PDA

View Full Version : A matter of perspective...



Ashpolt
20th Oct 2008, 22:27
....more importantly, third person vs first person.

Yes, I'm sure this has been brought up before, and will be brought up again, but Deus Ex is my favourite game of all time and so I would be remiss if I were to not take the one small chance I have to get my voice heard by the developers of Deus Ex 3. As such, please indulge me for this one post...

Please, Eidos, take the third person viewpoint out of Deus Ex 3. Or alternately, leave it in, but have an option to deactivate it - you can even make third person on as default, so if keeping the game entirely in first person lowers the quality of the experience in some way then it is the fault of us, the people who activate this mode - but please, allow me to play through Deus Ex 3 without switching into third person at any point (though non-playable cutscenes are acceptable in third person.)

There are a number of reasons for this, but the main one is immersion: simply, if you take us from the character's perspective you are disconnecting us from them in a way that you, as developers of an RPG (and please tell me you're still thinking of this game as an RPG!) should be trying to avoid. It's an RPG, it's about roleplaying this character, and changing perspective does nothing but make us more aware that we're playing a game. It wouldn't even be so bad if the entire game were in third person - at least it would be consistent - but switching back and forth between one perspective and another will ruin immersion. Games like Gears of War and Rainbow Six: Vegas can get away with this because they're just action games where plot and characterisation take a backseat to headshots - Marcus Fenix is hardly the next JC Denton, and I honestly can't remember the name of your character in the RS: Vegas games - but just to drag the point up one more time, Deus Ex isn't (or, at least, shouldn't be) an action game, it is an RPG and it needs a consistent relationship between the player and the character.

The second reason is gameplay, and I think I can adequately sum up the point here with four words: Alone in the Dark. (http://www.centraldark.com/index.php) That was a game that had a number of fantastic ideas, but they were utterly overshadowed by the constantly switching perspective and the confused controls that caused. Don't believe me? Try playing the game on PC with a keyboard and mouse - it's nigh on unplayable. OK, I'm sure you're implementing it differently, but this is still a massively relevant and valid cautionary tale: AitD could have been brilliant, but for a few exceptionally bad design choices.

In the previews I've read of DE3, one quote has stood out: that you have "learned from the mistakes of Invisible War, [...] and are determined not to make them again." Good for you! Invisible War, while actually a perfectly solid game in its own right, is pretty much the poster child for bad sequels in that it roundly failed in recognising what was loved about its predecessor, and it subsequently (I believe) sold disappointingly. Deus Ex 3 has a very good chance to turn that around, but to do so, you'll need to strongly consider why Deus Ex was (and is) so well loved in the first place. Sci fi shooters are 10 a penny today, so you want to be making yours stand out from the market, not blend in by taking bits from Gears of War and whatever else is popular at the minute. (Incidentally, when I read in the review that the game would go into third person when "something cool" happened I shuddered for reasons quite unrelated to the view point - if I wanted to be doing "cool" things, I would be playing the latest XTREME sports title or, again, Gears of War - "cool" is not what Deus Ex is about: "intelligent" is.) The regenerating health is another example of you seemingly trying to blend into the crowd rather than stand out from it - pretty much every action game nowadays has regenerating health, so why go along with that when the original Deus Ex had an absolutely fantastic and to this day largely uncopied localised body damage system? I'm sure you'll say that regenerating health speeds up gameplay, but again - sci-fi shooters are everywhere, you should be focusing on the RPG aspect, not the action aspect! The regenerating health I can just about cope with though, because at least it can be explained on a plot level as being an augmentation.

I think the main disappointment though is that I genuinely believe DE3 could be a great game, because a lot of what you've shown is really good - the art direction is fantastic, and the basic outline for the setting sounds pretty intriguing - so to hear an utterly, utterly stupid (at least in my eyes) announcement saying that the game will flit between first and third person viewpoints is just beyond belief. I'd like to remind you here that you have an uphill battle trying to regain the fans who were let down by Invisible War - and you are not going to win that battle by shooting yourselves in the foot.

Prevews are saying the game is at least a year and a half away, so you've got time to make these changes - and like I said above, I'm not even asking for the third person viewpoint to be removed, just an option to disable it. Listen to your fans, we're the people who are - hopefully - going to be paying you for this come release day. Saying you're determined not to make the same mistakes as Invisible War is a great start - don't mess it up by making entirely new mistakes.

Pete278
20th Oct 2008, 22:33
You know its optional, right? Like, to go into 3rd, you have to press a button.

Ashpolt
20th Oct 2008, 22:35
You know its optional, right? Like, to go into 3rd, you have to press a button.

It happens automatically when you use stealth (reference: every preview thus far written) or when you use certain attacks / augmentations (reference: the preview in PC Gamer UK this month.) Thus, it's not optional.

dxfan94
20th Oct 2008, 22:49
OMG thankyou i couldnt have said it better myself. Bravo! ugh i hate 3rd person (my opinion) the only time i ever liked it was in Halo3 when you used the railgun

K^2
20th Oct 2008, 22:56
It happens automatically when you use stealth (reference: every preview thus far written) or when you use certain attacks / augmentations (reference: the preview in PC Gamer UK this month.) Thus, it's not optional.
You misunderstood. Or maybe the reporters misunderstood. Anyways, Rene has clarified it on this forum. 3rd person for stealth is optional. You don't have to use it.

3rd person during use of some augmentations is automatic, but it is used to show you the effect of the augmentation use, rather than as part of gameplay. It really isn't all that different from use of 3rd person in cut scenes. Though, I know it gets annoying in some games. Hopefully, DX3 will use this sparingly.

That said, I do agree that it would be far better if we could disable 3rd person all together. That includes the 3rd person during use of augmentations and even the cut scenes. 1st person cut scenes have worked well enough for many games, and personally, I prefer it that way.

Ashpolt
20th Oct 2008, 23:01
You misunderstood. Or maybe the reporters misunderstood. Anyways, Rene has clarified it on this forum. 3rd person for stealth is optional. You don't have to use it.

3rd person during use of some augmentations is automatic, but it is used to show you the effect of the augmentation use, rather than as part of gameplay. It really isn't all that different from use of 3rd person in cut scenes. Though, I know it gets annoying in some games. Hopefully, DX3 will use this sparingly.

That said, I do agree that it would be far better if we could disable 3rd person all together. That includes the 3rd person during use of augmentations and even the cut scenes. 1st person cut scenes have worked well enough for many games, and personally, I prefer it that way.

From what I have read, 3rd person for stealth is optional only in that stealth itself is optional - you don't have to use stealth, and thus can avoid third person in that sense, but if you do choose to be stealthy then third person will be activated automatically.

