Mack from worth a buy explain why Third person games suck and why old school FPS are best

[I can't enter my old name]

I don't feel like the character in either first or third-person, but third-person at least gives me a visual of their body in relationship to the environment, whereas first-person gives me nothing. The point I'm trying to make is that seeing your character, their surroundings and how they interact with them is a better substitute for eyes and an actual body than first-person view, which gives you no sense of your character.

I have to disagree. I think third person shooters are gross.

In first person you can see exactly what is in front of you as a human being. In third person you always have this hideous abomination obstructing your view, and that thing is your character. If you were to stand in front of something, like if you were to stand in front of a table, you would have to move the camera high or to the side to see what you were supposed to see with your character's eyes.

Its narrow field of view offers no peripheral vision. Increasing the field of view in a first-person game too much makes everything look too distant and weird. It even cuts off the limbs in some games. It's like you're looking at the world with flat eyes inside a little rectangular frame, mounted to a tripod with tank treads for legs.

First person cuts off peripheral vision, true, but it is a compromise. The standard fov gives you enough peripheral vision while making objects look farther away than in real life. However, some games such have a zoom mode either by a zoom button or iron sights. Some people call it unrealistic, but in some cases, it's actually the true to scale mode.

On the other hand, if you were to move the camera back behind the player, and increase the fov which sometimes happens, you would have things look even farther, meaning enemies 100m away way look super tiny. Enemies close by are small, which I guess is why third person shooters have aim assist.

That and when you move the camera in third person, you will move the camera XY and Z (worse if the camera hits something like the floor, suddenly terrain becomes a factor in aiming), whilst in first person you are simply rotating the camera.

Also, if this is one of those shoulder camera aiming third person games, you suddenly lose the left half of your vision,

You can't look to the side without stopping a run (because almost no first-person games let you run sideways, even though it could make sense if done right) or facing away from an enemy, since the disembodied camera turns in conjunction with the legs and the character cannot move their eyes.

Technically you can, you move the camera to the left, and then run right, and you end up running in the same direction whilst looking left. The worst thing that could happen is you slow down a little bit.

 

[RaikuFA]

Let's not discuss the video. Let's not discuss anything that guy has to say. I've seen a few of his videos. Enough to conclude without a shadow of doubt that the guy is an absolute moron. He's dumber than Angry Joe and that is a small miracle. It honestly amazes me how dumb the guy is. He doesn't know anything meaningful about video games. Just the most basic things that even a child knows. And his thoughts (if you can even call them that) are as shallow as they get. He's basically a dudebro who doesn't understand anything that's more complex than a first person shooter that can be played by a six year old. He's the Donald Trump of gaming videos.

Isn't that all reserved for DSP?

 

[Squilookle]

I got 4 seconds in the that video, read that whingy condescending BS disclamer and stopped it right there.

Maybe I'll try it again later. Especially if it promises to get Mafia 1 its fair dues.

 

[Hawki]

Well, that's 30 minutes I'm not getting back. Luckily I listened to it while working.

Some of his points are sympathetic, but it seems to me that it's less "games suck now" and more that he craves great challenge. Either the gameplay is "hardcore" or it's not worth his time. Because he doesn't spend any time talking about narrative. He claims that games are intended for children, when the average age of a "gamer" is in their thirties (if anything, children don't seem to have enough choice these days, far as I can tell). He claims that the development landscape changed to suit consoles, despite the fact that consoles were alive and well long before Doom and the like came along. He claims that either developers develop games that he likes, or they're not real "gamers." It's...bleh. It's basically the No True Scottsmen falacy, which is ironic, because I think he IS Scottish.

It's honestly part of why I refuse to call myself a "gamer." I play games, read books, watch films, write, edit wikis, go to work, pay bills, etc. I'll play how and what I want to, if that's alright.

these third person action games are what ruining gaming industry.

If a single type of game in a single type of genre can "ruin" an industry, that industry was never robust to begin with.

the thing is they are not anymore. they involve cover system and see thorugh walls. and regen health.

Blah blah blah...

None of these are inherently negative aspects. If you don't like them, fine, but again, "everything's ruined!" is not only hyperbole, it's tired, worn out hyperbole.

then my friend, recommend me a good third person shooter that doesnot involve see through walls and regen health and cover system.

Army Men: Sarge's Heroes (well, the Dreamcast version at least)

Of course, even then your chances are improved if you use the terrain to your advantage (shocking concept, I know), so there is that

Plus, what's so bad about cover systems?

