Standalone Poll: First Person Only?

[DiazWaffleCrabstro 39]

Beans given. I think that third person completely undermines the "authentic" nature of DayZ and is probably the only feature worse than bandit headscarves. I see a lot of suggestions that it should be left as it is now--up to individual servers--but in practice this results in nobody playing the first-person servers because they're more difficult. This is not Gears of War--people should be forced to peek their characters around corners instead of going third-person and having an artificial 360-degree view of everything from the safety of cover.

If only we lived in a perfect world, but due to limitations of the engine used, third person actually patches the problems of first person, you dont have complete control over your body compared to real life, that being said, when they add a working skeletal structure and give us complete control over it, then i am good with FPW only.

[colekern 1364]

They would seriously have to fix up the 1st person for me to give the okay to restrict 3rd person.

[Mitunzz 90]

I think because of our field of view is about half the size of real life in DayZ, I think that third person is necessary to make up for that.

[DiazWaffleCrabstro 39]

I think because of our field of view is about half the size of real life in DayZ, I think that third person is necessary to make up for that.

beans, short, and has the main problem of FP only.

[DiazWaffleCrabstro 39]

also why FPW only in a game like this would not work. The approximate field of view of an individual human eye is 95° away from the nose, 75° downward, 60° toward the nose, and 60° upward, allowing humans to have an almost 180-degree forward-facing horizontal field of view.^{[citation needed]} About 12–15° temporal and 1.5° below the horizontal is the optic nerve or blind spot which is roughly 7.5° high and 5.5° wide.^[6]

Note how a 90 degree FOV would not be even close enough, and if you want to go with a view that is closer to our actual visual perception angles, the flat picture would seriously start to deform.

[oXd 0]

first person only, and no crosshair at all ...

maybe we can grab a piece of metal plate or a car mirror to peek corners and windows ?

[Azrail (DayZ) 211]

also why FPW only in a game like this would not work. The approximate field of view of an individual human eye is 95° away from the nose, 75° downward, 60° toward the nose, and 60° upward, allowing humans to have an almost 180-degree forward-facing horizontal field of view.^{[citation needed]} About 12–15° temporal and 1.5° below the horizontal is the optic nerve or blind spot which is roughly 7.5° high and 5.5° wide.^[6]

Note how a 90 degree FOV would not be even close enough, and if you want to go with a view that is closer to our actual visual perception angles, the flat picture would seriously start to deform.

why don't you just customize the FOV in 1stp?

and 3rdp allows you to not stick your head out AT ALL, so no chance for me to spot you.

go find better arguments, those are quite old.

[ZomboWTF 527]

since in the game you always need to expose all or half of your body when peeking around corners, and in real life its enough to show a third of your head, i say 3rd person should stay

or give us actually working mirrors to look around corners with

seriously, having to run around a corner to see whats there? nobody in his right mind would do that

Edited December 8, 2012 by Zombo

[DiazWaffleCrabstro 39]

why don't you just customize the FOV in 1stp?

and 3rdp allows you to not stick your head out AT ALL, so no chance for me to spot you.

go find better arguments, those are quite old.

Gues you cant read, if i wanted to customize the FP to give a view even close to that of real human vision, it distorts the image quite a bit, also as i do not have control over individual extremeties of my body, I.E. head, limbs, you can go and sodomize yourself, my argument is valid. 3rd fixes the short comings of FP, in game that is based on a war "simulator"

Edited December 8, 2012 by Inception.
Please don't do that.

[badbenson (DayZ) 38]

also why FPW only in a game like this would not work. The approximate field of view of an individual human eye is 95° away from the nose, 75° downward, 60° toward the nose, and 60° upward, allowing humans to have an almost 180-degree forward-facing horizontal field of view.[citation needed] About 12–15° temporal and 1.5° below the horizontal is the optic nerve or blind spot which is roughly 7.5° high and 5.5° wide.[6]

Note how a 90 degree FOV would not be even close enough, and if you want to go with a view that is closer to our actual visual perception angles, the flat picture would seriously start to deform.

why are you so desperate to prove your point that you need not only repeat the crap other people said a thousand times in this thread but also blow your fancy angle calculation argument totally out of proportion.

so what exactly is the difference between this...

http://cubeupload.com/im/ml7C2X.jpg

and these?:

http://cubeupload.com/im/YPonn3.jpg

http://cubeupload.com/im/N3XkxQ.jpg

http://cubeupload.com/im/n72GkT.jpg

infact if you double tab "-" in arma you get a better perspective than in the above.

http://cubeupload.com/im/n72GkT.jpg

so if you want to get some perspective why don't go on the call of duty (or any other shooter) forums and suggest they add 3rd person because their first person lacks so bad.

the fact is, just like in skyrim, if you give people 3rd person as a choice they will use it most of the time because it provides more overview. it's just like the dog...why does he lick his balls?

but saying arma's is first person is insufficient and that 3rd person is needed to make up for that is so silly it makes me giggle.

just read the thread and leave it be. it all has been said and your attempt isn't really the best presentation of your side of the argument.

the main concern is that 3rd person can be heavily exploited. pulling weird arguments out of your ass to argue for your personal preference doesn't change that.

edit:

oh and it is not true that head bobbing remains when you turn it off. infact it's reduced to such a minimum that anything less would be a camera on rails. so everyone still complaining about head bob in my eyes is just being annoying...