Besides, the use of third person when using augs is what bothers me far, far more, because as above you can choose not to use stealth - OK, it's narrowing down your options in a game all about your choices, but it's a possibility - whereas playing the game without augs is likely to be nigh on impossible, and even if not, it's going to be boring. Like I said in my first post, I don't care if I'm missing seeing something "cool" by staying in the first person, I'd choose immersion over "cool" decapitation moves or whatever anyday. (And on that note: if quick time sequences are announced, that's it, I'm outta here.)

[EDIT] Just about your bit about first person cutscenes - agreed, they've worked well for a great number of games (Bioshock & Half-Life FTW!) but I'm still pretty indifferent in this respect. As long as I'm controlling the character, I want to be in first person - other than that, I don't mind. If they could find a way to keep the cutscenes in first person though, I certainly wouldn't complain.

AaronJ
20th Oct 2008, 23:35
I couldn't care less about perspectives. But I must say, after how amazing Red Faction: Guerrilla looks, I am leaning.

ZylonBane
20th Oct 2008, 23:41
Anyone else here played VtM: Bloodlines? In that game, whenever you executed a stealth kill on someone, it would switch to a brief third-person animation of the kill. As someone who can't stand third-person gameplay, I have to admit they were pretty cool.

CarloGervasi
21st Oct 2008, 00:02
I wish people would stop pretending that it's optional, it's not. Pick up some literacy skills. The only thing that's "optional" is your use of certain features in the game (ie, the entire damn stealth system) that automatically, non-optionally triggers that particular perspective. You don't press a third-person button to go into third-person, you press it to go into cover. Eidos' official position is apparently "well, we understand that people don't want third person, so we're just going to ask them to not play the game as intended", which is jaw dropping.

Mindmute
21st Oct 2008, 00:23
Actually, I'm pretty sure René said you could use stealth without the 3rd person view or the cover system.

I don't mind it too much (on concept, not sure how it'll affect gameplay), if it *was* completely optional even if you chose to use stealth.

Think this one was the quote, not sure if there were others about the same subject:


As the game is still 1st person, it’s only if you press a key when up against a wall that the view changes to a 3rd person perspective. As soon as you move away from the wall, the game returns to 1st person automatically.
So it's just an option if you want to play that way. If you like the good 'ol DX1 style, you don't have to engage the cover system if you don't want to, so you'll see even less of the contextual 3rd person elements. You can just as easily walk up to that same wall in 1st person and never see the 3rd person cover.

You mentioned the button gets you into cover, not 3rd person view. They mentioned that besides cover only certain contextual actions would be in 3rd person (not stealth). This is already happened in DX (the dialogues), if it stays along that line of not very often and properly placed, then I won't mind it at all...

MaxxQ1
21st Oct 2008, 01:26
Anyone else here played VtM: Bloodlines? In that game, whenever you executed a stealth kill on someone, it would switch to a brief third-person animation of the kill. As someone who can't stand third-person gameplay, I have to admit they were pretty cool.

Yes, I have, and yes, it was. Also when dancing in the various clubs, I THINK it switched to third-person.


I wish people would stop pretending that it's optional, it's not. Pick up some literacy skills. The only thing that's "optional" is your use of certain features in the game (ie, the entire damn stealth system) that automatically, non-optionally triggers that particular perspective. You don't press a third-person button to go into third-person, you press it to go into cover. Eidos' official position is apparently "well, we understand that people don't want third person, so we're just going to ask them to not play the game as intended", which is jaw dropping.

Funny...what part of this -


As the game is still 1st person, it’s only if you press a key when up against a wall that the view changes to a 3rd person perspective. As soon as you move away from the wall, the game returns to 1st person automatically.
So it's just an option if you want to play that way. If you like the good 'ol DX1 style, you don't have to engage the cover system if you don't want to, so you'll see even less of the contextual 3rd person elements. You can just as easily walk up to that same wall in 1st person and never see the 3rd person cover.

- needs more literacy skills than what I need to understand that third-person is optional? Especially after the bolded part? After all, cover will be optional in this game, just like it was in the original.

...jesus...and people on other boards think I'm bad for complaining about the new Star Trek movie. :rolleyes:

K^2
21st Oct 2008, 02:00
From what I have read, 3rd person for stealth is optional only in that stealth itself is optional - you don't have to use stealth, and thus can avoid third person in that sense, but if you do choose to be stealthy then third person will be activated automatically.
Again, it is a misinterpretation of information.

It's not "stealth" you are choosing to use/not use. It is a cover system. If you walk up to a wall that has suitable cover, you have two options: 1) Press a button, game goes to 3rd person, and the character automatically leans behind cover, Solid Snake style. 2) You ignore that fancy feature, and simply duck behind cover yourself, in first person. Either way, you are breaking line of sight, thereby using stealth.

I agree with you on augs, though. I wish these would be optional as well. Maybe there will be something in config files that can be tweaked.

ZylonBane
21st Oct 2008, 02:42
Yes, I have, and yes, it was. Also when dancing in the various clubs, I THINK it switched to third-person.
Now that you mention it, I was always a little sad that I couldn't dance with anyone at the Lucky Money.

MaxxQ1
21st Oct 2008, 08:47
Now that you mention it, I was always a little sad that I couldn't dance with anyone at the Lucky Money.

Sure you could...as long as you kept hitting the jump key, you were bouncing up and down like in a mosh pit.:D

DXeXodus
21st Oct 2008, 09:02
And don't forget "lean left" then "lean right" then crouch and jump. Man it was a sad moment when I realized what I was doing. :)

Lazarus Ledd
21st Oct 2008, 09:19
THIEF3

I loved the 3rd person switch in Thief 3. There it was optional even if you leaned your body to the wall, you could switch to 3rd person, camera-wise, to have a better look at yourself and it felt more tense as the guard was passing by you. It was more exicting to watch that as an outsider from a camera perspective than it was from a fp-view.
I just love cinematic feel. And this introduction of 3rd person camera-view is just the right ammount of action feeling.

There we had the option to play in 1st person or 3rd person. We weren't forced to play in any view and the player was left to think on it's on when it was preferable to switch to 3rd person. Personally, for me it was stealh, climbing in some cases or just checking how we look cool in the surrounding area.
You're not even properly dicussing this. A little mix of 3rd view is introduced here, but your not willing to accept it cause it conflicts with your attitude of hardcore-FPS. The game will go nowhere if it sticks to just one opinion, one belief.... It's good to seek alternatives and to differentiate things. If we copy one another things will blend into i big grey puddle of nothing and colourness emotion that is inside everything will fade.

What Eidos Montreal is trying to do is putting one great smile inside the dull colourness emotion that is inside DX
I hope they pull it off.

Pete278
21st Oct 2008, 10:47
THIEF3

I loved the 3rd person switch in Thief 3. There it was optional even if you leaned your body to the wall, you could switch to 3rd person, camera-wise, to have a better look at yourself and it felt more tense as the guard was passing by you. It was more exicting to watch that as an outsider from a camera perspective than it was from a fp-view.
I just love cinematic feel. And this introduction of 3rd person camera-view is just the right ammount of action feeling.