IMO, nothing. Not inherently at least, provided they're used well.

Thing about cover systems/regenerating health is that they're the antithesis to games such as, say, Doom. In Doom, mobility is king - you have to keep moving, projectiles can easily be dodged, etc. You can stay alive as long as you keep your speed up.

Cover systems/regen health accomadate for hit-scan-type combat, where enemies will generally hit you if they can see you. So, while in Doom, a lack of regenerating health is made bearable by enemy inacuraccy, regen systems accomadate for greater enemy accuracy, and thus a chance to recover from your mistakes. Also, it emphasises using the environment to your advantage more - taking cover, knowing when to move, doing your best to take out enemies from as secure a location as possible, etc. It's a less mobile type of gameplay, but still quite enjoyable if done right. Least for me.

Maybe I'll try it again later. Especially if it promises to get Mafia 1 its fair dues.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lestiMZ4qk&t=3218s

This might be of some interest to you.

 

[B-Cell_v1legacy]

. He claims that the development landscape changed to suit consoles, despite the fact that consoles were alive and well long before Doom and the like came along

back then console get different thing and not to be try to be like PC. consolization of PC gaming didnot exist until Xbox release in market.

If a single type of game in a single type of genre can "ruin" an industry, that industry was never robust to begin with.

not single type of. if cover system, regen health, see thorugh walls become trend in every time of game that of course its is ruining industry.

None of these are inherently negative aspects. If you don't like them, fine, but again, "everything's ruined!" is not only hyperbole, it's tired, worn out hyperbole.

Yes they are. it doesnot matter who like or not. cover system did ruined entire thid person shooter genre and see thorugh walls actually ruined stealth games. what is the point of play a game when it play it self? you take cover and can see what is going behind your back. you see through walls and know what enemy doing. it just remove all tension and making game CASUAL!!!!

where is tension? where is suspense? where is immersion? we can see what is enemy doing behind us. we just take cover and wait until enemy try to shoot then we shoot. no challange.

again. we can see everything. we are too overpower. everything we can see. now i can see if a game is sci fi and has gadget to see behind wall but what does these mechanic doing in games like assassins creed and hitman?????

 

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

None of these are inherently negative aspects. If you don't like them, fine, but again, "everything's ruined!" is not only hyperbole, it's tired, worn out hyperbole.

Yes they are. it doesnot matter who like or not. cover system did ruined entire thid person shooter genre and see thorugh walls actually ruined stealth games. what is the point of play a game when it play it self? you take cover and can see what is going behind your back. you see through walls and know what enemy doing. it just remove all tension and making game CASUAL!!!!

"Aspects of gaming are negative because I say they are. Only what I like matters and other people's opinions and preferences are arbitrarily, objectively wrong by virtue of not being mine. Something something, vague highly subjective argument that really isn't one, something something, badass and hardcore, something something, my friend. Large amounts of exclamations marks."

I think I did a reasonably good job translating that.

Though by all means, don't stop what you're doing, B-Cell. You're way too entertaining. You're like the Trump of the Escapist, minus the whole being the POTUS thing.

"Make Gaming great again!"

 

[sageoftruth]

Before I watch it I need to know, has this guy improved at all, or is he still all about scattered kooky rambling, and incessantly hitting that damn bell? Trying to find the actual arguments buried under all the sludge that is his Youtube persona is more than I'm willing to tolerate.

 

[bluegate]

. He claims that the development landscape changed to suit consoles, despite the fact that consoles were alive and well long before Doom and the like came along

back then console get different thing and not to be try to be like PC. consolization of PC gaming didnot exist until Xbox release in market.

I'm having trouble making out what you're trying to say here, could you rephrase that, maybe elaborate a bit on it, because I'm drawing blanks as to what you are trying to say.

where is tension? where is suspense? where is immersion? we can see what is enemy doing behind us. we just take cover and wait until enemy try to shoot then we shoot. no challange.

again. we can see everything. we are too overpower. everything we can see. now i can see if a game is sci fi and has gadget to see behind wall but what does these mechanic doing in games like assassins creed and hitman?????

Quick question here, in the games in those screenshots, does the player actively have to click a button or perform an action for those enemies to glow like that, or does the game do it for you without the ability to turn it off?

Because if the player is able to turn it off or play through the game without activating the X-ray mode, then where is the problem?
You don't want to be able to see enemies through walls? Sure thing, just don't use it / turn it off.

