First vs Third Person Discussion (Dslyecxi video)

[mercules 1290]

It's a non issue - people will use whatever tools they are given to play the game. It won't affect sales one bit and easily proved by asking one simple question,

 

"When was the last time you didn't buy a game because it had no 3rd person option?"

 

Does anyone even consider that when buying games? It's NEVER occurred to me to even think about out and neither has anyone else.

 

This is why this argument is stupid and why it is wrong.

 

However I have NOT bought games that were 3rd perspon perspective before. In fact it is one of the reasons I didnt' buy into the MassEffect series until I was about bludgeoned with a friends keyboard as he chanted, "ME 1&2 are on sale on Steam. Only costs $20 to try them both. Trust me you will still like them." I have to admit, I liked those games but I still found the TPV annoying. I get it though, with all the cutscenes that have you in 3rd person it makes sense, but I really wanted to the option to go into FPV while in combat. 

[Jex 1104]

This would be why I don't play CoD, despite the claims that because I support FPV I must be a FPS CoD fan. 

 

I stopped buying their games after they stuck a knife into the back of the community.

[mercules 1290]

It's an sandbox-survival-fps-crafting-game. It can be played as a whole game or as each individual part. Depending on how it is played, it makes more sense to use one or the other view. One a lot more valuable question that could be asked instead would be: How could we make 1st person and 3rd person so they each are the best they can be and how do we organize servers and game-modes so that everyone can play the type of DayZ he wants to play.

 

Hey, what perspective is Mincraft the "sandbox-survival-crafting" game in? :) There are a lot of RPGs that use FPV. 

[big_t 66]

Third person is not being removed, we know that already.

 

 

In hind sight we also used to know that the SA was to be released in 2012. 

 

Things have changed , they took time to make the game better,,,  one of those things might be addressing the 3rd person exploit issue.

[Jex 1104]

However I have NOT bought games that were 3rd perspon perspective before. In fact it is one of the reasons I didnt' buy into the MassEffect series until I was about bludgeoned with a friends keyboard as he chanted, "ME 1&2 are on sale on Steam. Only costs $20 to try them both. Trust me you will still like them." I have to admit, I liked those games but I still found the TPV annoying. I get it though, with all the cutscenes that have you in 3rd person it makes sense, but I really wanted to the option to go into FPV while in combat. 

 

It doesn't fuss me that it's 3rd person at all. Since I have so many options of games out there, why must everyone of those conform to what I want? I am spoiled for choice on the whole so I can find any game I want to play pretty much. I immerse myself into games and don't notice the aspect of 1st/3rd or whatever view I get as long as the game play is good.

 

Tombraider for instance I thought was exceptional. I got involved into the story and loved the game play. When it comes to PVP games though, or horror genres, I prefer 1st person. FEAR would have been ruined in 3rd person for instance. The advantages of 3rd person over other players in dayz ruins the immersion - I don't know why its even being considered and why Rocket thinks that having an advantage over another player is acceptable.

 

edit: If dayz came out 3rd person only btw, i'd still get it.

Edited August 30, 2013 by Jexter

[mercules 1290]

The advantages of 3rd person over other players in dayz ruins the immersion - 

The advantage it offers over ZOMBIES ruins the immersion and they can't even use it in return. 

[Heiduk 265]

No but it is logical to stick with a formula that has made or has helped make DayZ what it is today .

That formula also includes zombies that teleport through walls, doors that break your legs, and rifles that vanish when placed in a backpack. Is it logical to stick with those features too? 

 

DayZ players are split into two base camps on PvP: the ones seeking PvP and the ones avoiding it.

They are als split into two base camps on 3rd person view. I believe PvP'ers are the same as 1st person players and therefore the 3rd person lovers belong to the PvP-avoiders.

 

I hate 3rd person but have never played DayZ for its PvP so I'm afraid I don't fall into your, or Ken's, neat little categories either.

 

I wanted to know if there an offical difficulty setting "1st person only" exists.