There we had the option to play in 1st person or 3rd person. We weren't forced to play in any view and the player was left to think on it's on when it was preferable to switch to 3rd person. Personally, for me it was stealh, climbing in some cases or just checking how we look cool in the surrounding area.
You're not even properly dicussing this. A little mix of 3rd view is introduced here, but your not willing to accept it cause it conflicts with your attitude of hardcore-FPS. The game will go nowhere if it sticks to just one opinion, one belief.... It's good to seek alternatives and to differentiate things. If we copy one another things will blend into i big grey puddle of nothing and colourness emotion that is inside everything will fade.

What Eidos Montreal is trying to do is putting one great smile inside the dull colourness emotion that is inside DX
I hope they pull it off.

What a grey death for humanity, I surely hope that doesn't happen :D.

CarloGervasi
21st Oct 2008, 12:10
Yes, I have, and yes, it was. Also when dancing in the various clubs, I THINK it switched to third-person.



Funny...what part of this -



- needs more literacy skills than what I need to understand that third-person is optional? Especially after the bolded part? After all, cover will be optional in this game, just like it was in the original.

...jesus...and people on other boards think I'm bad for complaining about the new Star Trek movie. :rolleyes:
You've gotta be kidding. Even this needs to be explained to someone? Christ.


"it's only if you press a key when up against a wall that the view changes to a 3rd person perspective."

Maybe that'll help you read better. I don't think I can do anything to help you comprehend it better. Do you think the "switch to third person button" only works when up against a wall? It's cover. It switches, no option, when you go into cover. The only "option" is to not use the cover system, which is a lot like a developer responding to an unbalanced weapon with "well, don't use it".

Jesus. No wonder Eidos has felt like they need to dumb down Deus Ex for two rounds now. At this point, Rene could post the entire design doc and it wouldn't make a bit of difference, there'd be so many people here that didn't "get it" that the general community still wouldn't know anything about the game.

DXeXodus
21st Oct 2008, 12:27
Listen dude. Back off. Talk like a normal person. We can all read.

That quote can be understood in two ways.

CarloGervasi
21st Oct 2008, 12:44
Listen dude. Back off. Talk like a normal person. We can all read.

That quote can be understood in two ways.

Yeah, the "right" way and the "I eat glue" way. Unless you seriously believe that you need to be "up against a wall" for the third person view to work? That there will be optional third person switches, totally separated from the cover system in form and function...but you need to be up against a wall, just like cover, to use it. :lol:

It's cover. Thats what he was talking about, and it's plain to see to anyone with even a small sampling of reading comprehension. Words mean things, specific things, we can't just go around reimagining the very specific, obvious meanings to things because they help protect the feelings of a barely literate guy on the internet who wants to ignore the obvious so he doesn't need to confront the fact that Eidos' official response to people not wanting third person views is "well, don't play the game as intended then".

René
21st Oct 2008, 13:10
Yeah, the "right" way and the "I eat glue" way.

Awesome!


...Eidos' official response to people not wanting third person views is "well, don't play the game as intended then".

It's a choice. There is no one way to play; there are multiple ways depending on your style.

WhatsHisFace
21st Oct 2008, 13:40
Now that Diablo 3 is coming out, does anyone think Eidos should give this game a top-down view instead? I think that would work better with the cover stealth system, as well as making it easier to see people you're going to pull through a wall.

MaxxQ1
21st Oct 2008, 13:53
Carlo...let me know when you grow two brain cells to rub together.

In the meantime, I'll interpret it as stealth/cover/third-person are all OPTIONS, and until the game comes out, or more information is forthcoming, I'll leave it at that.

Jerion
21st Oct 2008, 14:11
I find it absolutely hilarious that people are getting themselves all worked up over speculation formed over tiny tidbits of information. All we have are little statements by our friendly EM representative, Rene, and thats it. We don't even have any real context for the things they've told us so far.

Now, I join in this speculation to have a good time, but I'm not fooling myself. Getting worked up over a couple details without contextual information is idiotic.


Now that Diablo 3 is coming out, does anyone think Eidos should give this game a top-down view instead? I think that would work better with the cover stealth system, as well as making it easier to see people you're going to pull through a wall.

:lol:

Maybe they could include a health pack that you activate by eating a stick of glue. A side effect of this health pack would be everybody laughing at you and/or giving you odd looks, thus giving away your position to enemy patrols and forcing you to find new cover. Luckily, you have an optional 3rd person perspective so you know when the enemies are coming, enabling you to slip away unnoticed.

After all, it's a matter of perspective. :whistle:

K^2
21st Oct 2008, 14:57
Now that Diablo 3 is coming out, does anyone think Eidos should give this game a top-down view instead? I think that would work better with the cover stealth system, as well as making it easier to see people you're going to pull through a wall.
Oooo! And we can click on the enemies to attack them! And there should be classes.

Skulgun
21st Oct 2008, 15:45
Um, aren't you guys forgetting something? You know, like the fact that a substantial portion of the original DX was in third-person - the dialog and cutscenes! :rolleyes:

Did the fact that you had to switch into a third person view whenever you engaged in conversation with significant NPCs "take you out of the action" in that game? No? Then why would it for this one?

As long as the majority of the game remains a first-person RPG I'm perfectly fine with a little bit of third-person exposition.

foxberg
21st Oct 2008, 16:08
Cut scenes in 3rd person - non essential to the game play IMO.
Optional 3rd person while against the wall - I guess we'll have a choice to still use 1st? Thinking about it, the whole Splinter Cell was 3rd person. I loved all of the games in the series (not that I would want DX3 to be like that, DX has a completely different philosophy behind it). And I should say it was convenient when while hiding you could change the view angle to see where the enemies were.

But mandatory use of 3rd person while using some of the Augs? If I understood correctly, let's say when I use enhanced high jump while legs augmentation is activated I will automatically go into the 3rd person? If that's the case that would suck.

CarloGervasi
21st Oct 2008, 22:37
Carlo...let me know when you grow two brain cells to rub together.

In the meantime, I'll interpret it as stealth/cover/third-person are all OPTIONS, and until the game comes out, or more information is forthcoming, I'll leave it at that.

http://www.teachersparadise.com/c/images/prods/1CD/CD-4545

Pick up a copy. You can go ahead and "interpret" that whatever ass backwards way you want too as well.

Abram730
21st Oct 2008, 22:57
Um, aren't you guys forgetting something? You know, like the fact that a substantial portion of the original DX was in third-person - the dialog and cutscenes! :rolleyes:

Did the fact that you had to switch into a third person view whenever you engaged in conversation with significant NPCs "take you out of the action" in that game? No? Then why would it for this one?

As long as the majority of the game remains a first-person RPG I'm perfectly fine with a little bit of third-person exposition.

