Finally someone gets it! For me personally, the only way a first person game is immersive is if there’s full body awareness, first person player shadows, and if your weapon is at low-ready when not shooting
If fps did more then ya maybe it would be better. High ready low ready, being able to turn your neck and look while moving forward (Arma does this.) Even still, 3rd just does it better for me.
Preach my friend preach! This is a conversation that should be had about every game and I am totally on board with you because I feel way more immersed in a third person game where I can see all of the animations of the character. Great video bro..... Pew pew
Hey G, what I would say is that for instance in the case of tactical shooters I tend to prefer 1st person for very practical reasons. Not saying that certain aspects of 3rd person can't be done better, i.e GR:FS with it's suppresion mechanics. Tactical shooters, mainly in the case of CQC are all about angles, and the issue becomes, not only that, as things are, we've got an advantage over the AI whenever we're in cover, seeing over and around it without explosing ourselves but moreso that whenever I get into a house, from a 3rd person perspective, my character enters a room and sees what's inside it, for instance, before I do, which presents problems with my reaction time vs the enemy's, whom I'm sure are made more lenient to compensate for it. To summarize my point, 3rd person could be better implemented in Tactical Shooters and games in general, however nobody is moving in a direction that would manifest that at present.
Yooooo what up bro! How u been? I understand from the tac shooter perspective people who prefer first period. I’m not saying I’m right, I’m just saying this is what immersion is to me and I’m a bit tired of everything being in first, especially when every single Indy dev studio is making some type of “shooter” that’s in first. This game would have been a better third person game especially with this game world. Of course, just my opinion. Also, I get that first can work better for some people in cqc moments in tight areas due to camera issues and devs don’t want to work on AI being competent or figure out how to make a third person experience in cqc work better. I thought mgs5 did a great job but maybe not enough tight cqc? I def understand all the areas of what works with first vs third in CQC and why people might prefer first vs third or vice versa. I’ve just gotten to a point with decades of gaming under my belt where I’m just over first person games. Like I always say, give me some crispy third person animations and I’m all over it. It’s just what I prefer right now. And since it’s so rare to get a third person game where the animations are actually top notch, I’d like to see AAA studios come out with more third person games because I know I’m not going to get many opportunities to play one that is top notch given the climate of the industry.
@@GmoneyMozart I'm doing fine, just concerned for that GR game allegedly in the works. On the topic though, yeah, I get where you're coming from, actually I was watching some 1st person GR:WL modded gameplay the other day, thinking to myself that, besides the reasons I presented on the previous comment, I really liked WL better in 1st person because that way, I wouldn't have to stomach seeing how unfinished that game's 3rd person animations actually are.
@@GmoneyMozartmatter of fact is, they should allow us to switch on the moment, I mean imagine, you are playing breakpoint, you are out walking in a forest with your gun in third person, i do think thats one of the coolest and most immersive things in a game i saw too xd, but than you find a building and clearing buildings in third person IS HORRIBLE.
Some games are more 3rd person, like Skyrim and for example this game, but with shooters however I like a FP screen, I really hate when you can peak corners or blind fire in 3rd person.. Developers should listen to their audience more, instead of just doing what they like..
Personally, I disagree. I absolutely love first person games. The only third person games I actually play are Ghost Recon and The Witcher (I actually use a first person mod for GRW and I love it). Third person always makes me feel like a spectator and breaks my immersion. Edit: I should probably not that I almost exclusively play shooter games, with few exceptions (such as the Witcher).
You are right: third-person is more "emmersive;" it merges you away from the avatar. It's objective. "Immersion" means to be merged inside of something. In first-person, you are literally merged inside of the avatar. If you say that third-person is more immersive or equally as immersive, you are subjectively denying reality. You can point out that first-person has problems or that third-person works around a problem with first-person, but it doesn't change the fact that first-person is objectively more immersive. Your subjective experience does not change objective reality. They still need to make the third-person animations for the other Navii. First-person gives players better control of the avatar, and that is also objective. The reason you're able to say that VR would be most immersive is because you can see that first-person is objectively more immersive. Personal bias can prevent you from being immersed into the world, story, or whatever, but that is all subjective.