 

[Captain Marvelous_v1legacy]

Yes they are. it doesnot matter who like or not. cover system did ruined entire thid person shooter genre and see thorugh walls actually ruined stealth games. what is the point of play a game when it play it self? you take cover and can see what is going behind your back. you see through walls and know what enemy doing.

Yeah, except third person view our field of view better than first person does. Sitting here in my room with my back against a wall, I can actually see the wall behind me. Not only that, but if I want to look behind me it takes a second to do it unlike in First Person Shooters. Hell, while I run I can look behind me without slowing down to a crawl. Maybe the offer an unfair advantage, but I find it better in most game types. Except stealth I guess.

Now, you may be saying, "Increase the sensitivity of your mouse/right stick"... No.

it just remove all tension and making game CASUAL!!!!

This made me laugh. Yeah, it does make the game casual. It may have something to do with all of these games trying to appeal to a casual market. They aren't going after the "hardc0re l33t gamerz". If anything, Detective Mode should be an optional mechanic. That way the casual gamers get their crutch and the leaches get their challenge.

 

[JUMBO PALACE]

1. Stop saying "CASUAL" like it's a dirty word. No one is forcing you to play any third person games you don't want to play.

2. If you don't like detective vision, here's a fucking novel idea, don't use it. Don't use that feature, move on with your life, and let other people enjoy things without crying about it. I know it might be hard to believe, but I promise, it is really okay for people to have different opinions.

 

[CaitSeith]

Before I watch it I need to know, has this guy improved at all, or is he still all about scattered kooky rambling, and incessantly hitting that damn bell? Trying to find the actual arguments buried under all the sludge that is his Youtube persona is more than I'm willing to tolerate.

Half of it is an interesting comparison between old and new enemy AI's; then the bell happens...

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Before I watch it I need to know, has this guy improved at all, or is he still all about scattered kooky rambling, and incessantly hitting that damn bell? Trying to find the actual arguments buried under all the sludge that is his Youtube persona is more than I'm willing to tolerate.

He's the same old imbecile as before. Still thinks that gaming is about only that which appeals to him and if a game dares to venture beyond his ridiculously narrow appeal in any way it instantly sucks.

 

[JUMBO PALACE]

2. If you don't like detective vision, here's a fucking novel idea, don't use it. Don't use that feature, move on with your life, and let other people enjoy things without crying about it.

The problem is that those games often have more enemies and faster patrols because they know you can see through walls. The Arkham games are unbalanced without X-ray vision. I'd love a Batman game without detective vision if the stealth were more realistic and utilized the darkness.

In that is ture then yes, I can see a criticism of the system. I disagree though. I played a lot of those encounters without detective vision and they played fine in my opinion. I do agree with you that more traditional darkness and LOS stealth mechanics would be fun in a batman game though.

 

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

1. Stop saying "CASUAL" like it's a dirty word. No one is forcing you to play any third person games you don't want to play.

You say that like games that don't cater explicitly to his tastes and/or earned his hype have a right to exist in the first place.

True hardcore gamers, like himself, know what's best. You should know that by now.

 

[JUMBO PALACE]

1. Stop saying "CASUAL" like it's a dirty word. No one is forcing you to play any third person games you don't want to play.

You say that like games that don't cater explicitly to his tastes and/or earned his hype have a right to exist in the first place.

True hardcore gamers, like himself, know what's best. You should know that by now.

How foolish I have been!

People like B-Cell are why I've always disliked the term "gamer". I'm not anti-labels- I'm happy to call myself a weight lifter or a car guy, but christ, this hobby has some of the most uppity, self righteous elitists I've ever spoken with. I just don't have the energy or interest to get that furious over video games. I play them to have fun, why turn them into a source of stress?

 

[RaikuFA]

1. Stop saying "CASUAL" like it's a dirty word. No one is forcing you to play any third person games you don't want to play.

You say that like games that don't cater explicitly to his tastes and/or earned his hype have a right to exist in the first place.

True hardcore gamers, like himself, know what's best. You should know that by now.

How foolish I have been!

People like B-Cell are why I've always disliked the term "gamer". I'm not anti-labels- I'm happy to call myself a weight lifter or a car guy, but christ, this hobby has some of the most uppity, self righteous elitists I've ever spoken with. I just don't have the energy or interest to get that furious over video games. I play them to have fun, why turn them into a source of stress?

It's even worse when you look at the FGC or MOBA's. So much gatekeeping.

 

[Poetic Nova]

Should've known it was another B-Cell thread. Rieks of it from a mile away.

Either way, I find third person game everything but immersive, but some can stil be great. One of the reasons why Spec Ops never worked for me.