I agree, although I'd like to add that by nature 1st person is more immersing and associative and 3rd person is more objective and dissociative. Logical thought works better in 3rd person but it lacks the emotional conections.

I'd point out a psychological technique were a person is told to remember a traumatic event in 3rd person. This removes the emotional context of the trauma from the memory. See 1st person and 3rd person apply very much to the representational system of our brain and that's one reason why people like first person games, it has the ability to pull you in.

MaxxQ1
22nd Oct 2008, 00:35
Pick up a copy. You can go ahead and "interpret" that whatever ass backwards way you want too as well.

Y'know, I really don't understand this crusade you're on. The choice has been made by EM and the whining of a few people isn't going to change their minds. The way you're going on and on...and on and on...and on and on about this is making me think that this will be a gamebreaker for you. If that's the case, then why are you even still here? I'm not asking you to leave, just asking an honest question.

To me, it just seem like you're tilting at windmills without even the support of Rocinante to carry you to them.

I understand that people are upset because they feel the game, with certain "features" added, is being dumbed down, but no matter what information is currently out there, I think it's still too early to make the kind of judgements you're making on this game. Yes, IW was screwed up royally, and I understand the mistrust you, and a lot of other people, have regarding this new iteration. I'm not 100% behind this game yet, but, like I mentioned before, I'm taking a wait-and-see attitude.

And in the end, it's ONLY a game, and certainly nothing to get your panties all in a bunch over.

Skulgun
22nd Oct 2008, 02:09
Cut scenes in 3rd person - non essential to the game play IMO.

Huh? Did you play the same game I played? The cut scenes with dialog trees were a big part of the gameplay.

If you were talking about a pure action game like Half-Life in which the story is told entirely through the "eyes" of the player, than you might have a point. DX isn't that type of game, however, and never has been.

I really don't understand what you guys are complaining about.

CarloGervasi
22nd Oct 2008, 04:37
Y'know, I really don't understand this crusade you're on. The choice has been made by EM and the whining of a few people isn't going to change their minds. The way you're going on and on...and on and on...and on and on about this is making me think that this will be a gamebreaker for you. If that's the case, then why are you even still here? I'm not asking you to leave, just asking an honest question.
I'm not on a crusade to "change" the game. I'll probably buy it, even though I can see the next Invisible War coming a mile away. I just can't tolerate the jaw-dropping stupidity that a lot of people here love to put on 24-hour display. From swearing to high heaven that it was a sequel in the face of a mountain of evidence, to seriously believing that the original Deus Ex had no light-sensitive stealth system, to peddling ridiculous conspiracy theories as "real" and not "retarded", to this latest abortion of a thread where people prove once again that reading comprehension is a lost art - I can't stand it. It explains why Eidos feels like they need to dumb their games down, since these sorts of people apparently make up their fan base, but I still can't stand it.

All anyone needs to do is take the smallest amount of critical thinking skills, mix them with the smallest amount of reading comprehension, and then read what Rene posted in this very thread to see that I'm right, that it isn't optional to go into third-person while using cover, and in fact the only "option" is whether or not to use cover period. If it was an option, he would have come right out and said "option", not given some vague crap about how we choose to play the game. But even that is too much for them. Half of these people lose their train of thought if you ask them to read something with more than three syllables, it's ridiculous, and it makes any half-way intelligent discussion impossible when someone has to deal with people like that, stopping every couple of words to explain something that no one should seriously need explained to them. They'd rather just recant the "we don't have enough information" mantra, something not even applicable to the situation, than actually read and understand what is going on, what is being discussed. It's insane.



Huh? Did you play the same game I played? The cut scenes with dialog trees were a big part of the gameplay.

If you were talking about a pure action game like Half-Life in which the story is told entirely through the "eyes" of the player, than you might have a point. DX isn't that type of game, however, and never has been.

I really don't understand what you guys are complaining about.

There's a difference between game-play and cut scene, and a difference between what is expected from each. In a Deus Ex game, gameplay needs to be immersive and fun. Cut scenes need to be interesting and engaging. Random jumps from "I am this guy" to "I am watching this guy" while I'm still playing the game are asinine, and a good sign that they've abandoned the "immersion" part of the Deus Ex equation.


For some reason, no one in the games industry can make a good sequel anymore. They just don't get it. They think they need to reinvent the wheel with each release "just because", like anyone but a reviewer is seriously going to have a problem with the game just being new content within the same framework. These people will take one of the most critically acclaimed game designs of all time, and only retain like half of it for reasons that border on comical, stuff that just doesn't hold up to outside logic. "Some people don't want to search for health" vs "some people actually do", stuff like that. This third person stuff is just another example of that. Another needless, pointless alteration seemingly added for the sole purpose of changing something.

DXeXodus
22nd Oct 2008, 05:11
Rene: If at all possible can you please clarify this point. I am getting quite tired with this whole tennis match between CarloGervasi and everyone else.

This is how I understand the following: (Which apparently makes me "jaw droppingly stupid)


It's a choice. There is no one way to play; there are multiple ways depending on your style. - Rene

There is no ONE way to play.


it's only if you press a key when up against a wall that the view changes to a 3rd person perspective. - Rene

You see, now that can be understood as: when one is in cover mode you may press a key which activates the third person camera.

Don't call people stupid for seeing something differently to you. It may be true that the third person mode is automatic but you have stressed your point more than adequately by now. Keep your opinion as exactly what it is: Your opinion.

If I were you I would change my attitude a little bit. ;)

Mindmute
22nd Oct 2008, 08:46
No, you wouldn't, you just need to try and do your moderating and that means protecting idiots from getting called out as such.

Honestly, the need for moderation wouldn't even exist if you knew how to accept other's people opinions, even when you think (or are sure) that they're wrong, instead of acting like a spoiled brat in nearly every thread.

You made good points about the wording. So why not leave it at that? Why go out of your in the middle of stating your opinion to actually insult the ones who disagree?
It's not making them agree any more. It's not making other people who were on the fence agree with you more. It's simply childish.

DXeXodus
22nd Oct 2008, 09:30
Honestly, the need for moderation wouldn't even exist if you knew how to accept other's people opinions, even when you think (or are sure) that they're wrong, instead of acting like a spoiled brat in nearly every thread.