Edited December 10, 2012 by badbenson

[logan23 118]

Hey, if your in FP,...and lets say there are no Icons,.....How will you know your bleeding?

They are going to have both views.

People can argue that they want only first person but there will be servers with one and servers with the other.....I just don't see where this thread is going?

[Dreygar (DayZ) 178]

Again, this game isn't a first person shooter. It is an MMO with an FPS Combat System. To restrict the game to FPS only would be the stupidest decision and would never be considered.

Third person may allow you to "peek" around corners without being seen, and other ways to avoid exposure but it also allows you to conceal yourself within a bush properly, or maneuver through a structure, etc. Not to mention extended play, vehicle operations, etc.

I'm so glad the die-hard first person only-group loves their way of gaming and plays every game they own to be "immersed" in first person only.

It's a hopeless notion that this game will be first-person only, you'd have as much luck getting Bohemia to change Arma 3 to be FP only. If you like first person, go make a first person server. If you build it, they will come right? If they don't come, that's because your server doesn't appeal; which is the case anyway.

[MarcDaKind 37]

There is a real reason why every successful MMS is a first person only, and that is because third person totally breaks gun play. Try to imagine competitive CS with third person, it would totally break the game and result to a "peek fest" without exposing your body. Just like DayZ is now!

It's totally ridiculous that people are this persistent on keeping third person in this game, everybody have gotten used to it I know (even me), but after one week of first person only they wont notice it's gone anymore.

The private server I play on removed way points two weeks ago because that is the way SA is going to be, it was hard and painful at first; but after some days I got used to it, and using a compass and navigating actually started to become fun and rewarding. GPS and rangefinders also become really valuable items, that earlier had little relevance with way points on.

The mix of immersion, looting, tactics and fair gun play results in a successful survival game, third person takes away from that experience.

Immersion: Third person makes you care for the person you see in front of you, while first person makes you feel you are in the actual apocalypse.

Looting: Third person with cross hairs makes painkillers redundant, and driving with a broken windshield glass don't limit your vision, so looting those items is not as important as they should be.

Tactics and fair gun play: If you have seen enemies hiding in Polana factory, and they have seen you on the north hill. It is almost suicide to try to run down there and engage them. That is because you know they are sitting behind the concrete walls and looking at you using third person, although you cant see them. So the second you leave cover they will know exactly where you are, and rise up and kill you before you have a chance to react (This happened to me just that I was the one hiding at factory exploiting third person, he didn't have a chance).

And to the FOV argument: It is true that the real life Field of view is around 180 degrees, and that the current in game FOV is way to narrow. But we don't see those 180 degrees as clear as we do on a PC monitor, most of those 180 degrees is used to detect movement which is then subconsciously processed in the brain. So the most fair and authentic way to portray vision in the standalone to increase the FOV to around 100-120 which is what I usually use in other games, and then add those peripheral dots we already have that register movement covering those extra 80-60 degrees. This is a much more believable way to solve the FOV problem, than to attach a floating magic eye hovering 2 meters behind you, trying to argue anything else is beyond desperate and pathetic...

And the ridiculous head bob while running should be completely removed, it is completely unrealistic because our body compensates for the movement using the inner ear in real life; which is why we can run marathons without getting sea sick!

They should also perfect the peeking mechanic making it expose less of your body and more of your head, although it works ok as it is.

Edited December 10, 2012 by MarcDaKind

[badbenson (DayZ) 38]

Hey, if your in FP,...and lets say there are no Icons,.....How will you know your bleeding?

you could have a heart beat sound and maybe a visual effect. like any other this isn't a strong argument compared to the exploits.

They are going to have both views.

People can argue that they want only first person but there will be servers with one and servers with the other.....I just don't see where this thread is going?

couldn't agree more. everything has been said and every shit argument has been falsified several times. i was just trying to show how stupid these FOV arguments are and how pointless this discussion itself is now after such a long exhausting thread. but of course people will go on :rolleyes:

in the end like with any other hardcore feature the whiners will win just because of their sheer numbers. it's like with zombies. one is just a brainless mad person but in great numbers they are deadly. :P it's a natural instinct. you will rather notice the crying child than the guy who says "hey please cut my left arm off i need a challenge". i get the reasoning behind that.

dayZ is a commercial product now. no room for drastic changes that would potentially (at the end of the day they would still play it) scare of too many people. i like 3rd person too when i can have it. this doesn't change the fact that it breaks PvP. lets just hope SA won't be as focused on PvP. that would be a major bummer with 3rd person like this...

