant ambush advantages, but only if you absolutely have to stage the ambush from a very specific location. Pick any spot on the map, and there's likely a ton of locations from which you could stage an ambush with little chance of being spotted without needing to use third person, and the locations that only work if you use third person probably have worse escape routes, When you have the advantage of nobody being able to pinpoint your position, escape isn't as important. too. The point being, that I think it's a stretch to paint third person view as some sort of exploit that's drastically influencing the nature of PvP in DayZ.

But it does. What do most people do when they know a hostile player is nearby? Go into 3rd person, and spot them much more easily.

I don't enjoy playing on those type of servers myself, but I'm guessing the multitude of players who do frequent those servers think that they're a better gameplay experience than the vanilla servers. And who cares if they do? It doesn't impact mine or your gameplay. If anything, it helps our gameplay experience, 'cause their support of the game leads to a larger investment in development and expansion on the part of BI.

Actually, it does impact my experience, because it can be very difficult to find a vanilla server nowadays.

"Easy mode" is subjective... and as I stated above, DayZ is supposed to be fun and enjoyable to play. That's all that matters. Granted, that's a subjective measurement, too, but the best way to maximize enjoyability for the playerbase is to give server operators and players more options, and not less, on how they experience the game.

I would say that it's a bad idea to make major features optional and divide the community.

[Positronica 30]

If we had Halo-style motion sensors in DayZ, 75% of the servers would use them, and people would tenaciously defend them. Does that mean they should be in the game? No, because DayZ is not the type of game where you know everything you need to know.

Everyone could choose to play on servers with crosshairs and nametages, but tons of players don't. Everyone could choose to play on servers with maximized loot spawns and all sorts of starter gear, but tons of players don't. Everyone could choose to play on No-PVP servers, but tons of players don't. Everyone could have thrown a fit and whined and pouted when peripheral dots were removed, but they didn't. And the same can be said about the removal of thermal scopes and other items. The point being that the playerbase has demonstrated that they have the ability to judge what features make the game more or less enjoyable. And if they tried adding a radar to the game, I highly doubt people would flock to it and say "awesome". I think you'd see the opposite... most servers would refuse the patch until the radar was removed or an option to turn it off at the server level was made available.

Just because you don't have any personal experience with what I'm describing, doesn't mean that there aren't similar situations that are only possible because of third person, and it certainly doesn't mean you should go around insulting people.

If what you've describes happens all the time and it's a huge detriment to the game, how come players aren't flocking to the first person only servers?

[OrLoK 16182]

*pops head round corner*

My spidey sense is tingling... Keep it friendly in here, no grumping mmkay?

*scurries off*

[-Gews- 7443]

As someone above me posted, how often have you actually seen what you describe occur?

Elektro, people on hospital roof firing into the school... happens all the time. Same thing with the Cherno tower snipers, etc.

[Clumzy (DayZ) 377]

Everyone could choose to play on servers with crosshairs and nametages, but tons of players don't. Everyone could choose to play on servers with maximized loot spawns and all sorts of starter gear, but tons of players don't. Everyone could choose to play on No-PVP servers, but tons of players don't.

I actually find that tons of player do play on servers with maximized loot spawns and all sorts of starter gear, to the point where it's hard to find vanilla servers with people on them.

Everyone could have thrown a fit and whined and pouted when peripheral dots were removed, but they didn't. And the same can be said about the removal of thermal scopes and other items.

And I'm sure that if third person was removed, after a little while, nobody would be complaining, because I don't see how it improves the game.

Also: Can do, LoK. :3

[sp86 508]

Elektro, people on hospital roof firing into the school... happens all the time. Same thing with the Cherno tower snipers, etc.

People on the hospital are easy to deal with from Dobry. People on the towers are a difficult but doable shot from Visota and the surrounding hillside.

[Clumzy (DayZ) 377]

People on the hospital are easy to deal with from Dobry. People on the towers are a difficult but doable shot from Visota and the surrounding hillside.