QFT
+1 :thumbsup:

Lazarus Ledd
22nd Oct 2008, 16:17
What a grey death for humanity, I surely hope that doesn't happen :D.
oh, I'm just qouting Milly Thompson to some xtent from Trigun Maximum :) Go read Trigun Maximum :lol:
It's Vash's cure for the grey emotion inside everything. Something like penicilin: LOVE AND PEACE!!!! and :D


Also, why whine about something that will be a core gameplay of DX3. This is not DX. DX is a game of the past still on life thanks to, not you cause you forbbid to discuss about the old days, so why making problems where there are none. This is DX3 happening in 2027, released in 2009/2010 and DX a game in 205x made in 2000. What do we have here? Well 2Pac would paint it more clear: "CHANGES".
DX defined only traces of year 2027 and since DX3 is a prequel it has choice to differentiate itself more from the rest of entries. If it were a sequel, you'd had right to complain, but EM crushed Your thought and took the path less taken :cool:
Since you argued that tentacles in my vision had to be mechanical, hence it needed the game to be a prequel, I vowed for a prequel and it came true :lmao:

Flobulon
22nd Oct 2008, 16:59
What an entertaining thread. It never ceases to amaze me how far people on the internet will go to prove that they are right and everyone else is wrong. Even when it means falling back onto that age-old argument: "Yeah... well you're an idiot".

Aaaanyway... I personally wouldn't mind at all if there was a 3rd-person cover system, assuming that it is well done, obviously. It seems pretty obvious to me that an option of using a third-person perspective for stealth is the way to go, as long as it remains just that - optional. I understand, however, if people don't want to switch views for stealth - as long as the option of doing so is there.

I trust the developers to do what they deem necessary to make DX3 the best game they can. I'm no games developer myself, so I'm not gonna pretend that I know best when it comes to these matters. I think perhaps a couple of people on here need to bear that in mind themselves.

gamer0004
22nd Oct 2008, 17:04
As someone more intelligent than me stated: "So what I'm learning in this thread is that some people think the best way to make a prequel is to contradict the thing to which it is a prequel," and I couldn't agree more.
(That person is chris the cynic. He has written numerous very good articles on DX, including the one about Greys which I have posted somewhere else here on this forum).

Skulgun
22nd Oct 2008, 19:37
There's a difference between game-play and cut scene, and a difference between what is expected from each. In a Deus Ex game, gameplay needs to be immersive and fun. Cut scenes need to be interesting and engaging.


And what I'm saying is the dialog-tree "cut scene" sections were part of the gameplay and were also in third-person. Please explain to me how I am wrong.



Random jumps from "I am this guy" to "I am watching this guy" while I'm still playing the game are asinine, and a good sign that they've abandoned the "immersion" part of the Deus Ex equation.

Again, did you actually even play Deus Ex? Cause I'm pretty sure those kind of "random jumps" you are complaining about happened whenever you talked with NPCs - which was pretty damn often.

Look, I agree with what you are saying about sequels and unnecessary changes, but I seriously think that "third-person stealth" is the least we have to worry about in regard to negative changes that can be made.

Now health regeneration on the other hand...

Mecranth
23rd Oct 2008, 02:25
Agreed, Skulgun. A third person viewpoint, however frequent, is the least of anybody's worries, though CarloGervasi would rather convert the matter into a mess of unnecessary panic, even resorting to flames in the process.

I don't even mind the health regeneration idea that much anymore. Why? Because gaming is just like that now. If I have to be easily killed and require the use of heal-at-any-time medical kits in order to get enjoyment out of a game (which clearly is not a deciding factor at all when it comes to how much I love the first game), then I must be losing some focus.

Games are games and that's all the media (and developers) will ever see them as. They were never meant to simulate or to invoke philosophical thoughts that a lot of people so blindly try to liken many plots with. Deus Ex had major problems that many people overlooked, a lot of people even doing so to this very day, and instead of wanting a change in what they have been so in love with for the last near decade, go into fits of rage at the mere mention of anything out of the ordinary.

Gaming isn't going to stand still. Sequels and prequels to games long ago will not retain all that they had. Even hoping for such is showing a great amount of ignorance, a type of ignorance that, to this day, I cannot find any tolerance for. Deus Ex 3 will succeed or fail. It will not please everyone. In fact, I would be shocked to see many fans of the series pleased with it at all. To that I say: So be it.

Skulgun
23rd Oct 2008, 02:41
Game play sorta has the word "play" in it. As in, I'm playing the game. Not watching it. The conversations are part of the game. They are not part of the gameplay. They have different purposes, and different expectations as a result. Easy and simple.

Do you perhaps remember the little dialog options at the bottom of those cut scenes? Do you perhaps remember how you could chose from those different dialog options depending on your personal preference, and how they would affect the NPCs reactions to you (such as their decision to give you information and items, or not)? That, my friend, is called "gameplay", whether you will admit as much or not.



Yes, I played it. I get the feeling I played it quite a bit more than anyone else here, judging from moderators thinking it didn't have light based stealth, or users thinking the Grays were aliens, and all kinds of other crap. Third person jumps happened in conversations, thats it. Not when I reloaded my gun, or leaned, or whatever. It wasn't in the game play. Period. You see cutscenes in FPS games all the time, that doesn't set precedent for turning them into third person shooters.

Why don't you hold your righteous nerd anger in check and accept the fact that perhaps not everyone who has played DX has been as astute as you in gleaning every minuscule detail from the game (and yes, the fact that the Grays weren't actually aliens and the stealth system was affected by light are small details), but they are still fans and their opinion has value.

As I already pointed out, the action of the game is already broken up repeatedly by conversation dialog screens (which, given the game's RPG nature, are extremely common), so I do not really see how having a couple more third-person exposition scenes are going to "wreck the atmosphere" any more or "turn it into a third-person shooter" or whatever you are trying to say.

There are much much more important issues to worry about IMO.

Mecranth
23rd Oct 2008, 02:45
Deus Ex 3 needs to resemble Deus Ex

And that, my friend, is the ignorance that I speak of.

"Deus Ex 3 needs to resemble Deus Ex"

This particular trap has claimed many a person, and it still shocks me to see that people still fall right into it, expecting their games to be similar to what they liked before. That is the single biggest mistake you could ever make in gaming, right up there with believing the feature summaries on the backs of the cases.

If you are wanting or expecting something akin to Deus Ex 1, you may as well leave here and never come back. Your wish won't be coming true.

The game never needed to be like anything. The developers are in charge. If you have a serious issue, then you may want to just go find another upcoming title's board and ruin everybody's fun there.

Skulgun
23rd Oct 2008, 02:59
And that, my friend, is the ignorance that I speak of.

"Deus Ex 3 needs to resemble Deus Ex"

This particular trap has claimed many a person, and it still shocks me to see that people still fall right into it, expecting their games to be similar to what they liked before. That is the single biggest mistake you could ever make in gaming, right up there with believing the feature summaries on the backs of the cases.

If you are wanting or expecting something akin to Deus Ex 1, you may as well leave here and never come back. Your wish won't be coming true.

The game never needed to be like anything. The developers are in charge. If you have a serious issue, then you may want to just go find another upcoming title's board and ruin everybody's fun there.

Sorry, but even I don't buy that flawed "appeal to authority" argument. DX is a beloved franchise with a dedicated group of fans. Once a franchise has entered the public arena, it has created a precedent to a certain extent which, if the developers want to continue to enjoy the benefits of a healthy fanbase, they must continue to acquiesce to.

