First vs Third Person Discussion (Dslyecxi video)

[Ken Bean 175]

No, my friend would play the game and realise that it is a much more immersive and just better expirience. He woudl enjoy the game way more than he actually thought he could. ;)

 

How about trying to convince him, like so: :murder:

[Jex 1104]

That would be far unrealistic and almost any of those who support TPV would not like such a thing to be implemented (even Rocket I'd assume). It would mean putting someone in disadvantage due to the way they prefer playing the game.

 

It would be more okayish if the time limit on TPV usage would be added. Like, if there is some people around in a radius of 1km, you cannot use it. And if you fired a gun, you'll have to wait for about 10 minutes before being able to use it.

 

But it isn't realistic to use 3rd person so why give someone who wishes to exploit 3rd person have all the advantages? What if we could zoom out to 500m in 3rd person, then we could see the tops of buildings right? The radius idea is a good one, the best that you could compromise with I think but the 3rd person crowd won't want it as 3rd person is primarily used in PVP?

[big_t 66]

- player-player interaction

- encourages role playing

- tactical overview, no tunnel vision

- reflects natural self and souround awareness

- no desorientation in buildings like with 1st person

 

This and more already has been said.

 

And last but not least, given that allmost everyone is playing on 3rd person server (even those who complain about), people seems to like it.

 

 

- player-player interaction ....(how so?)

- encourages role playing ...(nonsense)

- tactical overview, no tunnel vision ... ( you mean tactical exploit view enabled, is not tunnel at all, adjust your settings)

- reflects natural self and souround awareness ....(by having a hovering camera behind your head?, use alt key to move your head around, like in real "natural" life)

- no desorientation in buildings like with 1st person... (have never been disoriented inside a building, questioning your gaming skills)

Edited September 3, 2013 by Big_T

[mr_chabowski@live.co.uk 2416]

Why do folks continue to make sweeping generalisations and massive assumptions, then strut around like they own the feckin' place?

 

Listen. (and this is for everyone) You're entitled to your opinion. Your allowed to share your views. As is EVERY member here.

But. You have no more right to impose your own preferences on anyone else than they do on you. And prejudice doesn't give you any right to insult folks.

Show some respect.

[big_t 66]

Hope you are not talking about my response above, because those sweeping massive generalizations were what I was responding to.

 

...and saying someone insulting for disagreeing with your bias and countering some ill conceived talking points sounds like butthurt to me.

[mr_chabowski@live.co.uk 2416]

Ha. No offence, fella. But your response doesn't factor in.

When I said "this is for everyone", something should have clicked.

 

And if you're going to talk "bias", don't address a neutral party. :thumbsup:

[Siberian (DayZ) 527]

Why do folks continue to make sweeping generalisations and massive assumptions, then strut around like they own the feckin' place?

 

Listen. (and this is for everyone) You're entitled to your opinion. Your allowed to share your views. As is EVERY member here.

But. You have no more right to impose your own preferences on anyone else than they do on you. And prejudice doesn't give you any right to insult folks.

Show some respect.

goood luk with that..

 

theres a whole lot of "my view/opinion is correct, everyone else is wrong" here..

[tommes 331]

You have no more right to impose your own preferences on anyone else than they do on you.

Rocket does.

[Siberian (DayZ) 527]

Rocket does.

on that we finaly agree..

[big_t 66]

goood luk with that..

 

theres a whole lot of "my view/opinion is correct, everyone else is wrong" here..

 

This is true, people opinions are quite polarized and steadfast over the debate over 1rst vs 3rd person, I doubt any opinions have been swayed either way. From the polls and general sense of the replies, the hardcore fans with enthusiasm for the development of the game acknowledge that the issue needs some attention.

 

I think most of the the 3rd person crowd can't seem to see what all the bother is about, they like 3rd for their own reasons and thats the end of it so it's frutrating to argue over it or imagine it being removed.

 

  For 1rst person advocates (myself included), the technical problems with 3rd person breaking the gameplay seem so obvious,  it's frustrating to fathom those that indorse 3rd person gameplay.

[Siberian (DayZ) 527]

This is true, people opinions are quite polarized and steadfast over the debate over 1rst vs 3rd person, I doubt any opinions have been swayed either way. From the polls and general sense of the replies, the hardcore fans with enthusiasm for the development of the game acknowledge that the issue needs some attention.

 

I think most of the the 3rd person crowd can't seem to see what all the bother is about, they like 3rd for their own reasons and thats the end of it so it's frutrating to argue over it or imagine it being removed.

