Poll: Third or First person?

[Dan Steele]

Sorry for making this forum twice, but I accidently uploaded it to the wrong category "Off topic" instead or gaming

So my friends and I are thinking of making a massive online shooter where you die in relativity few hits (5 shots or less) the game will feature easy upgrades for dependable weapons so newbies do not feel overwhelmed or left out like in Uncharted 3. There will be no perks or kill streak bonuses other than weapon upgrades (you have to purchase those) and bonus points for said kill streaks. However we ran into a problem, First person or Third person? I see how popular first person shooters are and I fear it will not flourish as a 3rd person shooter, what should I do? Since you guys are big on gaming, would you prefer this massive online shooter be third or first person?

 

[Gorilla Gunk]

I would say first-person. Like you said, they're popular. Plus if your character animations suck they won't really be as noticeable.

Do any of you have any experience making games? This seems like too big a project for just you and your friends.

 

[Dan Steele]

I would say first-person. Like you said, they're popular. Plus if your character animations suck they won't really be as noticeable.

Do any of you have any experience making games? This seems like too big a project for just you and your friends.

Once we work for an official company, we plan to get this idea running. Right now its only in the planning stages. I'm just a concept artist that thinks of ideas for games

 

[Euryalus]

What are you trying to make the game about and how do you want it presented. Perspective can change how a game is experienced. How do you want it to be experienced?

 

[TheMagicIndian]

Why not do both? That's the way Firefall is doing it and I quite like having a choice. Things like sniper rifles are easier to use in first and things like explodey-death cannons are easier to use in third, in my opinion.

If pushed for just one, I choose third person. Just make sure your animations are nice and fluid and not awkward to watch.

 

[Dan Steele]

What are you trying to make the game about and how do you want it presented. Perspective can change how a game is experienced. How do you want it to be experienced?

The single player and multiplayer are going to be on separate disks so both can both can be made to their max potential. In terms of perspective for the single player I want the player to see a well thought out character, not a walking gun if its first person. Unfortunately one of the best ways to develop a character is third person and I want the multiplayer to be a mirror image of the campaign but I fear people will not play a massive online 3rd person shooter thus making it fail like MAG.

 

[Euryalus]

What are you trying to make the game about and how do you want it presented. Perspective can change how a game is experienced. How do you want it to be experienced?

The single player and multiplayer are going to be on separate disks so both can both can be made to their max potential. In terms of perspective for the single player I want the player to see a well thought out character, not a walking gun if its first person. Unfortunately one of the best ways to develop a character is third person and I want the multiplayer to be a mirror image of the campaign but I fear people will not play a massive online 3rd person shooter thus making it fail like MAG.

You could use cutscenes if you're really split on the first-person gameplay, but still want a well developed character. If you really just want to focus on character then third person might (emphasis on might) be the way to go. To be honest the only way we can of any help is if we know exactly what you want to do. Is multi-player absolutely essential to the game? What is the single player going to be about? Do single player and multi-player need to even be played the same way? If your only leaning towards first-person because its popular then I would steer clear of that mentality. Nothing cool comes around if everyone's goal is to just be popular. You end up rehashing things.

 

[StBishop]

One thing to keep in mind is that while the escapist is a pretty good barometer for the gaming community it's only one facet.

One of my mates plays about 3 games: Halo: Reach; FIFA; and Mass Effect.
But he plays more of those games than I play of all of my games combined.

So while he doesn't buy a large variety of games he tells everyone he knows to get those games and those people are probably your largest portion of the market. People with a huge social circle who play multiplayer to death and only buy 1 game a year.

(For anyone wondering how Mass Effect got in there, it was a gift from me. He said he wanted halo with a better story and some more customisation. Mass Effect loosely fits that description.)

 

[Dan Steele]

What are you trying to make the game about and how do you want it presented. Perspective can change how a game is experienced. How do you want it to be experienced?

The single player and multiplayer are going to be on separate disks so both can both can be made to their max potential. In terms of perspective for the single player I want the player to see a well thought out character, not a walking gun if its first person. Unfortunately one of the best ways to develop a character is third person and I want the multiplayer to be a mirror image of the campaign but I fear people will not play a massive online 3rd person shooter thus making it fail like MAG.

You could use cutscenes if you're really split on the first-person gameplay, but still want a well developed character. If you really just want to focus on character then third person might (emphasis on might) be the way to go. To be honest the only way we can of any help is if we know exactly what you want to do. Is multi-player absolutely essential to the game? What is the single player going to be about? Do single player and multi-player need to even be played the same way? If your only leaning towards first-person because its popular then I would steer clear of that mentality. Nothing cool comes around if everyone's goal is to just be popular. You end up rehashing things.

The multiplayer is not going to be essential the the game, but I still want everyone to enjoy it. I cant give out any specifics of the single player, but it does involve a well thought out story involving a protagonist in search of his father. My fear is generally how when you play the multiplayer for a game it has the same enticing gameplay as the single player, only its against other players and that is the dilemma: Do I make it first or third person? On one hand players love first person shooters, but never realy play the story all that much. On the other hand players who play third person shooters generally like the campaign and coop, but not so much the online competitive.

 

[Euryalus]

The multiplayer is not going to be essential the the game, but I still want everyone to enjoy it. I cant give out any specifics of the single player, but it does involve a well thought out story involving a protagonist in search of his father. My fear is generally how when you play the multiplayer for a game it has the same enticing gameplay as the single player, only its against other players and that is the dilemma: Do I make it first or third person? On one hand players love first person shooters, but never realy play the story all that much. On the other hand players who play third person shooters generally like the campaign and coop, but not so much the online competitive.

I personally tend to love first person shooters more than third-person ones. The halo trilogy are some of my favorite games ever. I play them all the time. The thing is though, I pretty much never play them online. First-person shooters can be immensely fun and popular games with or without multi-player (look at Half Life). The opposite can be true of third person shooter multi-player. I had loads of fun with ME3's multi-player (though I hated its existence for other reasons). It essentially comes down to what kind of Game you want to make. Which will fit what you're trying to do better. You'd know that better than I would.

Good luck in your endeavor

 

[Dan Steele]

The multiplayer is not going to be essential the the game, but I still want everyone to enjoy it. I cant give out any specifics of the single player, but it does involve a well thought out story involving a protagonist in search of his father. My fear is generally how when you play the multiplayer for a game it has the same enticing gameplay as the single player, only its against other players and that is the dilemma: Do I make it first or third person? On one hand players love first person shooters, but never realy play the story all that much. On the other hand players who play third person shooters generally like the campaign and coop, but not so much the online competitive.

I personally tend to love first person shooters more than third-person ones. The halo trilogy are some of my favorite games ever. I play them all the time. The thing is though, I pretty much never play them online. First-person shooters can be immensely fun and popular games with or without multi-player (look at Half Life). The opposite can be true of third person shooter multi-player. I had loads of fun with ME3's multi-player (though I hated its existence for other reasons). It essentially comes down to what kind of Game you want to make. Which will fit what you're trying to do better. You'd know that better than I would.

Good luck in your endeavor

Thank you

 

[Aerosteam]

Third person.

I can look around corners.

 

[FalloutJack]

I still say both. And if not both, then third.

 

[sextus the crazy]

I'd thing 3rd person would be better because it would allow for meaningful customization. Not being able to see your characters customization is a big downer (coughTF2cough). Not to mention it make a cash shop more feasible.

 

[Goofguy]

I'd say third person, if only to be a bit more unique in your presentation of a shooter.