You can't just say "Oh, they're the developers. They can do whatever they want and you can just piss off if you don't like it."

The result of that attitude are creative abortions like Invisible War.

Mecranth
23rd Oct 2008, 02:59
[Post removed by user]

Mecranth
23rd Oct 2008, 03:00
Sorry, but even I don't buy that flawed "appeal to authority" argument. DX is a beloved franchise with a dedicated group of fans. Once a franchise has entered the public arena, it has created a precedent to a certain extent which, if the developers want to continue to enjoy the benefits of a healthy fanbase, they must continue to acquiesce to.

You can't just say "Oh, they're the developers. They can do whatever they want and you can just piss off if you don't like it."

The result of that attitude are creative abortions like Invisible War.

As flawed as you may believe it is, it is the truth, not an argument.

Mecranth
23rd Oct 2008, 03:08
I am sorry to inform you that what you just posted is based entirely around personal opinion, and does not speak for anybody but yourself.

Skulgun
23rd Oct 2008, 03:25
Thats gameplay as much as selecting menu options is gameplay.

Yes, and I suppose first-person shooters are just putting your mouse over a designated area of the screen and clicking until the animation changes. :rolleyes:





The entire stealth system is a small detail? Really? I guess Deus Ex was a medieval strategy game. The fact that it wasn't is a "small detail".

No, big huge game play mechanics are not "small details", and people trying to act like they know what they're talking about when they can't even get that right is ridiculous. If you don't know how the stealth system in the first game worked, you really don't need to argue with someone that the stealth system in Deus Ex 3 is just like the old one. It's that simple.


I didn't say "the entire stealth system", dumbass, I said the light aspect of the stealth system. I've played the game dozens of times, and I seriously cannot remember a single incident when the light in an area had a significant effect on my trying to be stealthy. Sound and line-of-sight were always much more important.




1 - It's not about "breaking up the action".

2 - What I was trying to say, and what I apparently should have said in a more simplistic way, is that the presence of third person in one part of a game doesn't justify it in the other. It's not an excuse. "Well, it was already here, so lets go ahead and plop it down right there" doesn't hold up to outside logic.

And if you want third person shifts, hey, great, wonderful. Good for you. If you don't mind them, again, good for you. But don't go around telling people that it was already in the first game because of a conversation. It wasn't. Don't go around telling them that they're complaining about nothing, and that this was all already there.
They're two entirely separate things. Next time I play Deus Ex and I randomly shift to a third person view when I approach a wall, thats when you get to use that "complaining about nothing" line, not before.



How exactly are they "two completely different things"? You still haven't convinced me of this. Deus Ex always was an RPG not a straight shooter. Third person is already incorporated into the gameplay through interaction with NPCs. Why is it such an abomination, then, to have it in small aspect of the action as well?



Yeah, there are. That doesn't mean we can't discuss this one. It's like saying "well, genocide exists, so we can't talk about a video game anymore". People don't discuss things solely based on whether or not they are the most important issue of the day.

No, it's like saying "Yeah, it sucks that Hitler has taken over my country and is killing thousands of people, but I ******* can't stand his ****ty dress sense!"

Having slightly more third-person in a franchise which already makes liberal use of third-person perspective is pretty much a non-issue, IMO.

WhatsHisFace
23rd Oct 2008, 03:30
Yes, and I suppose first-person shooters are just putting your mouse over a designated area of the screen and clicking until the animation changes. :rolleyes:





I didn't say "the entire stealth system", dumbass, I said the light aspect of the stealth system. I've played the game dozens of times, and I seriously cannot remember a single incident when the light in an area had a significant effect on my trying to be stealthy. Sound and line-of-sight were always much more important.




How exactly are they "two completely different things"? You still haven't convinced me of this. Deus Ex always was an RPG not a straight shooter. Third person is already incorporated into the gameplay through interaction with NPCs. Why is it such an abomination, then, to have it in small aspect of the action as well?



No, it's like saying "Yeah, it sucks that Hitler has taken over my country and is killing thousands of people, but I ******* can't stand his ****ty dress sense!"

Having slightly more third-person in a franchise which already makes liberal use of third-person perspective is pretty much a non-issue, IMO.
Having a conversation system in the game isn't making it a third person game.

Oh! Deus Ex has a menu where you can take notes! Deus Ex = Microsoft Word!

Give me a break. :rolleyes:

Jerion
23rd Oct 2008, 04:43
Therein lies the problem, and why we aren't ever going further than this point in the discussion. You aren't getting me, I'm not getting you.

Welcome to this awesome realization. :thumbsup:

Maybe now that we've established that you aren't going to stop pushing your points and that he isn't going to start agreeing with them, maybe we can move on...

DXeXodus
23rd Oct 2008, 05:20
Yes. Thank you. I agree, lets move on.

René
23rd Oct 2008, 14:16
This thread hurts my brain.

Absentia
23rd Oct 2008, 15:23
I gotta agree. After all this bickering, all that's now hanging in the balance is René clearing this up. Unless he actually doesn't know.

[EDIT] And I do realise that "Rene clearing this up" doesn't go with "hanging in the balance" because it's not phrased "whether or not Rene clears this up" or something to that effect. Meh.

Jerion
23rd Oct 2008, 15:55
This thread should be forgotten...

Skulgun
23rd Oct 2008, 21:10
You think these two are remotely comparable? Oh geez. You know what? Universal ammo really was a good idea. Different ammo for different weapons really is too complex for the average fan.


Wow, was to miss the point, dude. You tried to somehow prove that the conversation system in DX wasn't gameplay by using a straw man comparison to menu options. I was just giving an equally irrelevant reduction of a gameplay element to its most basic form.

And what the hell does UA have to do with anything?



No, you didn't say "the entire stealth system", you just said "the light aspect", which was "the entire stealth system". Try again.


No, it wasn't "the entire stealth system" as I already said and you well know. Line-of-site and sound always were in there as well, and were much more important.



Number one, please don't act like I've said Deus Ex is not an RPG and is a shooter, it's asinine.

Well, you are the one who is implying that NPC interaction isn't gameplay, and only the shooting aspect of the game counts as such. What was I supposed to assume? :rolleyes:



Number two, if I haven't convinced you already, I'm not gonna. It's an abomination because it breaks immersion during the gameplay, and yes, I know you don't understand why a conversation is different, I know. It doesn't matter. It kills immersion. Thats why I don't like it. It's as simple as it gets, there's not really much else I can do for you if you don't understand it by now. Not agreeing with it is ok, but not understanding what I'm even saying by now is unbelievable.

And that has been my main question all along: How does it "break immersion" in a RPG which already makes use of the third person perspective on a regular basis? Even if, for whatever odd-ball reason, you still refuse to accept the fact that NPC interaction counts as gameplay, you have to admit third-person perspective - showing JC as a separate person - occurs extremely frequently during the game.