 

In ARMA its called Mercenary, I think a lot of the Mod's servers renamed it to Hardcore, whatever that means. We wouldn't even be having this discussion if hosting companies had used it as the default for new servers rather than Veteran or Normal.

 

That way 1st person can see through walls while 3rd can remain seeing over them. A fair compromise.

 

Just call it a heart-beat sensor like they did in COD, totally legit.

 

there needs to be a way to push grass down in front of you, or it will get fustrating fast.

You can already do this. Just crawl forward a little then backup.

  

You can't shame people into playing first person, because the bottom line is, all the guys wanting to pass themselves off as hardcore pros, the 3000 people who liked Dslyexci's video, at the end of the day you'll find all these ninjas on a third person server.

 

I would be pretty curious to see the response if one of the popular Streamers who uses 3rd person did a rebuttal video on why 3rd person is awesome. Does anybody have any connections?

 

My chances of getting a fair hearing here is I now realise near impossible

Enough with the self pity. I'm sure Rocket hasn't read all 70+ pages but I would be surprised if he isn't aware of the discussion. Besides, it not like its a new argument, 1st/3rd person wars have been going on ever since I joined this forum and they have happened on the ARMA forums since the game was released. Suck it up, make your points like everybody else, and maybe just maybe you might have a tiny influence on the final game.

 

First let me say that third person shooter can be very tactical.

In that many-windowed environment you "may" have a valid point. It also seems it would only be designed that way as a PvP hotspot.

The operative word in Ken's post is "can". The issue is that for them to actually be tactical they need to be designed around that view point from the ground up. Everything from level design to the weapons available need to consider the view point. The problem with 3rd person in DayZ/ARMA is that you take a world and set of game mechanics that are based to a very high degree on a real place and real-world mechanics then add one little tweak. You give the player a floating camera on a 4 m tall pole that follows them around. That one little change instantly invalidates a large number of real-world tactics and strategies, so now you have a bunch of players running around your carefully crafted representation of the "Real" world doing completely unrealistic things.

Maybe that makes for a fun game so its a reasonable tradeoff and you leave it as it is. Maybe you want players to behave in a more realistic/authentic way so you start making tweaks to the mechanics of the world that counteract your original tweak. How will you define authentic? What metrics will you use to determine when players are acting authentically enough so you can stop tweaking? How many man-hours are you going to spend making adjustments to meet your goal and what unintended consequences will those adjustments have?

Or maybe you take a step back and decide to let the design be driven by a single goal: "Make the world and mechanics as physically plausible as possible." All of a sudden design decisions are radically simplified because they are driven by the immutable laws of physics and biology. There is nothing more authentic than that.

[Siberian (DayZ) 527]

 

 

 

In my wildest dreams, I can't imagine there being two different hives and why would there be?

 

What's this worst case scenario you're fearing, that a third person player is going to easy mode farm a full populated third person server and not get killed all the time by the 40 other players stalking the military spawns and then jump to your first person server, be forced to play in first person like you and then totally own you in first person, because while you're accustomed to playing in first person, because you're not a pussy/n00b/carebear, he has the better gun?

 

Shouldn't we then also have a separate server, because while farming the hell out of easy mode third person servers, isn't it also kind of easy mode to get all your gear on an empty elite/veteran/badass server?

 

People get killed at much on third person server, simply because they are more populated and there are more enemies around. They lose their gear as much as you and they start all over as much as you too. People don't server hop from third person to first person. If you're a third person player, you probably filter first person servers away from your server browser, like the majority of all the first person players apparently also chooses to play on third person servers.

 

wow that sir is one excellent post..

 

well said.

 

it sure beats posting "You dumb"..

 

hahah

[Siberian (DayZ) 527]

A method to get players to adapt to a higher difficulty setting would be to have like 3 settings: noob, regular, hardcore

Hardcore means FPV only, almost no HUD and everything minimal but you would find the best loot only on those servers. So for example on a regular server the best weapon to find might be an AK or M4 variant, on noob maybe shotguns and an Enfield or Winnie. Other loot classes similar.

