First person mode?

[shadowsite]

So I played the beta.
Is there no First person mode like in the main game?
All I found was that weird, not fun 3rd person mode in which the controls are REALLY not good.
I don't want have a WW2 FPS game, but I would like to have a proper first person view of the carnage unfolding infront of me, while being able to change the outcome of the battle with my actions.

[M4F10S0]

Maybe in future.

[⇓S'lakk⇓]

Maybe in a future mod.. But the devs have no plan to add this into the game.

[Welkon]

It's based off Men of War games.

[Yggdrasil]

Originally posted by shadowsite:

So I played the beta.
Is there no First person mode like in the main game?
All I found was that weird, not fun 3rd person mode in which the controls are REALLY not good.
I don't want have a WW2 FPS game, but I would like to have a proper first person view of the carnage unfolding infront of me, while being able to change the outcome of the battle with my actions.

Thanks for letting me know it's not in the Gates of Hell. I was going to buy the base game in anticipation of sometimes dipping into FP in Gates of Hell. But now that I know GoH won't have this feature, I won't be wasting my money on it.

[soupbun]

Originally posted by Yggdrasil:

Originally posted by shadowsite:

So I played the beta.
Is there no First person mode like in the main game?
All I found was that weird, not fun 3rd person mode in which the controls are REALLY not good.
I don't want have a WW2 FPS game, but I would like to have a proper first person view of the carnage unfolding infront of me, while being able to change the outcome of the battle with my actions.

Thanks for letting me know it's not in the Gates of Hell. I was going to buy the base game in anticipation of sometimes dipping into FP in Gates of Hell. But now that I know GoH won't have this feature, I won't be wasting my money on it.

Just because a game doesn't have first-person view means that you'll drop it and never think about playing it? And by the way, read development updates 88 and 89.

[shadowsite]

Originally posted by soupbun:

Originally posted by Yggdrasil:

Thanks for letting me know it's not in the Gates of Hell. I was going to buy the base game in anticipation of sometimes dipping into FP in Gates of Hell. But now that I know GoH won't have this feature, I won't be wasting my money on it.

Just because a game doesn't have first-person view means that you'll drop it and never think about playing it? And by the way, read development updates 88 and 89.

I can absolutely understand his point.
One of the biggest reasons I bought the call to arms base game was to actually feel like I am a part of the action and that I can change the outcome of an engagement by "doing it myself".
Also one of the biggest immersions was the fact that it was in first person and seeing your sqaud getting shot.

After playing the beta and seeing this janky 3rd person perspective when taking control, I just can't recommend it to someone who is looking for the same feeling and immersion the base game gives you.

Also I read the dev notes: what exactly do you mean by refering to it?

[Major Major]

Im so happy that it doesnt have this direct control/fps. Feels more strategic or something, idk i never found it fit in the game this direct control.

[Darth Revan]

Originally posted by MrNobody:

Im so happy that it doesnt have this direct control/fps. Feels more strategic or something, idk i never found it fit in the game this direct control.

direct control is still in the game, just limited to the normal direct control games with this engine have since forever and to 3rd person.

[soupbun]

Originally posted by shadowsite:

Originally posted by soupbun:

Just because a game doesn't have first-person view means that you'll drop it and never think about playing it? And by the way, read development updates 88 and 89.

I can absolutely understand his point.
One of the biggest reasons I bought the call to arms base game was to actually feel like I am a part of the action and that I can change the outcome of an engagement by "doing it myself".
Also one of the biggest immersions was the fact that it was in first person and seeing your sqaud getting shot.

After playing the beta and seeing this janky 3rd person perspective when taking control, I just can't recommend it to someone who is looking for the same feeling and immersion the base game gives you.

Also I read the dev notes: what exactly do you mean by refering to it?

What I mean is that this game is DLC in name ONLY. They had to market it as a DLC for Call to Arms as part of their new agreement with Digitalmindsoft so they could actually make this game. They got screwed over by the previous publisher. GOH is a completely separate game from CTA despite the tag. So, it will NOT include some of CTA's features because it is a totally separate game from CTA and as such needs to be treated as such because people are complaining about "no first-person view." Though, BWS should put a disclaimer in the store page to help clear things up.(Also, I meant to read development updates 89 and 90, not 88 and 89. Sorry)

[SpeedWolf]

I personally do not like the first person mode it is very clunky in Call to Arms, regardless is just more options. So I'm not against it if it's implemented. as the men of War series and spin-off give you so much option I can just choose to ignore it.

There's nothing wrong with more options,

[Yggdrasil]

I was watching a YouTube video on Gates of Hell and noticed the player could get a visual on an enemy tank and fire at it as though in the gunner or captain's position of a friendly tank. Is this right? I just think it would be fun now and then to do so.

[wildrivers]

Try E key and T key

[wildrivers]

Get gun sights like in tank aim at tanks what ever about want to Blown up

[Yggdrasil]

Originally posted by wildrivers2011:

Try E key and T key

Cool. Thanks!

[no1kittyfAn!]

No First Person is a serious mistake. Poor effort. Im glad I came across this simple fact cos its a deal breaker for me. Part of what makes CTA unique from the rest is this. Definitely a backward step.