We disagree on what "liberal use of third-person perspective" is, and what constitutes game play. Therein lies the problem, and why we aren't ever going further than this point in the discussion. You aren't getting me, I'm not getting you.

Yes, I "haven't been getting you" because your stance is illogical and you have yet to offer a good reason why it isn't.

Ashpolt
23rd Oct 2008, 22:52
Whoa...this thread took off in a way I wasn't expecting!

I agree with different people on different points here, so I'm likely to piss off all parties, but hey! Here goes:

-On third person in cutscenes: got to agree with CarlosGervasi on this one, it's a vastly different ball game from having third person in other sections of the game, and the difference is that in cutscenes I only have control over my character's responses, not any kind of physical actions - and the third person view is primarily a problem for me (other than the immersion factor) in relation to the physical movement of my character, and control of him during these sections. In "normal" gameplay, you're constantly moving your character, and so switching between viewpoints would be mildly disorientating and irritating - seriously, I mentioned it in my first post, but play the new Alone in the Dark if you don't believe me, then come back and tell me one fixed viewpoint isn't a good idea! During cutscenes, though, your character's standing still (or walking a pre-scripted path - either way, you're not in control) so the third person viewpoint serves only to make these sections feel more cinematic, which I'm fine with.

-On the "infamous" Rene quote - switching sides here: I read it as him saying you can play stealthily without going into third person - which is great. He says you go up against a wall and press a button to go into third person - clearly two separate actions, so I should be able to just go up against the wall, not press the button, and stay in first person. This I'm fine with...except that third person will still be used for certain augs.

-To whoever mentioned Thief 3 - I had completely forgotten that game had third person as an option, simply because I never used it. If DE3 can implement third person in the same way, so that I can play through the entire game without ever using it in gameplay, then that's fine by me! Like I said in my first post, the option to remove third person is all I want, I'm not demanding that Eidos take it out altogether.

Glad to see the general concensus is that third person should be strictly optional though, even from those who aren't as dead set against the idea of third person in general as others. Eidos, are you listening?

...Ah, who am I kidding? Of course they bloody aren't.

René
23rd Oct 2008, 22:57
"third person switches are, at this time, non-optionally tied to certain optional actions".

That okay?


-On the "infamous" Rene quote - switching sides here: I read it as him saying you can play stealthily without going into third person - which is great. He says you go up against a wall and press a button to go into third person - clearly two separate actions, so I should be able to just go up against the wall, not press the button, and stay in first person. This I'm fine with...except that third person will still be used for certain augs.

Yes.

DXeXodus
24th Oct 2008, 04:15
Ponies for everyone! :D

http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm5/DXeXodus/mylittlepony.jpg

Abram730
24th Oct 2008, 04:19
it would be far better if we could disable 3rd person all together. That includes the 3rd person during use of augmentations and even the cut scenes.


Like a check box on the Aug in the Aug menu page?

I remembered back when I was programing... how detailed and exact ideas needed to be. :)

K^2
24th Oct 2008, 07:52
Like a check box on the Aug in the Aug menu page?

I remembered back when I was programing... how detailed and exact ideas needed to be. :)
I want a global flag. I don't care which menu it is set in, visually. I can even live with it being set in a config file. But I would like to have a global flag that, if set, disables 3rd person view everywhere and for everything. Instead of switching to whatever camera, it should keep showing you everything through Adam's eyes. I'm fine with losing something in the process, so it doesn't need to be perfect.

Naturally, exceptions can be made for the intro and extro moves. These can remain fully cinematic. But once the gameplay starts and until I die or win the game, I want to see no 3rd person views.

Ashpolt
24th Oct 2008, 19:22
"third person switches are, at this time, non-optionally tied to certain optional actions".That okay?

Not really, no, because it's limiting my options in how I play the game. This'd be OK-ish to a degree in some games, but this is the sequel to Deus Ex, the game that practically introduced open-ended gameplay - or, at very least, refined it to a far greater degree than had been seen before. Restricting the player's options is pretty much castrating the core thrust of the game (if you'll excuse the 2 overtly sexual references there.) Imagine it:

"Wow, the blade arm aug sounds awesome! But I don't want to use it because it'll put me in third person."

"Hmm...lots of guards here, the stealthy approach would probably be a wise idea...but that'll put me into third person, so I guess I'll go in all guns blazing."

Rene, I'll admit to not really knowing who you are, but I gather that you have some kind of link to the devs. If that's the case, could you please tell them this: There are enough people who want to be able to opt out of third person during gameplay entirely that it should be seriously considered as an option, and there's enough time between now and release that there's really no excuse not to allow it. Like I said, I'm not asking for third person to be removed entirely - if people want to play sections or even the whole game in third person, then let them! Again, it's Deus Ex, what would the game be without choices? - but please let those of us who don't want it be allowed to disable it entirely.

Again, I really doubt anything any one (or indeed, any number of us) says will influence even the tiniest decision, never mind a major one, but at least this way when the game comes out I can say I tried. :)

Bluey71
24th Oct 2008, 19:38
That okay?



Yes.

Is that with every aug or just certain augs?

Skulgun
24th Oct 2008, 20:18
Wow, you seriously are one of the most dense people I've ever had the displeasure of arguing with on these internets. :mad2:


UA was put into Deus Ex because Ion Storm thought it's fans were too stupid to manage "pistol ammo" and "shotgun ammo". I said something along the lines of "gee, no wonder they thought they needed UA". Do you get it?

No, what am I saying, of course you don't.

Yes, I understand why you don't like UA. What I don't understand is what bringing that up had to do with you making irrelevant straw man comparisons to gameplay features. It's completely unrelated to the topic at hand.



You...think we're talking about Invisible War I guess.

Uh, no, I wasn't. Deus Ex wasn't "talking and blastin' fools". There's a little bit more to the game play side of things than shooting people. If you missed that the stealth system was entirely light based, I guess it's not too far fetched to believe that you may have missed that as well.

Okay, let's consider some things here. Do you remember a augmentation in Deus Ex that would make you run silently? How about the one that made you invisible? You do? Alright, now what do you think their inclusion says about the relative importance of sound and line-of-site in the stealth system? Hmmm... :scratch:

And you seriously need to get your sarcasm detector checked (hint:a :rolleyes: could indicate sarcasm is present in a post). Of course DX isn't just talking and shooting. My point was your dismissal of NPC interaction as "not real gameplay" kind of implies your view of what an RPG is might be slightly skewed.



During the game, yes, which I never refuted. During game play, no, it doesn't. Again, this stems from the impossibility of you understanding what "game play" means. Or why someone might have different expectations for it compared to a conversation. As someone else said, your argument is akin to saying that turning Deus Ex 3 into a word processor would be ok because the original features notes.

Okay, please explain to me: how is character interaction not gameplay!!! You are interacting with the game, ergo it's fricking gameplay! That's what "gameplay" is, it's the very definition of "gameplay"!