 

  For 1rst person advocates (myself included), the technical problems with 3rd person breaking the gameplay seem so obvious,  it's frustrating to fathom those that indorse 3rd person gameplay.

agreed, at the end of the day i doubt anyone in the history of the internet has ever had their opinion swayed..

 

 

we all like what we like for our own reasons, and that should be enuf for both sides to simply agree to disagree.

 

what clouds things is the fact that Dayz is so unlike basicly any other game, be it a FPS shooter or a 3rd person RPG.

[dsi24 227]

This is true, people opinions are quite polarized and steadfast over the debate over 1rst vs 3rd person, I doubt any opinions have been swayed either way. From the polls and general sense of the replies, the hardcore fans with enthusiasm for the development of the game acknowledge that the issue needs some attention.

 

I think most of the the 3rd person crowd can't seem to see what all the bother is about, they like 3rd for their own reasons and thats the end of it so it's frutrating to argue over it or imagine it being removed.

 

  For 1rst person advocates (myself included), the technical problems with 3rd person breaking the gameplay seem so obvious,  it's frustrating to fathom those that indorse 3rd person gameplay.

I dunno about that, for most of the third person people here the argument has gone from "but third person is fine!" to "well how do we fix it?". Once they start questioning it, it's only a matter of time until they exhaust all possibilities for fixing it and realize that, oh, it doesn't belong.

 

Of course, you can't give them that "no one's opinion's are swayed" lifeline.

Edited September 3, 2013 by Dsi1

[Jamz 253]

I dunno about that, for most of the third person people here the argument has gone from "but third person is fine!" to "well how do we fix it?". Once they start questioning it, it's only a matter of time until they exhaust all possibilities for fixing it and realize that, oh, it doesn't belong.

 

Of course, you can't give them that "no one's opinion's are swayed" lifeline.

 

I don't think anyone ever said it was fine, simply to not remove it entirely.

[dsi24 227]

I don't think anyone ever said it was fine, simply to not remove it entirely.

Answer this question: How do you get rid of all of third person's exploits and keep it in a usable form at the same time?

 

(spoilers: you can't, it's either usable and exploitable, or gone and unexploitable. The very nature of third person is what makes it so exploitable, you can't get rid of the exploits without getting rid of what makes third person third person)

Edited September 3, 2013 by Dsi1

[Jamz 253]

Answer this question: How do you get rid of all of third person's exploits and keep it in a usable form at the same time?

 

(spoilers: you can't, it's either usable and exploitable, or gone and unexploitable. The very nature of third person is what makes it so exploitable, you can't get rid of the exploits without getting rid of what makes third person third person)

 

I do see what you are saying. However even if the only way to do it is to split the server types to either or, then I still believe it should be kept in some form. If the FPV servers don't populate then the players have spoken and it's up to you to encourage them to play on the FPV servers. I'd rather see something done about TPV so mixed view servers are viable, which seems to be what's happening, so I'm waiting for any information as to what is being done.

 

My idea would be to pull the cam close in to an over the shoulder view about a foot behind and head height. camera movement as it is now but unable to rise past head height giving a red faction armageddon style view (but a little tighter). Switching between TPV and FPV bound to a button for full viewing mode in FPV to be switched into instantly. Lastly, for the situation highlighted earlier when facing the wall and having the cam swing out; either removing non static objects from view until the head has cleared the wall, or making a viewing mirror visible to the other player (as used by the military to see around corners) so a visual object can give the player away. It's a start, and I'm sure the dev team have even more ideas.

Removal of a view completely should only be a last resort, this has always been my standpoint from the very beginning of all this.

 

Edit - to save posting on another thread for Dsi1, another idea would be the perimeter around built up areas forcing FPV. To be honest, I'm no software developer or game writer so I don't know what is possible or not, only the dev team will.

Edited September 3, 2013 by Jamz

[big_t 66]

I do have a challenge and a humble request to all 3rd person advocates. And I ask this with all humility and respect due to your preference to play 3rd person....

 

Please play a 1st person only server for 2 hours. Feel the difference in gameplay.  (turn off head bob in settings and use alt key to look around ), no doubt you will be tapping the enter button as I was, but once you get over that urge and know that everyone on the server has the same vision... you'll get an insight as to why people push so hard for 1rst person.

 

 

If you think there are no populated first person servers: try day zero podagorsk, or regular dayz zero, there are highly populated 1rst person only servers there.

 

 

I think it's a fair ask as all players have been playing on 3rd person enabled servers for many many hours.