So there would be an incentive to go into hardcore land maybe a good feeling afterwards of having survived there.

haha so if someone doesnt like FPS, they have to fight with sticks n stones..

 

holy crap im glad your not in charge of anything Dayz related..

 

that might be among the VERY worst ideas in the history of this storied thread..

[Ken Bean 175]

Did we found a solution yet?

[SoulHunter (DayZ) 233]

Did we found a solution yet?

Seems like removal of TPV is the one being talked so much now. Let's see what will happen

[wild_man 4442]

Did we found a solution yet?

we see many opinion :)

 

guys feel too much strong on both side >:(

 

both side make strong argue and after we listen evidence we agree 3rd person is for baby :P

Edited August 30, 2013 by KoS

[Ken Bean 175]

Whoa, interesting. I thought I'd convince some 3rd person player to join 1st person server. As you guys say 3rd person player are seeking for easy mode.

Life on 1st person server currently is totally easy.

The situation may change, as soon as we get such a server being populated.

Edited August 30, 2013 by Ken Bean

[SoulHunter (DayZ) 233]

Whoa, interesting. I thought I'd convince some 3rd person player to join 1st person server. As you guys say 3rd person player are seeking for easy mode.

Life on 1st person server currently is totally easy.

Its then good! It has been admitted that FPV is far more immersive than TPV, and now its being said that it is easier! The way to go without all those exploits and whatnot!

 

FPV FTW!

 

Thanks for that research mate! ((:

[Ken Bean 175]

Its then good! It has been admitted that FPV is far more immersive than TPV, and now its being said that it is easier! The way to go without all those exploits and whatnot!

 

FPV FTW!

 

Thanks for that research mate! ((:

Yeah, I thought so. You guys really touched my heart.

 

I'm going to stand up for your thing.

 

It has been long time ago since I felt so engaged last time.

 

Anyway, since you guys constantly say, 1st person server is only for über-pro-hardcore-player, all the player may think, 1st person might be nothing for the "normal guy". Thought about that and absolutely makes sense.

 

So maybe wee need to nerf the 1st person server a bit? Apparently the super-über-difficulty is nothing realistic? It's just waaaayyy too difficult and clearly must be adjusted so that normal average player can play.

 

And the best thing is - if anyone is questioning my findings - I have absolutely definitive proof.

 

This thing happened before, with another game. It's not the first time a game destroyed itself because of the difficulty.

Edited August 30, 2013 by Ken Bean

[big_t 66]

...The problem with 3rd person in DayZ/ARMA is that you take a world and set of game mechanics that are based to a very high degree on a real place and real-world mechanics then add one little tweak. You give the player a floating camera on a 4 m tall pole that follows them around. That one little change instantly invalidates a large number of real-world tactics and strategies, so now you have a bunch of players running around your carefully crafted representation of the "Real" world doing completely unrealistic things.

Maybe that makes for a fun game so its a reasonable tradeoff and you leave it as it is. Maybe you want players to behave in a more realistic/authentic way so you start making tweaks to the mechanics of the world that counteract your original tweak. How will you define authentic? What metrics will you use to determine when players are acting authentically enough so you can stop tweaking? How many man-hours are you going to spend making adjustments to meet your goal and what unintended consequences will those adjustments have?

Or maybe you take a step back and decide to let the design be driven by a single goal: "Make the world and mechanics as physically plausible as possible." All of a sudden design decisions are radically simplified because they are driven by the immutable laws of physics and biology. There is nothing more authentic than that.

 

 

Wow. Very well written and articulated. It's guys like you and Dslyecxi that put it into such rational and descriptive terms. 

 

 

I feel like just slapping people upside the head and telling them they are wrong, (which they are) , but you put it into terms that are really hard to counter.

 

 

I am very interested to see an intelligent counter response to Heiduks post above.  