An average Joe created a FP mod for Wildlands that swaps back and forth. Stands to reason a huge developer could implement it into the game and satisfy all.
Ubisoft did great with the Original Avatar game it was 3rd person you can explore the world in any ways on foot or vehicle be it land air and sea wasnt a big world but was decently sized during its time and whats cool you can also choose your side RDA or the Navi and each faction had their own story from both sides I would love Ubisoft to remake that one
100%!!!!! Immersion comes from the world around the player, the environments and interacting with them, not what view point the game is played in. I've been playing Metal Gear Solid V this weekend, I was highly immersed in Afghanistan as Big Boss climbing up mountains, running across the desert and crawling through streams and mud. I felt anxiety lying still in bushes hoping the enemy didn't see a leg sticking out etc. You don't get that in FPS. You can't see if your body is properly hidden, if a leg, backpack or gun barrel is sticking to far out from cover. I prefer to see my character and the animations the dev team crafted. Certain games just shouldn't be FPS. Especially video game adaptions on ICONIC characters and IP's. Avatar should have been 3rd person so we can see our character running through the woods of Pandora, parkouring over obstacles, swinging from tree to tree, leaping over ravines, diving off the floating mountains, stealth attacking the robomechs etc! We should be able to see the size difference from us to regular humans. Not to mention the Navi are skilled fighters and hunters, they aren't just relegated to bow and arrows. Same for the new Robocop game! They have so many cutscenes in the game with dialogue choices so the player can see Robocop, which could have been cut back had they just made the game 3rd person so we can see the animations of Robocop walking, turning and shooting. Thats part of the fun of Robocop is seeing the shooting poses, bullets bouncing off his body, seeing the metal take damage but he is still moving forward and the mere size of him! Si disappointed in both these IP's that I was looking forward to.
The problem is that the developers for division cant even provide fluid movement for third person. I love the way how my agent aims in Division but that moron cant even crouch, go prone or other interesting things. He will always end up stuck in cover like a moron, or in random object. Meanwhile enemy AI can go prone, crouch and 101 different things. Breakpoint feels so amazing in third person in my opinion. I love to see the gear of my character and all those small things you mentioned in the video.
@@GmoneyMozart They are lazy. They think their stupid cover system is a next gen feature, when in reality, it is extremely punishing in a COVER BASED SHOOTER like division, to even stay in cover. Enemies on heroic don´t give damn about cover, they will just walk towards you and shred your armor into pieces in nanoseconds. Breaking line of sight does not work, cover to cover is suicidal, cant crouch... the developers don´t even know what they want from the player and Division has identity crisis.
I just saw this and saw your reply to my comment about this rant lol. Theres no reason they atleast could of gave both. Skyrim, fallout, hitman, gta, rdr, black one blood brothers whos a small studio of old ghost recon and r6 devs but all have the option to play in first person and third person.
Immersion isn't limited to perspective. It's about design. Third Person cannot fail in expression. Where first can be lazy. First-person CAN be extremely immersive. I love flying or driving in the first person. On foot, I prefer the third person. However one of the most immersive games I've played was Project Zomboid. It looks like PS2 sims, but beyond the surface level, the game is complex, deep with it's mechanics. When I boarded up a home made it my base, and slowly it felt like a real home. The way I organized and decorated it, the way I set up defenses. RDR2 is a fantastic third-person game, but with an FOV mod it's a fantastic first-person game as well. Throw a VR headset on and god damn. Perspectives matter but I think ultimately it comes down to design. Third person cannot compromise, first can. That's why first-person games tend to fail at being immersive. Take Ready or Not, I found that to be extremely immersive. Great argument though. I agree with you, these are what I feel makes a game immersive, and what I think the reason third often more immersive than first. In a perfect world, we'd get both because I love when games have bothl Edit: Another add I have to bring in. Third person does DOF much better than FP games. When you see in the avatar clip where he raises his hands to the animal, the realistic human vision would create a blur on the hands because you're focusing on the animal. So when I see things like that it's noticeably less immersive. In gameplay I prefer DOF off, because there is enough movement as to not notice.
To see your character in star wars jedi survivor crushing droids with the force and his movements concentrating on it, to seeing your character suffer from bullet wounds in breakpoint, those things make it immersive. First person is for simulation. Third person is for immersion. I agree with you whole heartedly! P.S. More pew pews please!
G man loves 3rd person so much, he has his s*x in 3rd person so he can watch to see all the motion...JK It's subjective really, there can be a argument either way. I think the outcry mostly comes from the first game being 3rd person. True, it is false to assume 1st=immersion, but it's also not true to just assume 1st= corner cutting. The campaign of MW2019 packs as many interactive event trigger as the entire OG MW just in the Clean House mission, and that's not accounting for all the mocap performance for NPCs and all the detail on the guns and animation. 3rd person games can cut corners, too. The gun animation and detail usually won't be as great, and that's why animations GR: Frontline looked cheap. Ubi just took animations from Breakpoint and made the bare minimum effort to shoehorn them in a 1st person game. Also parkour and crazy movements can work well in 1st, just look at Dying Light and Dishonored. At the end of the day it's an artistic choice, and not a differentiator of quality and effort. 1st vs 3rd is just another rabbit hole like Xbox vs PS. As long as a game is made well, 1st or 3rd should not be relevant beyond personal preferences.
My man !!! I’m here to back u up !! 3rd person all the way !! Beats me to see the " leaders " of this industry; mimicking, copying & force feeding us all the gimmicks of the movies industry!! ( cinematic sequences, scripted events & actions , QTE’s … hell ; even leaving the risk of creating new ip’s or new mechanics & ways of gameplay. Basically formulaic generic low quality products ) but on the other hand: they wanna STRIP THE ESSENCE OF THE MOVIE INDUSTRY OUT OF THE GAMING INDUSTRY; which is wide screen displaying a character interacting with his world & environment!!??? Immersion as you said it best : is subjective…. BUT … if I had to watch RAMBO, BRUCE LEE & so many other movies through that bullshit argument; I would’ve been long gone outta that bubble !! Aka immersion breaking nonsense!! Mind you : the minuscule percentage of movies that tried that FPS approach KEPT IT UNDER 1% …. Throughout the history of movies !! Keep preaching so they stop reaching!! 🙏🏾
Depends on the type of game really, for first person immersion you should be able to freelook around you, have stances for weapons, etc; works for tactical shooters but not for this game, as it would've been better in third person
Only true bad games lack third person. All the grandiose games ive played in my life CANT HELP but have a third person mode. They need it to develop the game properly. Its literally evidence of a good game. If theres no third person mode at all anywhere. Its factually going to be a bad shallow lazy game. And most of the time in grandiose games that dont have a third perosn mode, u can usually enable that third person mode using some sort of console commands or something because good games usually have it.
Hmm I'm a first person guy but in this case Avatar being third person should've been a no-brainer. A good example is that Assassin's Creed is more immersive than Far Cry. Perhaps the real reason is that they don't want comparisons with Horizon Forbidden West/Zero Dawn, can't meet those expectations.
yea the immersion excuse is getting old, the gameplay makes it immersive not the point of view, unless we are compairing 3rd person with first person VR.
I can understand, that when we get to the point where we are in virtual reality, you are the avatar, and you can move you weapon accordingly, and it won’t be so stuff and generic like most fps are imo, but we are still staring at a screen at the end of the day and I want to see my character. The moves and abilities and cosmetics, all of it.
I don't find first person immersive at all. I find it very restrictive. It feels like I'm playing with horse blinders on with little to no situational awareness. I can only play an FPS for about an hour before I get bored and move on. Avatar is an automatic no buy for me sadly.
There may be a day when first person technology is so realistic it actually feels like yourself, but it's nowhere near that yet. First person in games looks so fake and out of body, like you're just floating.
I’ve been saying this for SOOOOO LONGGG!!!! They’re soo lazy when it comes to animations; they know that shit is real work when it comes to 3rd person and literally cut the corner for FPP🤦🏽♂️when I fist heard the news about this game I was ecstatic.. I couldn’t believe it!! Then found out it was FPP I immediately knew I would never buy it.. I remember playing ghost recon, socom, metal gear solid had me shaking in my boots as a youngin, uncharted felt like it was on another level when it came to immersion n cutscenes for me; n don’t get me started on where it all started lol fuckin GTA like cmon you mean to tell me gta isn’t on another level right now at immersion n guess what it’s 3rd person and FPP😂😂🤦🏽♂️🥴all n all I understand it from a pvp standpoint due to 3rd person peeking around corner; they’d have to figure out a counter for that.. but other than that some of these single player IPs def should be 3rd person hell even coop with a friend on avatar wouldn’t destroy me immersion😂🤷🏽♂️division did very well with this with the darkzone pvp and outside pve.. take that aspect on a big ass map or world😅🤷🏽♂️.. and we need a talk on these brain dead ass Ai lol I mean atp Put zombies in every game if you wanna add bots to a pvp game🙃 at least they won’t break my immersion cause the dam zombies already brain dead as they should be 😂😂😂😂
Exactly bro! I too was very exited for this game but then when they said it was first person I was disappointed. And now seeing the gameplay I’m just not interested. The game would have been much better in third person and this pretend narrative that they chose first because it’s more immersive is just something I don’t believe. It’s def about not wanting or being able to create a great 3rd person avatar game.
Finally someone gets it! For me personally, the only way a first person game is immersive is if there’s full body awareness, first person player shadows, and if your weapon is at low-ready when not shooting
If fps did more then ya maybe it would be better. High ready low ready, being able to turn your neck and look while moving forward (Arma does this.) Even still, 3rd just does it better for me.
@@GmoneyMozart Same here brother
Preach my friend preach! This is a conversation that should be had about every game and I am totally on board with you because I feel way more immersed in a third person game where I can see all of the animations of the character. Great video bro..... Pew pew
😘
@@GmoneyMozart everything in this video was spot on
5:20 This!..... this right here u got urself a new subscriber bro cookin with facts with these videos!
lol welcome to the party bro! Sit back and enjoy the shit show ;)
Hey G, what I would say is that for instance in the case of tactical shooters I tend to prefer 1st person for very practical reasons.
Not saying that certain aspects of 3rd person can't be done better, i.e GR:FS with it's suppresion mechanics.
Tactical shooters, mainly in the case of CQC are all about angles, and the issue becomes, not only that, as things are, we've got an advantage over the AI whenever we're in cover, seeing over and around it without explosing ourselves but moreso that whenever I get into a house, from a 3rd person perspective, my character enters a room and sees what's inside it, for instance, before I do, which presents problems with my reaction time vs the enemy's, whom I'm sure are made more lenient to compensate for it.
To summarize my point, 3rd person could be better implemented in Tactical Shooters and games in general, however nobody is moving in a direction that would manifest that at present.
Yooooo what up bro! How u been?
I understand from the tac shooter perspective people who prefer first period. I’m not saying I’m right, I’m just saying this is what immersion is to me and I’m a bit tired of everything being in first, especially when every single Indy dev studio is making some type of “shooter” that’s in first. This game would have been a better third person game especially with this game world. Of course, just my opinion.
Also, I get that first can work better for some people in cqc moments in tight areas due to camera issues and devs don’t want to work on AI being competent or figure out how to make a third person experience in cqc work better. I thought mgs5 did a great job but maybe not enough tight cqc?
I def understand all the areas of what works with first vs third in CQC and why people might prefer first vs third or vice versa.
I’ve just gotten to a point with decades of gaming under my belt where I’m just over first person games. Like I always say, give me some crispy third person animations and I’m all over it. It’s just what I prefer right now. And since it’s so rare to get a third person game where the animations are actually top notch, I’d like to see AAA studios come out with more third person games because I know I’m not going to get many opportunities to play one that is top notch given the climate of the industry.
@@GmoneyMozart I'm doing fine, just concerned for that GR game allegedly in the works.
On the topic though, yeah, I get where you're coming from, actually I was watching some 1st person GR:WL modded gameplay the other day, thinking to myself that, besides the reasons I presented on the previous comment, I really liked WL better in 1st person because that way, I wouldn't have to stomach seeing how unfinished that game's 3rd person animations actually are.