Edited September 3, 2013 by Big_T

[dsi24 227]

I do see what you are saying. However even if the only way to do it is to split the server types to either or, then I still believe it should be kept in some form. If the FPV servers don't populate then the players have spoken and it's up to you to encourage them to play on the FPV servers. I'd rather see something done about TPV so mixed view servers are viable, which seems to be what's happening, so I'm waiting for any information as to what is being done.

 

My idea would be to pull the cam close in to an over the shoulder view about a foot behind and head height. camera movement as it is now but unable to rise past head height giving a red faction armageddon style view (but a little tighter). Switching between TPV and FPV bound to a button for full viewing mode in FPV to be switched into instantly. Lastly, for the situation highlighted earlier when facing the wall and having the cam swing out; either removing non static objects from view until the head has cleared the wall, or making a viewing mirror visible to the other player (as used by the military to see around corners) so a visual object can give the player away. It's a start, and I'm sure the dev team have even more ideas.

Removal of a view completely should only be a last resort, this has always been my standpoint from the very beginning of all this.

 

Edit - to save posting on another thread for Dsi1, another idea would be the perimeter around built up areas forcing FPV. To be honest, I'm no software developer or game writer so I don't know what is possible or not, only the dev team will.

TPV is just as exploitable in the wilderness as it is in the built up areas.

 

Things popping up in the middle of your screen makes the game feel janky, especially a whole player or vehicle. How would you make the mirror not look terribly janky? (Using ArmA3's RTT for a real mirror-on-stick similar to this game's camera stick would be awesome, but that specifically requires the lack of TPV to work) Either the player is putting their weapon away and swinging a stick around as you swing the camera around (requires time to put up weapon and change to the stick and vice versa, and where do you get the mirror-on-a-stick from in the first place?), or a stick is just sticking out of your back where the camera is located like this (and again, where do you get it from?).

Edited September 3, 2013 by Dsi1

[IncognitoNico 71]

I do see what you are saying. However even if the only way to do it is to split the server types to either or, then I still believe it should be kept in some form. If the FPV servers don't populate then the players have spoken and it's up to you to encourage them to play on the FPV servers. I'd rather see something done about TPV so mixed view servers are viable, which seems to be what's happening, so I'm waiting for any information as to what is being done.

 

My idea would be to pull the cam close in to an over the shoulder view about a foot behind and head height. camera movement as it is now but unable to rise past head height giving a red faction armageddon style view (but a little tighter). Switching between TPV and FPV bound to a button for full viewing mode in FPV to be switched into instantly. Lastly, for the situation highlighted earlier when facing the wall and having the cam swing out; either removing non static objects from view until the head has cleared the wall, or making a viewing mirror visible to the other player (as used by the military to see around corners) so a visual object can give the player away. It's a start, and I'm sure the dev team have even more ideas.

Removal of a view completely should only be a last resort, this has always been my standpoint from the very beginning of all this.

 

Edit - to save posting on another thread for Dsi1, another idea would be the perimeter around built up areas forcing FPV. To be honest, I'm no software developer or game writer so I don't know what is possible or not, only the dev team will.

I get what you are saying, but I also agree with Dsi1, and I think that making third person view be an over the shoulder type of thing, would make it purposeless, because by doing that, you would have a good portion of the screen obstructed, so FPV would be more viable, and it would essentially be the same thing with a portion of your body obstructing the screen

[Cap'n (DayZ) 1827]

So...why can't there just be 3rd person enabled servers and 1st person only servers? I don't understand, I feel like most 1st advocates are just hell bent on making everyone play their way. Play a fucking 1st only server if you feel so inclined. Rocket's already discussing pretty plausible ways to fix 3rd's exploits. So...why is there even an argument? Are you just sadists who want us to play like you? If so, I've lost faith in our community. Also, I'm going to kill Dyslecxi and whoever brought this up. They've torn apart our community and stirred a scourge of people who can't stand for reasonable compromise.

[IncognitoNico 71]

So...why can't there just be 3rd person enabled servers and 1st person only servers? I don't understand, I feel like most 1st advocates are just hell bent on making everyone play their way. Play a fucking 1st only server if you feel so inclined. Rocket's already discussing pretty plausible ways to fix 3rd's exploits. So...why is there even an argument? Are you just sadists who want us to play like you? If so, I've lost faith in our community. Also, I'm going to kill Dyslecxi and whoever brought this up. They've torn apart our community and stirred a scourge of people who can't stand for reasonable compromise.

Because there isn't a lot of 1st person only servers because admins want to please everybody, and most people can't find any populated first person only servers with good ping, and if you play on a tpv server you are at a disadvantage against players in tpv, because they can see you over walls, around corners, over buildings, etc...

