To me there is no huge difference between a game that allows 1st and third person.
Allowing both gives third person viewers an combat advantage though since they see around their character which mean having both options in combat is rather meaningless, everyone will use third person then.
1st person is perfect for VR and games where you use firearms while 3rd person works better for more tactical based games and for placing AoE magic.
Anyways for me using first person is no dealbreaker, played Daggerfall a looong time after all.
This first-person restriction will cost them a significant amount of players.
Whatever the reason for the restriction, I hope it justifies the lost revenue.
A game that relies on teams of players to succeed is taking a huge risk by limiting their prospective audience in this way. Players that love first-person views will grudgingly accept 3rd-person play, but not the other way around.
I have a nagging suspicion that Sea of Thieves is going to be a monumental failure.
A rookie mistake which they will pay for down the road. You give your customers options whenever you can not lock them out of them or make decisions for them.
Despite what some people may think, im sure they utilized polls and research when thy say "first person is more immersive". Some people may think its not as a personal preference, but id bet there would be a solid majority that do. I played skyrim 100% FP and never felt more immersed.
If most players wanted first person tunnel vision inflicted upon everyone, then why don't most games do that?
That said, there is plenty of space in the world for niche games that most players hate, but a small but significant percentage of players love. A game that captures 10% of the MMO market would be a huge hit, probably second only to WoW, even if the other 90% of MMO players think it's awful. I'm not predicting that sort of success for this game, of course.
Not including 3rd person view is a mistake. When i play RPGs i always prefer 3rd person view because i want to see my character, not be the character. Watching the character I created is the thing that gives me joy. Giving them personalities and looks, watching them beat their enemies is more immersive in 3rd person imo. In first person, you kinda take it away. You try to make your characters unique but the only thing you see is their hands.
Welp, they lost me with this one. I find 1st person games more disorienting to play than anything else. 3rd person should be an option at the very least. What's the fun of playing a pirate game when you can see how cool you look as you play?
Yea third person give you eyes in the back of your head, lets you see over and behind walls, lets you see things coming towards you from the side you wouldnt normally be able to see, and around corners, real natural lmao
I prefer 1st as it does make you more careful when playing, I miss the days of EQ1 sitting back to back to watch our area while on PVP servers, then they added 3rd person and you could watch 360 without moving.
I really think they are just gearing up for Microsoft's VR projects. Sea of Thieves is a Win10 and Xbox1 exclusive, so it stands to reason.
That had come to my mind as well. It is prime for a VR conversion since it will already be controller friendly. I think VR will work great for first person and probably better than monitors, but no publisher wants their title locked into being a VR only game so they'll sell it first person to monitor users first.
The whole assertion that first person is more immersive is completely subjective though. I agree with Quizzical that limited zoom third person more closely simulates peripheral vision and spatial awareness than first person.
A limited zoom approach to third person perspective actually isn't what I had in mind, though it's another way to achieve the same effect. Both Chain of Command and Infantry, for example, would calculate what your character should be able to see from his current position and direction facing. You could see much further in the direction you were facing than behind you; one justification for limited but non-zero visibility behind you is that you can hear people who are close, or even feel them if they get close enough.
This meant that an enemy character a medium distance away from you would be drawn on your screen if you faced toward the character and not if you faced away. You could make an enemy character appear and disappear by turning your character, even though this didn't move the camera at all. Other games like Civilization or Red Alert have had a fog of war mechanic in which you could only see what was happening near one of your characters.
I really think they are just gearing up for Microsoft's VR projects. Sea of Thieves is a Win10 and Xbox1 exclusive, so it stands to reason.
That had come to my mind as well. It is prime for a VR conversion since it will already be controller friendly. I think VR will work great for first person and probably better than monitors, but no publisher wants their title locked into being a VR only game so they'll sell it first person to monitor users first.
The whole assertion that first person is more immersive is completely subjective though. I agree with Quizzical that limited zoom third person more closely simulates peripheral vision and spatial awareness than first person.
I agree. It's why first person survival/horror games have become so popular- there, the lack of spatial awareness and peripheral vision actually serves to heighten the intensity.
In non-survival/horror games, specifically multiplayer games, I generally prefer 3rd person. Less shooting/stabbing unaware folks in the back, more head on fights.
I'm surprised by how many people are freaking out over this. I mean there's tons of FP games with millions and millions of players out there, yet everyone is reacting like not having 3rd person will somehow be their doom. Personally, I think the lack of platforms will be their biggest hurdle.
What this ranting tells me is that they must have really drawn alot of appeal to their game.
Sounds like there's a nice waiting market out there to tap for 3rd-person multiplayer pirate games, if nothing else, for another developer.
This is hardly an issue. It is odd that the developers should feel a need to explain their decision, the reasons they give are ironically a bit debatable.
I prefer 1st as it does make you more careful when playing, I miss the days of EQ1 sitting back to back to watch our area while on PVP servers, then they added 3rd person and you could watch 360 without moving.
Everquest had 3rd person when I started and I started in 1999. It might not have had a camera toggle in beta testing but I'm pretty sure the release version always had it. The first thing I did the first time I played was to figure out how to switch to 3rd person view. If it hadn't been possible I probably would have camped out right then and never played the game at all.
Andddddd there goes my interest in this. Fuck 1st person camera. I want to see my character. I want to see my surroundings. 1st person camera is a horrible limitation on combat, platforming, and every other game mechanic. And for what? Immersion? I am not immersed into a world in which I am represented only by my hands.
Comments
Allowing both gives third person viewers an combat advantage though since they see around their character which mean having both options in combat is rather meaningless, everyone will use third person then.
1st person is perfect for VR and games where you use firearms while 3rd person works better for more tactical based games and for placing AoE magic.
Anyways for me using first person is no dealbreaker, played Daggerfall a looong time after all.
Whatever the reason for the restriction, I hope it justifies the lost revenue.
A game that relies on teams of players to succeed is taking a huge risk by limiting their prospective audience in this way. Players that love first-person views will grudgingly accept 3rd-person play, but not the other way around.
I have a nagging suspicion that Sea of Thieves is going to be a monumental failure.
That said, there is plenty of space in the world for niche games that most players hate, but a small but significant percentage of players love. A game that captures 10% of the MMO market would be a huge hit, probably second only to WoW, even if the other 90% of MMO players think it's awful. I'm not predicting that sort of success for this game, of course.
This meant that an enemy character a medium distance away from you would be drawn on your screen if you faced toward the character and not if you faced away. You could make an enemy character appear and disappear by turning your character, even though this didn't move the camera at all. Other games like Civilization or Red Alert have had a fog of war mechanic in which you could only see what was happening near one of your characters.
In non-survival/horror games, specifically multiplayer games, I generally prefer 3rd person. Less shooting/stabbing unaware folks in the back, more head on fights.
What this ranting tells me is that they must have really drawn alot of appeal to their game.
Sounds like there's a nice waiting market out there to tap for 3rd-person multiplayer pirate games, if nothing else, for another developer.
1st or third person is fine and always has been.
Everquest had 3rd person when I started and I started in 1999. It might not have had a camera toggle in beta testing but I'm pretty sure the release version always had it. The first thing I did the first time I played was to figure out how to switch to 3rd person view. If it hadn't been possible I probably would have camped out right then and never played the game at all.