Forget Watch Dogs. Forget Arkham Knight, Smash Bros, Goat Simulator, and Destiny. This shit right here is the game of the year:
GOTFY.
GOTFY.
Video Games
Posts: 7448
Joined:
February 2012
holy moly, remind anyone of the interstellar teaser a little?
I can tolerate FP depending on the circumstances. For example, I love how Skyrim allows you to switch between 3P and FP. However, there are several reasons I don't like FP.Bacon wrote:Fair enough. I figured he was just saying that he doesn't like FPS. I have many friends who refuse to play ANY FPS games just cause of CoD and the latter. I try to get them to play Metroid Prime or Half-Life and they brush it off. Sorta like certain adults with all cartoons.darthnazgul wrote:Why facepalm? A lot of people can't play first person games due to motion sickness.Bacon wrote:
1. It feels like there's a camera attached to my character's forehead. It's an annoying feeling that takes me out of the game, which is ironic, because I'm sure a lot of people say the same thing about 3PS.
2. As a rule, if I can't see my character, it feels as if there's a part of the game that's "missing". Many 3P games allow character customization and shit, and I want to see that too. That's part of the reason I find 3P games so much more immersive.
3. I'm a sucker for cinematic experiences, which is why I adore games like GTA, Red Dead, Uncharted, Ass Creed, The Last of Us, etc. I've never come close to anything like that while playing an FPS without it driving me absolutely crazy.
4. Whoever mentioned motion sickness is pretty close. I feel like I just cannot focus on anything when nearly everything on the screen is whirling around; in fact it quite literally makes my eyes hurt. When I have a character centered on the screen it's a lot more comforting.
I'm sure I'm missing some neat stuff in games like Bioshock and shit, but the camera-implanted-in-my-fucking-skull feature is a tradeoff I can't afford to make with those kinds of games. I know prince's and RIFA's heads are exploding right now, and I probably typed way more than I should have about this, but I guess I just feel passionate about it.
Cilogy wrote: I can tolerate FP depending on the circumstances. For example, I love how Skyrim allows you to switch between 3P and FP. However, there are several reasons I don't like FP.
1. It feels like there's a camera attached to my character's forehead. It's an annoying feeling that takes me out of the game, which is ironic, because I'm sure a lot of people say the same thing about 3PS.
2. As a rule, if I can't see my character, it feels as if there's a part of the game that's "missing". Many 3P games allow character customization and shit, and I want to see that too. That's part of the reason I find 3P games so much more immersive.
3. I'm a sucker for cinematic experiences, which is why I adore games like GTA, Red Dead, Uncharted, Ass Creed, The Last of Us, etc. I've never come close to anything like that while playing an FPS without it driving me absolutely crazy.
4. Whoever mentioned motion sickness is pretty close. I feel like I just cannot focus on anything when nearly everything on the screen is whirling around; in fact it quite literally makes my eyes hurt. When I have a character centered on the screen it's a lot more comforting.
I'm sure I'm missing some neat stuff in games like Bioshock and shit, but the camera-implanted-in-my-fucking-skull feature is a tradeoff I can't afford to make with those kinds of games. I know prince's and RIFA's heads are exploding right now, and I probably typed way more than I should have about this, but I guess I just feel passionate about it.
Cilogy, I think the main problem is that you're being tricked by third person FOV. Also, motion-sickness surely plays a huge part into this.
Third person isn't more cinematic than First person. They both can be equally cinematic. However, there are few arguments that exist against Third person:
- VIEW OBSTRUCTION : Isn't it weird that whenever you just wanna look around and admire the view, there's this character that pops out blocking your view? You may be used with it, but the reality is that you have a constant element on top of your image.