[brzator47@gmail.com 524]

So...why can't there just be 3rd person enabled servers and 1st person only servers? I don't understand, I feel like most 1st advocates are just hell bent on making everyone play their way. Play a fucking 1st only server if you feel so inclined. Rocket's already discussing pretty plausible ways to fix 3rd's exploits. So...why is there even an argument? Are you just sadists who want us to play like you? If so, I've lost faith in our community. Also, I'm going to kill Dyslecxi and whoever brought this up. They've torn apart our community and stirred a scourge of people who can't stand for reasonable compromise.

We want a better game, that's about it really. It doesn't take a genius to figure out why just having it optional is not a good long term solution.

Dslyecxi did not tear apart the community. This topic has been discussed many times before. Rocket's earlier idea was to have 1st/3rd person toggle only available in options menu but that was thankfully scrapped from what I can tell. A pretty terrible idea that would have achieved nothing aside from killing 1st person view.

[sausagekingofchicago 4711]

How about.....

 

Third person view available only in a "rest state"?  That's assuming we don't need to apply bandages directly to wounds, something I'm just throwing out there which likely isn't the case.  Rest state would occur at a camp, campfire, or sitting still for X amount of time.  Camera would slowly rotate and any movement or attempt to control the camera would kick it back into first person.   

 

What this does:  Grants players the ability to take Show Off and Crew screenshots for random brag threads.  Lets players examine their character in their new fancy pants.  Forces players into first person in nearly every situation.  Cross-country travel wouldn't be as pretty but that may be a trade off.

 

Most of the gain, not too much of the pain, imo.  We might need some clever idle animations that include showing off the weapons we find.  The more animations/emotes the better for this.  A little bit of player chosen style in these rest state/idle animations would go a long way to convey personality.

 

Anyway, just another toss out.

[bad_mojo (DayZ) 1204]

In a game that is largely about player interactions it's puzzling how much people are concerned with looking at themselves.

 

 

The worst part of these debates are the "well if you guys would go populate a first person server" & "nobody plays first person, that shows everyone likes third person and not first" ideas. Do people actually believe this?

 

If you're given two modes to chose from in a video game, and one is WAY better than the other, which do you think most people will choose? Obviously the better one.

 

The problem in DayZ is that advantage is unrealistic and doesn't follow the spirit of the game. If we've got floating eyes, why not magic powers? Why not zombie repellent? Why not laser guns?

 

I don't expect anyone to change their minds about this, but at least try to see it from our side once in a while. If you only look at the stuff that reinforces your side of the argument, you'll never see where you could be wrong.

[IncognitoNico 71]

How about.....

 

Third person view available only in a "rest state"?  That's assuming we don't need to apply bandages directly to wounds, something I'm just throwing out there which likely isn't the case.  Rest state would occur at a camp, campfire, or sitting still for X amount of time.  Camera would slowly rotate and any movement or attempt to control the camera would kick it back into first person.   

 

What this does:  Grants players the ability to take Show Off and Crew screenshots for random brag threads.  Lets players examine their character in their new fancy pants.  Forces players into first person in nearly every situation.  Cross-country travel wouldn't be as pretty but that may be a trade off.

 

Most of the gain, not too much of the pain, imo.  We might need some clever idle animations that include showing off the weapons we find.  The more animations/emotes the better for this.  A little bit of player chosen style in these rest state/idle animations would go a long way to convey personality.

 

Anyway, just another toss out.

I think having that would be kinda cool

[IncognitoNico 71]

In a game that is largely about player interactions it's puzzling how much people are concerned with looking at themselves.

 

 

The worst part of these debates are the "well if you guys would go populate a first person server" & "nobody plays first person, that shows everyone likes third person and not first" ideas. Do people actually believe this?

 

If you're given two modes to chose from in a video game, and one is WAY better than the other, which do you think most people will choose? Obviously the better one.

 

The problem in DayZ is that advantage is unrealistic and doesn't follow the spirit of the game. If we've got floating eyes, why not magic powers? Why not zombie repellent? Why not laser guns?

 

I don't expect anyone to change their minds about this, but at least try to see it from our side once in a while. If you only look at the stuff that reinforces your side of the argument, you'll never see where you could be wrong.

The problem is that their side of the argument is always "I hate the head bobbing in FPV" that can be turned off, "I want to check out my player" which is useless because we now have a player model in the inventory, or some stuff that you have in TPV that is "better" than FPV even tho you have the same thing in FPV