Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
There's nothing "original" about first person.
Hell, even immersive is extremely debatable.
I don't personally find first person more immersive than third at all, quite the opposite.
You always have to gaslight yourselves into thinking your opinions and preferences are not so much opinions and preferences but objectives facts.
Also, I can guarantee they only did first person in the first game because it's simply far easier and far less costly to do than third.
But yes, I very much do agree that if it doesn't, it should have a first person option.
But i don't like 3rd person shooters and therefore: no 1st person view no purchase!
I really don't understand why so many people want to run after themselves... ;-)
Now it's a hard pass.
First game did it correctly, and the fact this is a sequel should've continued how the first game played.
Oh well, million other games to play I guess.