EDIT:

And the ridiculous head bob while running should be completely removed, it is completely unrealistic because our body compensates for the movement using the inner ear in real life; which is why we can run marathons without getting sea sick!

so let me see if i get this right. it's too much to go into the options and pull a slider too the left?...you lazy motherfucker! :D

i personally like a bit of a headbob. not too much but a little bit. feels much more "realistic" to me than a cam on rails. yea 100% is annoying. BUT it doesn't give me an advantage so why not keep the option??!!

Edited December 10, 2012 by badbenson

[DiazWaffleCrabstro 39]

why are you so desperate to prove your point that you need not only repeat the crap other people said a thousand times in this thread but also blow your fancy angle calculation argument totally out of proportion.

so what exactly is the difference between this...

http://cubeupload.com/im/ml7C2X.jpg

and these?:

http://cubeupload.com/im/YPonn3.jpg

http://cubeupload.com/im/N3XkxQ.jpg

http://cubeupload.com/im/n72GkT.jpg

infact if you double tab "-" in arma you get a better perspective than in the above.

http://cubeupload.com/im/n72GkT.jpg

so if you want to get some perspective why don't go on the call of duty (or any other shooter) forums and suggest they add 3rd person because their first person lacks so bad.

the fact is, just like in skyrim, if you give people 3rd person as a choice they will use it most of the time because it provides more overview. it's just like the dog...why does he lick his balls?

but saying arma's is first person is insufficient and that 3rd person is needed to make up for that is so silly it makes me giggle.

just read the thread and leave it be. it all has been said and your attempt isn't really the best presentation of your side of the argument.

the main concern is that 3rd person can be heavily exploited. pulling weird arguments out of your ass to argue for your personal preference doesn't change that.

edit:

oh and it is not true that head bobbing remains when you turn it off. infact it's reduced to such a minimum that anything less would be a camera on rails. so everyone still complaining about head bob in my eyes is just being annoying...

I am saying because the fpw, in dayz as it is, has its limitations, both have good and bad points to them, fpw lets concentrate more on what is ahead of you, while 3rd gives you a better overview, 3rd will allways be a good thing to have simply because you cant just look if your bleeding from your backside in fpw, to name one reason. And yes, if you want a realistic fpw view, you would need a field of vision of 145 or higher from side to side. cant really rely on any of your pictures, as A.) you did not provide different versions of the same screen, B.) they were not showing long range objects.

And yeah i play alot of fpw games, and i like them, but dayz is trying to simulate a scenario where 3rd person view in this case, patches up the short comings of the current fpw model,

[zera319 1]

Give me yo beans

[badbenson (DayZ) 38]

A.) you did not provide different versions of the same screen, B.) they were not showing long range objects.

what the hell are you even talking about?! jesus. just read what i and other people wrote. you're not contributing you're just being some kind of annoying chat bot.

x:"how are you today?"

you: "i like turtles."

bleeding: read thread.

first person patches up things: read thread!

3rd person is more realistic than 1st person; READ THE GODDAMN THREAD!

if you wanna win the debate contest atleast try to make some sense.

good day!

Give me yo beans

have them good sir.

[DiazWaffleCrabstro 39]

what the hell are you even talking about?! jesus. just read what i and other people wrote. you're not contributing you're just being some kind of annoying chat bot.

x:"how are you today?"

you: "i like turtles."

bleeding: read thread.

first person patches up things: read thread!

3rd person is more realistic than 1st person; READ THE GODDAMN THREAD!

if you wanna win the debate contest atleast try to make some sense.

good day!

have them good sir.

i figured you tried to provide pictures with different Fov, gues you were too stupid to understand it, also the Humans field of vision data, is not my own calculation, it is from a medical source, so it is not out of proportion, if you cant take the info in without getting or witty brain go haywire, i humbly suggest. Dont read if it hurts your brain.

[OrLoK 16182]

Hello all

I think a couple of you, no matter your thoughts, should calm down a little. People are allowed their own views even if they are incorrect.

