Isometric vs 3d person vs first person view

[Mudran]

I guess devs make decision about this based on their own preferences, but recently I realized that I prefer different views in different games. It sounds obvious, but it doesn't always match released games - like Vampire the Masquarade 2, Outer worlds etc. It is different for different kind of players, so I should get over it if they decide differently.

 

I thought I will never like isometric view, but when I saw Desperados III gameplay, it is probably that kind of game, where I would prefer it. So I started to think about different isometric games made by Obsidian and others and I guess the difference is:

I don't like flat isometric levels with only combat, because it feels clunky and boring for me and I prefer action combat.

I don't like adventure games in such levels, because it is not immersive and I require immersivity if it should have heavy dialogues - to feel like "in character". So it is very frustrating if the only games with a lot of dialogues are only isometric for some reason.

I prefer if it does have heavy mechanical gameplay, with icons with objectives like on a map and it is more vertical, stealthy - like a very detailed city, not a lot of small dungeons - like it was in Seven the Days long gone or Shadow tactics. And I don't like if I have to search for something.

So I guess it is my way of RPG strategic games without heavy strategy.

 

I prefer 3rd person view when it is roleplaying a character with different background story, because it is all about that character, so I want to see that character, and also in 3rd person I can see better surrounding - to feel immersed in the world.

 

And first person - I still don't like that, but I guess it is good for accuracy or when you really need to see a lot of details before you, but in an open world it is frustrating for me. So I prefer first person view in dungeons of Rage 1, where it is all about shooting mechanics and fast aiming and reactions and you need that accuracy. And you don't need to look around that much, and it is not about playing some character.

 

I hope finances are not the only reason for such decisions. On the other hand there are always players who are fond of that chosen view, so I guess it doesn't matter.

But I still have the feeling that if those 2 new RPG games would be 3rd person it would be more preferred by RPG players. But who knows. I have the feeling from trailers that Outerworlds are trying to be Borderlands and they will never be that and question if they will be able to combine it well. But a lot of games are trying to be copy of something successful, so I guess it is tempting to play safe.

[Yvendel]

first person view is still the best for inmersion, you live in that world, more than any other view posible. I love being able to play rpgs in 1 person view, because I wanna live the world, not see my char's ass, mainly. Protagonist turns out to be the game and world itself, not the guy you are playin with.

 

Iso is for strategic games clearly and works the best with it, while 3 person is for action and vanity.

 

More than taste its all about which type of game you want to make/play.

[Mudran]

I'm aware of a lot of players (a lot of those are used to first person view from old games) see first person view as immersive and I can agree with that is possible, but I wish it wouldn't be used as another agenda which leads to only one goal - preventing some players playing games they would enjoy otherwise, because who would enjoy this mainly are RP players and some players hate them. well, atleast I will have time to continue with my own learning...

 

So I can add - first person view for playing myself=immersed in the world around, third person view for playing some other character.

 

But anyway this post wasn't meant to be about some agenda, but about how I was surprised that some sort of isometric games can be interesting for me if there is gameplay supporting /made for that view and not just tactical combat. Also I don't care that much about characters there, because there is not much of details.

And most of offered RPG games are based on the opposite. A lot of players still do enjoy it - I guess they have bigger imagination than me, so this is just a thought, not like the right thing to do.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Mudran

[tekmage]

@mudran I think it is all a matter of perspective and individual preferences on what is actually immersive. I personally don't feel the first person perspective to be exclusively the most immersive. some of the most immersive games have some things in common. A good story to tell , a rich setting full of history and/ or a role to play that is interesting to fill. Witcher 3, Fire Emblem Path of Radiance and Knights of the Old Republic RPG comes to mind.

[Mudran]

Sometimes it is scary how people are different. And they don't believe what is important for the other person and sometimes it is misused, so I wish simply there would be many options. You would say it is matter of money, but sometimes even Ubisoft don't have it and they can afford it for sure.

 

But back to the topic.

I guess some players play themselves in FP and imagine in their heads that they play someone.

in Isometric games they imagine their groups of adventurers walking around, having tactical combat or builds.

I guess players like me or maybe who are not really gamers they have this reality FOV inside of their heads and if the game doesn't match that, it is frustrating.

 

But the problem with 3rd person view is that it requires also very good fitting character.

For example Pyranha Bites have their german dude with his low voice and for some players it was a problem, for me it was good enough.