@@GmoneyMozartmatter of fact is, they should allow us to switch on the moment, I mean imagine, you are playing breakpoint, you are out walking in a forest with your gun in third person, i do think thats one of the coolest and most immersive things in a game i saw too xd, but than you find a building and clearing buildings in third person IS HORRIBLE.
Some games are more 3rd person, like Skyrim and for example this game, but with shooters however I like a FP screen, I really hate when you can peak corners or blind fire in 3rd person.. Developers should listen to their audience more, instead of just doing what they like..
Personally, I disagree. I absolutely love first person games. The only third person games I actually play are Ghost Recon and The Witcher (I actually use a first person mod for GRW and I love it). Third person always makes me feel like a spectator and breaks my immersion.
Edit: I should probably not that I almost exclusively play shooter games, with few exceptions (such as the Witcher).
After decades of gaming I can no longer stare at a gun bounce up and down for hours on end and remain entertained.
Pew pew pew
You are right: third-person is more "emmersive;" it merges you away from the avatar.
It's objective. "Immersion" means to be merged inside of something. In first-person, you are literally merged inside of the avatar. If you say that third-person is more immersive or equally as immersive, you are subjectively denying reality. You can point out that first-person has problems or that third-person works around a problem with first-person, but it doesn't change the fact that first-person is objectively more immersive. Your subjective experience does not change objective reality.
They still need to make the third-person animations for the other Navii.
First-person gives players better control of the avatar, and that is also objective.
The reason you're able to say that VR would be most immersive is because you can see that first-person is objectively more immersive. Personal bias can prevent you from being immersed into the world, story, or whatever, but that is all subjective.
Let me get the popcorn…I’m diving in now.
@@GmoneyMozart wait that's it? I was looking forward to another Jay vs Gmoney debate
An average Joe created a FP mod for Wildlands that swaps back and forth. Stands to reason a huge developer could implement it into the game and satisfy all.
Ubisoft did great with the Original Avatar game it was 3rd person you can explore the world in any ways on foot or vehicle be it land air and sea wasnt a big world but was decently sized during its time and whats cool you can also choose your side RDA or the Navi and each faction had their own story from both sides I would love Ubisoft to remake that one
Someone finally said it
you know I would ;)
Tbh, the just cause games are really good for immersion and there is a very good reason why those games are in third person.
100%!!!!! Immersion comes from the world around the player, the environments and interacting with them, not what view point the game is played in. I've been playing Metal Gear Solid V this weekend, I was highly immersed in Afghanistan as Big Boss climbing up mountains, running across the desert and crawling through streams and mud. I felt anxiety lying still in bushes hoping the enemy didn't see a leg sticking out etc. You don't get that in FPS. You can't see if your body is properly hidden, if a leg, backpack or gun barrel is sticking to far out from cover. I prefer to see my character and the animations the dev team crafted. Certain games just shouldn't be FPS. Especially video game adaptions on ICONIC characters and IP's. Avatar should have been 3rd person so we can see our character running through the woods of Pandora, parkouring over obstacles, swinging from tree to tree, leaping over ravines, diving off the floating mountains, stealth attacking the robomechs etc! We should be able to see the size difference from us to regular humans. Not to mention the Navi are skilled fighters and hunters, they aren't just relegated to bow and arrows.
Same for the new Robocop game! They have so many cutscenes in the game with dialogue choices so the player can see Robocop, which could have been cut back had they just made the game 3rd person so we can see the animations of Robocop walking, turning and shooting. Thats part of the fun of Robocop is seeing the shooting poses, bullets bouncing off his body, seeing the metal take damage but he is still moving forward and the mere size of him! Si disappointed in both these IP's that I was looking forward to.
The problem is that the developers for division cant even provide fluid movement for third person. I love the way how my agent aims in Division but that moron cant even crouch, go prone or other interesting things. He will always end up stuck in cover like a moron, or in random object. Meanwhile enemy AI can go prone, crouch and 101 different things. Breakpoint feels so amazing in third person in my opinion.