:mad2:

And the "word processor" analogy is complete hyperbole. A more accurate one would be saying the inclusion of the ability to send e-mails in the game would be okay. Having third-person in a couple spots is not turning the game into a third-person shooter. Stop exaggerating.



I've offered several, you just don't accept them, because you don't really grasp what you're trying to argue about. I get the feeling you haven't played the game you're attempting to discuss, or at least haven't played it since 2000, if you can't even get details like how the entire stealth system worked right. You don't seem to understand what game play constitutes, and what it does not. You don't seem to understand that Deus Ex had more to offer than "go cap dat NSF in da ass dawg!1". In fact, the only thing even casually related to this argument that you do seem to understand is how to hit "submit reply", which is an unfortunate turn of events.

Maybe you'll let it go now and come to the realization that you're just never going to understand, the same way a pigeon isn't going to understand math. Probably not.

Actually, considering your disregard for the blatantly obvious importance of line-of-sight and sound in the stealth system, as well as your stupid dismissal of NPC interaction as not being gameplay, that first paragraph seems to apply much more to yourself than it ever would to me.

It's obvious you're just an incredibly stupid individual who has been slowing beginning to realize the irrationality of his position throughout this discussion, and has been clumsily throwing out ad hominum attacks, incorrect information, and random bull**** just to save face.

Luckily Rene has answered your whining to your satisfaction so hopefully we don't have to deal with anymore of your crap for a while.

Bluey71
24th Oct 2008, 20:31
I think Carlo is trying to tell you there is a difference between switching to 3rd person for an npc cutscene, and switching to 3rd person for using an aug.

Cutscenes usually happen at the start or the end of an objective, whereas the use of an aug would be somewhere in the middle, during the action when really, you dont want to be suddenly switching from first into third person - so not to spoil the immersion.

At least thats my worry re the 3rd person problem.

Absentia
24th Oct 2008, 21:12
I can definitely agree with the concern about third person in the augs. in Chronicles of Riddck, the camera did un-optionally switched to third person, but only for things like mantling onto a surface, climbing a ladder, crawling into a vent, monkey-barring across a ceiling etc. This was cool, and it's much more exciting than simply "sliding" up a ladder like on most FPS games. At least, I don't think it broke the immersion. In fact, I don't even think third person augs is going to "break the immersion" as much as people think it will, but there NEEDS to be an option to be able to remain in first person.

When you have an aug that switches to third person, purely just because it "looks cool", it's gonna get old. The idea isn't to use the aug caus it looks cool - although of course that's just a bonus if it does, but the idea is to use it for its actual purpose in the given situation. It'd do more for the gameplay if it seamlessly blended in with the perspective, so the game isn't trying to give the impression of "HEY, LOOK HERE, ADAM IS KICKING ASS!!!"

This kind of thing even got old in Max Payne 2, and the whole point of that game was that everything looked cool with slow motion ragdoll physics. Oh and apparently there was some kind of storyline...
I understand maybe its hard to integrate some things like the "martial arts" augmentation into first person, but it's far from impossible. Deus Ex is about freedom. Not that I'm accusing EM of not grasping this, as they seem to have hit the nail on the head for most of the gameplay ideas. but yes, as said before, there's enough people who want this option for it to be considered.
Lets say, by default the third person switches are turned on, so you may find you enjoy them enough to not bother, but later on if it gets too samey for some (don't try to think that people will love the game as much as you will) then they can turn it off. I really can see this mechanic becoming one of the fatal flaws that people would complain about (if left unchangable)

Flobulon
24th Oct 2008, 22:16
Not sure if this has been posted before, but according to the PC Gamer UK preview of DX3, the camera will also switch perspectives during certain "special moves" (combat abilities provided by mechanical augmentations). The article goes on to say "Whether this will feel natural or jarring, it's pointless to speculate at this stage.".

By the way, am I OK to quote this? If not I'll delete the quotes.

Uranium - 235
24th Oct 2008, 22:42
The only possible reason to have third person is melee combat. For everything else, there are NO valid reasons to use third person.

- Camera issues.
- Aiming issues.
- Screen obstruction.
- Ruins immersion.
- Seriously, I hate having part of my screen clogged by the damn character model. The worst is when the animations aren't that great, you see it ALL THE TIME (Mass Effect...)

MaxxQ1
25th Oct 2008, 00:39
Not sure if this has been posted before, but according to the PC Gamer UK preview of DX3, the camera will also switch perspectives during certain "special moves" (combat abilities provided by mechanical augmentations). The article goes on to say "Whether this will feel natural or jarring, it's pointless to speculate at this stage.".

By the way, am I OK to quote this? If not I'll delete the quotes.

In most cases, quoting as you did is fine. Only the most anal-retentive will give you flak for quoting one or two sentences.

It's when posting the entire article that magazines start having problems with it.

DXeXodus
27th Oct 2008, 04:59
I really thought that this whole debate had ended. Oh well. It was a good dream while it lasted.

@MaxxQ1: Yes, its OK to post that. It is just a small piece and not the whole article. :thumbsup:

DXeXodus
27th Oct 2008, 05:14
Lol. Apparently. :D

Officer Half
27th Oct 2008, 13:21
Anyone else here played VtM: Bloodlines? In that game, whenever you executed a stealth kill on someone, it would switch to a brief third-person animation of the kill. As someone who can't stand third-person gameplay, I have to admit they were pretty cool.

THAT was a great game.

I don't mind third person at all really. As long as we have a crosshair third person, I'd probably play the whole game third person. In Thief:DS I played the entire game through once in FP then again in TP. I love both.

SageSavage
27th Oct 2008, 13:40
But there's also the Bioshock/CoD/Far Cry 2-approach that sticks strictly to the 1st person view. They have animations that make your avatar's body and the camera move like your head would move in this situation - only in 1st person. I think those games managed to make me "feel" the situations more directly. Other perspectives can of course destroy this illusion and that's my concern.
VtMB is an excellent game with a dense atmosphere but that is more because of the RPG-elements, the sound etc. and not because it switched between perspectives. I liked the stealth kills too but VtMB didn't require you to play in 1st person anyway. That was a more liberal approach. If I had to decide, I'd probably only allow 1st person for a FPS-RPG-hybrid.

GmanPro
28th Oct 2008, 21:36
Oooo! And we can click on the enemies to attack them! And there should be classes.

It worked in Fallout! :D :D

ZylonBane
28th Oct 2008, 22:25
It worked in Fallout! :D :D
He's referring to Diablo.

Don't be "that guy". You know, the guy who constantly makes jokes on what other people say, without realizing that they were joking in the first place. It's never funny. It's just embarrassing.

GmanPro
28th Oct 2008, 22:39
Uh... sorry? Just making a joke too. Although it did work for Fallout!:thumbsup: