Why do most western gamers/devs still prefer First Person view over Third Person?
Is it only because "muh realism"? Seeing your cool characters in motion really doesn't worth more?
Games like Overwatch, Destiny or Battlefield1 just beg for having at least an option for third person view.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
It's more difficult to make sure the camera isn't trash in 3rd person.
Western devs don't have to animate your character in a first person game.
come on, there are so many games that already did it right. It really can't be that hard for devs to copy a good formula.
on the other hand, not having to worry about your character's clunky looking animations might be a good idea to stick with first person
Realism and it saves time and money on animations. I don't think players prefer first person overall they just like games that happen to be first person because of their influences. RE4, Max Payne, Gears of War and Uncharted are all popular.
It may not be that hard to do but it requires more work and is harder to do than fps camera. A lot of developers are lazy.
Its a cynical outlook but they could just be too lazy to create animations for a third person camera.
Eastern gamers and devs are less inclined to self-insert and value the protagonist as its own character distinct from themselves, while Western gamers and devs are the opposite -- there is a much stronger tendency for Western gamers to self-insert, and Western game design reflects that desire
Last gen consoles were full of third persons shooters
That's 100% wrong
You actually have to do 2 separate animations, character animations (players you see)
And first person animations (reloads and punches)
Overwatch characters for example have totally different ranges and animation sets for first person and character animations
Zenyatta goes full dhalsim with his melee attack in first person but his character animation dosent reflect the first person range of that kick
but what about games like Overwatch, where you play as very specific pre-defined characters?
also the biggest selling point of that game are the character designs, yet you hardly even see them properly
similarly with destiny. The whole point of that game is grinding cool looking gear and showing it off, yet you only see your character in the hubworld.
fps games were and are still way more popular than their tps counterparts tho
overwatch characters don't look nearly as good and fluid in motion from the outside as their hands look in first person view though.
They definitely should have put more work into the character animations if they designed the game to be played in TPS.
Only if the devs aren't lazy enough to forgo doing the first one.
There are countless FPS games where you are just a camera holding a gun.
First person is better for shooters. When your enemies are far away, you want your camera unobstructed for maximum field of vision.
Third person is only better for brawlers because the close-range action would become obstructive in first-person.
Vanquish is a hybrid melee/shooting game so they had to make the levels claustrophobic and use a third person camera.
I like first person more because i've always thought it was easier to maneuver my character that way
I think first person view is preferred for games made in mind for competition like the three you listed for example. Adding a third person view to them could change the dynamic of the game and how it is played. Someone could run up to one side of a wall and turn the camera in third person to see if someone or anything is on the other side of the wall without any risk. I'm not against adding multiple perspectives since I liked that feature in the original 2005 Battlefront 2, but I could see them wanting to control variables that may cause "unfair" advantages.
Outside of games with intended competitive play, you have games like Assassin's Creed, God of War, and The Last of Us for example that are both extremely popular and played in third person view. I can only imagine any people that are clamoring for Assassin's Creed to be in first person are in the minority.
First person is better for general gun nuttery cause the recoil feels much better on top of you being able to actually use the weapon's sight and see its working in details when reloading etc. Westerners love gunporn so there you go. It's also sometimes better for immersion.
More important difference is probably with multi player games. 3rd person allows you to do silly stuff like being completely in cover but still being able to observe your enemies or look above walls etc. For your usual semi-realistic games where getting a jump on someone means he is already at least half dead before he can even turn around it changes a lot, and honestly 3rd person just feels bad and counter-intuitive to mechanics. It also buffs peeker advantage since you also have perfect understanding of the enemy position when going around the corner.
It's not that Western devs prefer third person over third person. It's that Japanese devs just don't make games in first person ever.
TPS is actually more efficent for shooters in general. A wider field of vision usually worth a lot more than basically always being zoomed in.
if a game has both FPS and a well working TPS (like in Battlefront) people always use the TPS view if they want to play efficently
as said, FPS is more about a literal restriction so you can't check corners without risk
First person games are really unpleasant to play, I find, and adding a 3rd person option like Skyrim does just makes the 3rd person view feel really shitty because you still have to aim so you're pointing the camera directly down or at awkward angles most of the time.
Primarily 3rd person games feel great though, unless the camera is way too close to the character you control.
You can half-ass the third person animations if the player isn't looking at them up close all the time though. Ultimately it's more economical.
> feels much better on top of you being able to actually use the weapon's sight and see its working in details when reloading etc
I would argue with that
I think a closer third person view can give you a much more satisfying look about the mechanics of the weapon, seeing how it was meant to be used by a person in it's full glory.
youtube.com
youtube.com
Close TPS is often used to remove the omni visibility of usual TPS while giving more attention to singular enemies or player character, which makes it kinda be close to actual FPS. Generally it still retains the problem of either having to snap to iron sight/scope FPS aim or foregoing it in favor of reticle.
>A wider field of vision usually worth a lot more than basically always being zoomed in.
You can achieve the same thing by increasing the first person FOV. What you can't change is the fact that a quarter of your screen is blocked by your character in third person.
1st person is more immersive
Japs hate themselves and don't want to self insert unless it's a hentai game
Because 3rd person cameras suck balls and first person done right is more immersive.
Overwatch probably made a mistake by not being third-person. Remember that the game was in development hell for years as project Titan, and the gameplay was probably fully fleshed out as a FPS before skin microtransactions were a popular thing
Hiding behind corners the multiplayer experience
3rd-person is so lame. it always just ends up turning into a rollfest