I love to see the gear of my character and all those small things you mentioned in the video.
lmfao I wonder if it was a technical issue. They would never admit it but I don't doubt it.
@@GmoneyMozart They are lazy. They think their stupid cover system is a next gen feature, when in reality, it is extremely punishing in a COVER BASED SHOOTER like division, to even stay in cover. Enemies on heroic don´t give damn about cover, they will just walk towards you and shred your armor into pieces in nanoseconds. Breaking line of sight does not work, cover to cover is suicidal, cant crouch... the developers don´t even know what they want from the player and Division has identity crisis.
I just saw this and saw your reply to my comment about this rant lol.
Theres no reason they atleast could of gave both.
Skyrim, fallout, hitman, gta, rdr, black one blood brothers whos a small studio of old ghost recon and r6 devs but all have the option to play in first person and third person.
Immersion isn't limited to perspective. It's about design. Third Person cannot fail in expression. Where first can be lazy. First-person CAN be extremely immersive. I love flying or driving in the first person. On foot, I prefer the third person. However one of the most immersive games I've played was Project Zomboid. It looks like PS2 sims, but beyond the surface level, the game is complex, deep with it's mechanics. When I boarded up a home made it my base, and slowly it felt like a real home. The way I organized and decorated it, the way I set up defenses.
RDR2 is a fantastic third-person game, but with an FOV mod it's a fantastic first-person game as well. Throw a VR headset on and god damn. Perspectives matter but I think ultimately it comes down to design. Third person cannot compromise, first can. That's why first-person games tend to fail at being immersive. Take Ready or Not, I found that to be extremely immersive.
Great argument though. I agree with you, these are what I feel makes a game immersive, and what I think the reason third often more immersive than first. In a perfect world, we'd get both because I love when games have bothl
Edit: Another add I have to bring in. Third person does DOF much better than FP games. When you see in the avatar clip where he raises his hands to the animal, the realistic human vision would create a blur on the hands because you're focusing on the animal. So when I see things like that it's noticeably less immersive. In gameplay I prefer DOF off, because there is enough movement as to not notice.
To see your character in star wars jedi survivor crushing droids with the force and his movements concentrating on it, to seeing your character suffer from bullet wounds in breakpoint, those things make it immersive. First person is for simulation. Third person is for immersion. I agree with you whole heartedly! P.S. More pew pews please!
G man loves 3rd person so much, he has his s*x in 3rd person so he can watch to see all the motion...JK
It's subjective really, there can be a argument either way. I think the outcry mostly comes from the first game being 3rd person.
True, it is false to assume 1st=immersion, but it's also not true to just assume 1st= corner cutting. The campaign of MW2019 packs as many interactive event trigger as the entire OG MW just in the Clean House mission, and that's not accounting for all the mocap performance for NPCs and all the detail on the guns and animation.
3rd person games can cut corners, too. The gun animation and detail usually won't be as great, and that's why animations GR: Frontline looked cheap. Ubi just took animations from Breakpoint and made the bare minimum effort to shoehorn them in a 1st person game.
Also parkour and crazy movements can work well in 1st, just look at Dying Light and Dishonored.
At the end of the day it's an artistic choice, and not a differentiator of quality and effort. 1st vs 3rd is just another rabbit hole like Xbox vs PS. As long as a game is made well, 1st or 3rd should not be relevant beyond personal preferences.
I def have sex in third person bro. Best way to bang!
My man !!! I’m here to back u up !! 3rd person all the way !! Beats me to see the " leaders " of this industry; mimicking, copying & force feeding us all the gimmicks of the movies industry!! ( cinematic sequences, scripted events & actions , QTE’s … hell ; even leaving the risk of creating new ip’s or new mechanics & ways of gameplay. Basically formulaic generic low quality products ) but on the other hand: they wanna STRIP THE ESSENCE OF THE MOVIE INDUSTRY OUT OF THE GAMING INDUSTRY; which is wide screen displaying a character interacting with his world & environment!!??? Immersion as you said it best : is subjective…. BUT … if I had to watch RAMBO, BRUCE LEE & so many other movies through that bullshit argument; I would’ve been long gone outta that bubble !! Aka immersion breaking nonsense!! Mind you : the minuscule percentage of movies that tried that FPS approach KEPT IT UNDER 1% …. Throughout the history of movies !! Keep preaching so they stop reaching!! 🙏🏾
Depends on the type of game really, for first person immersion you should be able to freelook around you, have stances for weapons, etc; works for tactical shooters but not for this game, as it would've been better in third person
Arma has the best first person imo where you can look around while still moving forward.