You're still at a big disadvantage, because they can spot you long before you spot them, and they don't even have to expose themselves. I'm not saying they're invincible (But if you don't have a long ranged weapon then they might as well be), but it gives them a really big advantage.

[sp86 508]

You're still at a big disadvantage, because they can spot you long before you spot them, and they don't even have to expose themselves. I'm not saying they're invincible (But if you don't have a long ranged weapon then they might as well be), but it gives them a really big advantage.

They're watching the streets. As you stated.

[Clumzy (DayZ) 377]

They're watching the streets. As you stated.

True as it may be (In most cases), I don't think I ever said that, specifically.

Anyways, I can't really think of anything more to add at the moment, so I'll just say that I don't think third person needs to be removed. I do, however, think it should be changed so that only people visible within the natural line of sight are rendered. It would close the gap in the community, and satisfy everyone (Since most people who have defended third person say it should stay because of the FOV, lack of headbob, and cinematic experience).

[harley001 315]

You can disable head bob. Double tap - or + to adjust fov. But i do think we need better fov options.

[Clumzy (DayZ) 377]

You can disable head bob. Double tap - or + to adjust fov. But i do think we need better fov options.

Which we are getting.

[Positronica 30]

DayZ may have started out as a PvE experience, but that is no longer what it's defined by.

Yes it is. PvE is still far and away the core of the game. Heck, unless you've got friends or a camp, you can't even PvP without going through the PvE game after every death. And when PvP does occur, it's almost always a quick, short affair and then it's right back to dealing with the PvE world. And even if you're actively hunting for PvP, you're still always subject to the PvE game as you move through the world. But even if you're right, even if DayZ is now just all about the PvP, then that's a failure of the game, plus from the little bit we've seen about the stand alone, I think it's safe to say that BI still intends to make PvE and the zombie experience what DayZ is primarily about. Because if they fail at that, then DayZ might quickly find itself lumped into the vast multitude of PvP/Deathmatch games out there, leaving the door wide open for a competitor to steal their sandbox survival thunder. And trust me, if DayZ SA sells well, there's a good chance we'll start seeing some competition. The War Z, despite all it's massive flaws, proved one thing, and that's that you can bring a zombie survival game to market quickly, mainly because it doesn't need much scripted content. BI will have the advantage, due to the MMO style engine they're putting together for the SA, but gamers are fickle, and they could lose that advantage fast if they don't deliver new content at a fast enough pace, and especially if they fail to focus on the elements of the game that make DayZ unique and special.

But it does. What do most people do when they know a hostile player is nearby? Go into 3rd person, and spot them much more easily.

I would debate that. I think most players, when they know there's a hostile player nearby go into first person view, so that they're ready to shoot accurately at a moment's notice.

Actually, it does impact my experience, because it can be very difficult to find a vanilla server nowadays.

Maybe you live in an area with terrible ping times to most servers, but the server list is still chock full of servers running vanilla DayZ. But even if every private hive chose to run a modified verson of DayZ, what's your argument? Are you saying its not fair that other people aren't using their money to give you the game experience you want instead of the game experience they want? Also, if you really are unhappy with every server that you can reliably connect to, there's nothing stopping you from hosting your own server, you could even make it first person only. On top of that, keep in mind that the only reason DayZ exists is because Arma 2 allowed for massive amounts of modding and customization when it came to the game. If DayZ SA reverses that, what sort of unexpected future mod might we miss out on?

I would say that it's a bad idea to make major features optional and divide the community.

You're right, when it comes to first person and third person view, we should make all servers uniform, and since right now, 99.9% of players have chosen to play on servers that allow both third and first person, we should make that the standard for all servers. Or is that not what you meant? ;-)

[Clumzy (DayZ) 377]

You're right, when it comes to first person and third person view, we should make all servers uniform, and since right now, 99.9% of players have chosen to play on servers that allow both third and first person, we should make that the standard for all servers. Or is that not what you meant? ;-)

Well, the problem is that keeping things the way they ae, with the exception of removing first person servers entirely, wouldn't solve anything. It would create even more conflict. Making third person balanced with first person, as I have said many times, looks like the best option to me.