- IMMERSION BREAKING? : Most people will always prefer the First person if they could have a choice. Both Fallout and Elder Scrolls are games that offer players the option to play in both Third person and First person. Most of them take First person exactly because it's way more immersive. RPGs especially are created to PLAY and BE the character. You can't BE the character while you're controlling an Avatar. Mass Effect works but it's not as immersive as Fallout/Elder Scrolls. First person contributes a lot to immmersion. Third person brakes it by adding a barrier between you and the avatar you're controlling. The moment you notice that you are doing something through someone else... that's the moment where immersion gets damaged. Now you will probably name The Last of Us and RDR as games that are incredibly immersive. I would agree. But they are not immersive because of the Third person aspect primarily. They are immersive because of tons of other tricks.
- THE FOV TRICK : The most obvious thing is that -usually- third person games offer a much bigger FOV than First person games. Or do they? Isn't it just a trick because the camera is planted behind the character? It could very well be. But in most games the FOV is higher in Third person. Skyrim and Fallout are simple examples since you can play with both options. Higher FOV offers a much bigger picture but doesn't guarantee immersion since the camera is basically "shooting" from the "ceiling" instead of shooting from the forehead as you said. This is connected to my second point but the thing is the FOV can easily trick people.
There's a lot more to say in defence of First person and it's cinematic potential and immersion.
Anyway, missing Bioshock is kinda sad... especially as a Nolanite.
Third person isn't more cinematic than First person. They both can be equally cinematic. However, there are few arguments that exist against Third person:
- VIEW OBSTRUCTION : Isn't it weird that whenever you just wanna look around and admire the view, there's this character that pops out blocking your view? You may be used with it, but the reality is that you have a constant element on top of your image.
- IMMERSION BREAKING? : Most people will always prefer the First person if they could have a choice. Both Fallout and Elder Scrolls are games that offer players the option to play in both Third person and First person. Most of them take First person exactly because it's way more immersive. RPGs especially are created to PLAY and BE the character. You can't BE the character while you're controlling an Avatar. Mass Effect works but it's not as immersive as Fallout/Elder Scrolls. First person contributes a lot to immmersion. Third person brakes it by adding a barrier between you and the avatar you're controlling. The moment you notice that you are doing something through someone else... that's the moment where immersion gets damaged. Now you will probably name The Last of Us and RDR as games that are incredibly immersive. I would agree. But they are not immersive because of the Third person aspect primarily. They are immersive because of tons of other tricks.
- THE FOV TRICK : The most obvious thing is that -usually- third person games offer a much bigger FOV than First person games. Or do they? Isn't it just a trick because the camera is planted behind the character? It could very well be. But in most games the FOV is higher in Third person. Skyrim and Fallout are simple examples since you can play with both options. Higher FOV offers a much bigger picture but doesn't guarantee immersion since the camera is basically "shooting" from the "ceiling" instead of shooting from the forehead as you said. This is connected to my second point but the thing is the FOV can easily trick people.
There's a lot more to say in defence of First person and it's cinematic potential and immersion.
Anyway, missing Bioshock is kinda sad... especially as a Nolanite.
You should feel guilty and ashamed.
Posts: 55632
Joined:
May 2010
EVE Online Developers Cancel Their World of Darkness MMO
CCP Games have decided to end development on the troubled online version of World of Darkness, the vampire themed MMO from the creators of EVE Online. According to the official announcement, 56 employees from CCP's Atlanta subsidiary have lost their jobs, while the rest of the studio will continue working on titles within the EVE universe.
"The decision to end the World of Darkness MMO project is one of the hardest I’ve ever had to make." ,said CCP CEO Hilmar Veigar Pétursson.
"I have always loved and valued the idea of a sandbox experience set in that universe, and over the years I’ve watched the team passionately strive to make that possible."
"To our current and former employees and fans of World of Darkness, I am truly sorry that we could not deliver the experience that we aspired to make. We dreamed of a game that would transport you completely into the sweeping fantasy of World of Darkness, but had to admit that our efforts were falling regretfully short. One day I hope we will make it up to you."
Sigh...