 

Here let me start out the compelling and cohesive counter argument:  

 

"I wanna see my guy running"

 

" Everyone else it doing it so it must be good / budweiser is the best tasting beer"

 

"how else will I camp the hospital roof in cherno?"

 

"it's activated by default"

 

 "they had 3rd person in operation flashpoint soooo it must be good for dayz"

 

"don't take away my crutch,,, i'm so used to it"

 

"Dayz is not supposed to be a difficult game, it's only a game jeez"

Edited August 30, 2013 by Big_T

[Ken Bean 175]

Some guys of you may not want to believe but being realistc at all cost in every regards is

1) more complex and difficult as one may think and

2) doesn't always work as a game and

3) is most of the time not very interesting.

Edited August 30, 2013 by Ken Bean

[Jamz 253]

Did we found a solution yet?

 

Sadly no, but I think some good ideas are out there and if nothing else this thread has made some people (not many) see both sides (sic) of the two viewpoints.

 

In hind sight we also used to know that the SA was to be released in 2012. 

 

Things have changed , they took time to make the game better,,,  one of those things might be addressing the 3rd person exploit issue.

 

This is also being done as TPV is being kept in, it will be modified. Things could of course change in the future for both the SA and the mod, but I think we on the forum, the more serious players of DayZ, have a responsibility to help if we can by giving opinions and ideas on changes/improvements.

[Jamz 253]

Wow. Very well written and articulated. It's guys like you and Dslyecxi that put it into such rational and descriptive terms. 

 

 

I feel like just slapping people upside the head and telling them they are wrong, (which they are) , but you put it into terms that are really hard to counter.

 

 

I am very interested to see an intelligent counter response to Heiduks post above.  

 

Here let me start out the compelling and cohesive counter argument:  

 

"I wanna see my guy running"

 

" Everyone else it doing it so it must be good / budweiser is the best tasting beer"

 

"how else will I camp the hospital roof in cherno?"

 

"it's activated by default"

 

 "they had 3rd person in operation flashpoint soooo it must be good for dayz"

 

"don't take away my crutch,,, i'm so used to it"

 

"Dayz is not supposed to be a difficult game, it's only a game jeez"

 

Arrogance is no friend to discussion. If you truly want some reasons as to why it's worth keeping TPV in some form, I think the most important one is that some people simply prefer it. For me for instance, the increased view of the world which I get makes me feel more like I'm actually there in TPV (especially in open areas), it also gives me an added sense of vulnerability which I don't get in FPV (I simply don't feel more disconnected in TPV which some people seem to be inferring) as I am always aware of my physical self. Lastly, in some situations it actually is a disadvantage too. In a situation when entering a building with a zombie inside and to one side of the door I'm entering through, I actually see him a split second later in TPV than I would in FPV due to the viewpoint being behind myself. It's not much, but enough to catch me out if I'm not careful enough.

 

I'm sure many people don't agree with me, as I don't agree with many peoples opinions to scrap TPV altogether. This is how it should be.

Edited August 30, 2013 by Jamz

[big_t 66]

Arrogance is no friend to discussion. If you truly want some reasons as to why it's worth keeping TPV in some form, I think the most important one is that some people simply prefer it. For me for instance, the added view of the world which I get makes me feel more like I'm actually there in TPV (especially in open areas), it also gives me an added sense of vulnerability which I don't get in FPV (I simply don't feel more disconnected in TPV which some people seem to be inferring) as I am always aware of my physical self. Lastly, in some situations it actually is a disadvantage too. For insance, when entering a building with a zombie inside and to one side of the door I'm entering through, I actually see him a split second later in TPV than I would in FPV due to the viewpoint being behind myself. It's not much, but enough to catch me out if I'm not careful enough.

 

I'm sure many people don't agree with me, as I don't agree with many peoples opinions to scrap TPV altogether. This is how it should be.

 

 

Yes you proved my point completely thank you.   The best most intelligent argument is , "some people simply prefer it"  This is not an argument it goes to my last point, it's just a crutch people are used to playing with . 