On the other hand Two worlds or Divinity 3rd person game had very ordinary villagers or I don't know how to describe it (the males atleast) and I couldn't enjoy those games anyway.

But still old MMOs can do it, and most of new games cannot. The movement is always too heavy or things like that.

 

Also the first Divinity Original Sin had weird characters, but I guess it was good enough for isometric view. But with more of money they really made so many really cool characters in Divinity 2 original sin...

Also Wasteland 2 had really good character creation with backgrounds for each character for the party, they had indians even - I always wonder why this cannot be in 3rd person view. Because Bethesda does have a lot of options, but no background option, even if it would be just a text.

I wish some features would be brought into 3rd person view. That there would be a game, which would be really RPG - meaning the original translation of this: roleplaying games - not leveling up games and gear... Because true RPG is actually against levels.

Edited August 31, 2019 by Thandal

[Thandal]

I happen to dislike the first-person view. I find it too limiting. Literally, I find the view too limiting. "Situational Awareness" was drilled into me (by my Drill Sergeant) a long time ago, and I get claustrophobic when I feel like I can't see what's going on around me.

 

I like both the group isometric and the third-person views, especially when the game allows customization of the player's character. I seldom play games that use the first-person view at all, and generally don't like them much when I do.

[Oblivionaddicted]

It all depends of the kind of game and what you do. The first person view is largely more covenient when you use fire weapons, the 3rd person view is more convenient when you need to do acrobatics or hand to hand fight. The isometric view looks more like an ancestor of the real 3D than anything else to me.

 

These are just examples, every view has its pros and cons. Globally speaking it's always better when you can toggle between the points of view.

[NikiRandom]

I like both third and first person, it depends on the game really. A good game is a good game etc.

One of my all time favourites, the Thief series, is first person and I love it. I do find that I generally play Skyrim in third person though.

Isometric I find a bit claustrophobic. I absloutely love Dungeon Seige, but after playing it with a mod that gives free vertical camera movement but then breaks the game, I've found it hard to go back to playing it vanilla : )

[Mudran]

I downloaded Seven: the days long gone demo and tried it - it does have strange hybrid - camera is isometric, but you control the character with mouse, and I'm not sure it works well for me. I'm not sure if I feel comfortable with restriction from the character point - that I cannot look up if I want to see more, and at the same time I cannot look around with tactical camera (or I didn't find it), so I feel too much restricted with this combination - like the game is not taking the best from isometric view or the best from moving directly your character. Sadly it looks great otherwise - It is voiced, the background is interesting, and yes - as usually with small games - they are more annoying because they are not that much polished, but they also add some kind of "challenge" to make you feel even better - so you cannot save it manually. And because I'm more action person and I don't think forward every step I usually make mistakes, so such games without saves can be more frustrating for me.

So I will see if Desperados III will make me want to play isometric games (aside from Divinity II OS and Dungeon Seige - I have no idea why I played that game, only that I loved Dryad race and gathering their armors)

Edited September 26, 2019 by Mudran

[Mudran]

I guess I'm turning this into article instead of discussion again - here is another comparison:

I saw some video about recent Ghost recon breakpoint where the author was complaining about 3rd person view, how bad it is for clear shooting view, flexibility and so on.

The problem is that animations will always hinder flexibility, because there is longer process from noticing something into doing it. But isn't it more natural with animations? You shouldn't be that fast in reality anyway.

Clear view is bigger problem and the only solution would I guess really be to have both view options, but for some reason it is not that common to have it - Bethesda is one of the few who didn't streamline this feature for some reason.

I have heard this argument all the time - it is how the Ubisoft franchises are different, they cannot change it. But is it right to have franchises differences based mainly on camera view? Shouldn't be there some other ones?

like survival depth, squadron gameplay, singleplayer, covershooter, lootershooter, crazy vilians - like in Farcry and so on? Or would it make the game really that worse? If some players really cannot play in 3rd person, or it is very difficult for them and the opposite - is that reason serious enough not to allow it? I mean worse game with unsupported view - for someone used to it - is combined together the same as - camera the player dislike with game centered and polished around it does sound almost the same, only for the player it has more negative feeling connected to it.

 

EDIT:

I guess it can damage reputation of the game if it will have less supported camera view and it will look worse - I can see it all the time how biased some players are, how they don't care about facts - like someone gave Vampyr on GOG bad rating because he didn't like the game on PS4 graphics - it doesn't make sense, but players do it anyway.

Edited October 4, 2019 by Mudran