Be nice.

rgds

LoK

Edited December 10, 2012 by orlok
punkchewazion

[badbenson (DayZ) 38]

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."

you obviously don't know what out of proportion means and eventhough you read my posts you didn't seem to get one bit of it. the point of those pictures was to show that arma's first person in particular is not broken which becomes clear if you compare it to other games. first person games will never represent the human field of view as long as they are rendered on a normal monitor, unless you prefer "fish-eye-view" over non distorted objects. so yes indeed, backing your claim that arma's first person lacks with data about the human field of view is blowing things totally out of proportion. although i have the feeling i'm talking to a vegetable i'm hoping you understand that now.

not only are you just claiming things without proof (go ahead and post some "proper" comparison screens), you are also proving you have no idea what you are talking about yourself which is kind of embarrassing if you ask me. not to mention your desperate attempts to insult people when they prove you wrong.

i would go on battling with you but you are obviously unarmed. also i think just understanding what i just wrote will take you a while anyways. so i'll leave you to yourself now...

[lllewqer 4]

Maybe, maybe not. The camera bobbing is too disorienting, I can't even see anything because the screen just keeps moving. Now let's not start with that "But your head does exactly the same movement in real life". It is something completely different. Gonna get off-topic here a bit, but Mirror's Edge had this realistic camrea bobbing because of the parkour thing, but it was so nicely implemented that it didn't feel wrong or sickening. If they are going to do it as DICE did it with Mirror's Edge, then I am all for it, but if they don't or can't, I think we should be able to switch between first and third person.

[DiazWaffleCrabstro 39]

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."

you obviously don't know what out of proportion means and eventhough you read my posts you didn't seem to get one bit of it. the point of those pictures was to show that arma's first person in particular is not broken which becomes clear if you compare it to other games. first person games will never represent the human field of view as long as they are rendered on a normal monitor, unless you prefer "fish-eye-view" over non distorted objects. so yes indeed, backing your claim that arma's first person lacks with data about the human field of view is blowing things totally out of proportion. although i have the feeling i'm talking to a vegetable i'm hoping you understand that now.

not only are you just claiming things without proof (go ahead and post some "proper" comparison screens), you are also proving you have no idea what you are talking about yourself which is kind of embarrassing if you ask me. not to mention your desperate attempts to insult people when they prove you wrong.

i would go on battling with you but you are obviously unarmed. also i think just understanding what i just wrote will take you a while anyways. so i'll leave you to yourself now...

here is the point, Arma 2 itself, there it works, but dayz is more about horror survival and assessing the situation, the FPW as we have it, is lacking as you cant control your extremeties, there the 3rd is needed to patch that, which is what i have tried to say all the time, i agree to admit, we both misunderstood each others points. Considering the medium we communicate through, and you are comparing 2 different things we both made mistaken assumptions, i dont need to provide the screens, you can go to an FPS and do the FOV adjustments yourself, But i atleast can admit and see we both made hasty assumptions. And no it is not blowing things out proportion, of the things Dayz needs atleast, i never said that Arma2 itself needs 3rd.

Edited December 10, 2012 by DiazWaffleCrabstro

[MarcDaKind 37]

so let me see if i get this right. it's too much to go into the options and pull a slider too the left?...you lazy motherfucker! :D

i personally like a bit of a headbob. not too much but a little bit. feels much more "realistic" to me than a cam on rails. yea 100% is annoying. BUT it doesn't give me an advantage so why not keep the option??!!

Of course I know that I can turn it off in the options menu but there is really no reason for it to be there, I'm also addressing the people using "sickening head bob" as an argument to keep third person...

I am saying because the fpw, in dayz as it is, has its limitations, both have good and bad points to them, fpw lets concentrate more on what is ahead of you, while 3rd gives you a better overview, 3rd will allways be a good thing to have simply because you cant just look if your bleeding from your backside in fpw, to name one reason. And yes, if you want a realistic fpw view, you would need a field of vision of 145 or higher from side to side. cant really rely on any of your pictures, as A.) you did not provide different versions of the same screen, B.) they were not showing long range objects.

And yeah i play alot of fpw games, and i like them, but dayz is trying to simulate a scenario where 3rd person view in this case, patches up the short comings of the current fpw model,

And to the FOV argument: It is true that the real life Field of view is around 180 degrees, and that the current in game FOV is way to narrow. But we don't see those 180 degrees as clear as we do on a PC monitor, most of those 180 degrees is used to detect movement which is then subconsciously processed in the brain. So the most fair and authentic way to portray vision in the standalone to increase the FOV to around 100-120 which is what I usually use in other games, and then add those peripheral dots we already have that register movement covering those extra 80-60 degrees. This is a much more believable way to solve the FOV problem, than to attach a floating magic eye hovering 2 meters behind you, trying to argue anything else is beyond desperate and pathetic...

Read the thread before posting the same BS argument again and again...

Edited December 10, 2012 by MarcDaKind

[MarcDaKind 37]

Double post

Edited December 10, 2012 by MarcDaKind

[the horror 262]

If you want to play in first person, then just fucking do it. No use crying if others want the freedom to choose how they want to play.

I use both and want to continue to do so...