 

    Vunerable, disconnected in 3rd person.  I guess thats a reason somehow. I don't agree at all but is a 1rst real point for 3rd person.

 

That uncomfortable feeling when using 1rst person is the same as the feeling when you take the training wheels off your bicycle for the first time. it's strange and scary at first but you get used to it and realize soon it is much better.

[Siberian (DayZ) 527]

Yes you proved my point completely thank you.   The best most intelligent argument is , "some people simply prefer it"  This is not an argument it goes to my last point, it's just a crutch people are used to playing with . 

 

   

 simply put who are you to decide what is a valid reason for prefering 1 view point to the other ???

 

all you guys are the same, you repost the opposing view then throw the personal bias in at the end. tainting your entire post.

 

leave out the bias and simply accept you have an opinion and respect that others do aswell.

 

my preference for 3rd person is a choice i like its not a GODAM crutch.. same as some people prefer pvp/KoS and some dont.

 

not PVPing isnt a crutch either.. its a preference.

[Ken Bean 175]

It because they never actually made a game, so they don't know how pointles their realism and 1st person fetishism is when it comes to a bigger picture and an actually enjoyable game.

 

Under the bottom line you have to make a compromis and most realistc things just doesn't work, are not practical or otherwise too difficult to implement.

 

You broke a leg ingame? How long do you want to wait until you can walk again, if ever? Can you imagine how complex a true health system for player can be? Its not something which is processed realtime in all its realistic details on every computer. And it doesn't make fun to do many things in actual realtime.

 

3rd person is enjoyable and practical for games. Just forget once the realsm thing (which the 1st person view is neither) and you may sdiscover that 3rd person indeed has advantages to offer. Yeah, without a device you can't look in real life through a third person perspective, but in real life you also cant run 20 kilometres and back with full backpacks every day. You lose maybe some teeth as you grow older and maybe suffer serious aches. Your cartilages in the knees may start to disappear and as a result you might not be able to crouch any longer ...

 

Goes on and on and almost never ends.

 

And I know that you guys are not the ones who have to implement it.

 

And yet you are the first who complain because cutting an animal may take half an hour and collecting wood another. "When do I have time?", you'll ask and "I also have a real life.", you'll claim and then you say "Playing this game would work, if I had two lifes or if the day had 48 hours." and then you leave and say "Realism is not that bad, but you really can go way too far." and so on...

;)

Edited August 30, 2013 by Ken Bean

[big_t 66]

 simply put who are you to decide what is a valid reason for prefering 1 view point to the other ???

 

 

When a certain view point has privileged viewing abilities to see other players and zombies (3rd) at the detriment to the other view style (1rst), then yeah I'm the boss that says "thats not good work my son...we can do better"

 

 

my preference for 3rd person is a choice i like its not a GODAM crutch.. same as some people prefer pvp/KoS and some dont.

 

 

 

You sure about that? If you couldn't have the visual advantage of seeing over hills and around corners would you still be using that magical point of view? 

 

 

It's just a casual preference I suppose. Still no argument.

[Jamz 253]

Yes you proved my point completely thank you. 

 

   

 

I proved that a players preference is important in a video game, nothing more. I'm sure you understand that perfectly well, being a player with a strong preference yourself :)

 

Incidently, the point of this discussion was originally to come up with ways to fix the exploits in TPV if I'm not mistaken. So the fact that they exist now is not really an argument anymore....

Edited August 30, 2013 by Jamz

[Siberian (DayZ) 527]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You sure about that? If you couldn't have the visual advantage of seeing over hills and around corners would you still be using that magical point of view? 

 

 

It's just a casual preference I suppose. Still no argument.

 

 

yes i'd still use it regardless.

 

flight sims/driving games be them arcade or "realistic" models, if theres a 3rd person view i use it.

 

its simply a more entertaining, visualy pleasing experience.. which when refering to games is the whole point..

 

SA at the end of the day is a game, it isnt some VR real scenario...