@@GmoneyMozart yeah i play Antistasi and do Zeus ops with a group and yes it's first person is the most immersive i've played
Prefer third
Only true bad games lack third person. All the grandiose games ive played in my life CANT HELP but have a third person mode. They need it to develop the game properly. Its literally evidence of a good game. If theres no third person mode at all anywhere. Its factually going to be a bad shallow lazy game. And most of the time in grandiose games that dont have a third perosn mode, u can usually enable that third person mode using some sort of console commands or something because good games usually have it.
Exactly. All the best games are third person games. Just facts really.
amen@@GmoneyMozart
Hmm I'm a first person guy but in this case Avatar being third person should've been a no-brainer. A good example is that Assassin's Creed is more immersive than Far Cry.
Perhaps the real reason is that they don't want comparisons with Horizon Forbidden West/Zero Dawn, can't meet those expectations.
Why create a custom character if you cant see yourself wearing what you created
yea the immersion excuse is getting old, the gameplay makes it immersive not the point of view, unless we are compairing 3rd person with first person VR.
I can understand, that when we get to the point where we are in virtual reality, you are the avatar, and you can move you weapon accordingly, and it won’t be so stuff and generic like most fps are imo, but we are still staring at a screen at the end of the day and I want to see my character. The moves and abilities and cosmetics, all of it.
Bruh, I'm still playing Break Point. 3rd person all that way, 2023 for sake, give us the option at least..
I don't find first person immersive at all. I find it very restrictive. It feels like I'm playing with horse blinders on with little to no situational awareness. I can only play an FPS for about an hour before I get bored and move on. Avatar is an automatic no buy for me sadly.
Just another excuse to launch another far cry with the avatar skin! Ubisoft being Ubisoft... Nothing new to see here boys!
There may be a day when first person technology is so realistic it actually feels like yourself, but it's nowhere near that yet. First person in games looks so fake and out of body, like you're just floating.
Exactly. I don’t see the appeal anymore at this stage in gaming.
all of the mo-cap will be wasted on 1st person view
It’s laziness and time saving. Yoooooooooooooooooo
I’ve been saying this for SOOOOO LONGGG!!!! They’re soo lazy when it comes to animations; they know that shit is real work when it comes to 3rd person and literally cut the corner for FPP🤦🏽♂️when I fist heard the news about this game I was ecstatic.. I couldn’t believe it!! Then found out it was FPP I immediately knew I would never buy it.. I remember playing ghost recon, socom, metal gear solid had me shaking in my boots as a youngin, uncharted felt like it was on another level when it came to immersion n cutscenes for me; n don’t get me started on where it all started lol fuckin GTA like cmon you mean to tell me gta isn’t on another level right now at immersion n guess what it’s 3rd person and FPP😂😂🤦🏽♂️🥴all n all I understand it from a pvp standpoint due to 3rd person peeking around corner; they’d have to figure out a counter for that.. but other than that some of these single player IPs def should be 3rd person hell even coop with a friend on avatar wouldn’t destroy me immersion😂🤷🏽♂️division did very well with this with the darkzone pvp and outside pve.. take that aspect on a big ass map or world😅🤷🏽♂️.. and we need a talk on these brain dead ass Ai lol I mean atp Put zombies in every game if you wanna add bots to a pvp game🙃 at least they won’t break my immersion cause the dam zombies already brain dead as they should be 😂😂😂😂
Exactly bro! I too was very exited for this game but then when they said it was first person I was disappointed. And now seeing the gameplay I’m just not interested. The game would have been much better in third person and this pretend narrative that they chose first because it’s more immersive is just something I don’t believe. It’s def about not wanting or being able to create a great 3rd person avatar game.
I like 3rd person. I like to see the gear