Why no third person view?

[hawkhill]

Just started playing this game, and it has some stunning visuals.
It's a beauty to witness in first person, but sometimes I want to experience this game in third person.

Why is there no option? The in-depth visual customization made me think I'd be able to look at my character, but no. I don't know how often I'll be able to see my character's face after making all those precise adjustments to the face.

They even give you an idle camera view, so they KNEW you'd want to see your character more often, yet they wouldn't give a third person view for gameplay?

What's the point of carefully making all that customizing and adjusting only to have my only views for it be an uncontrollable camera that's a little too far away to get a good look at my face and such?

[Half-Vampire]

This is not Bethesda game, most game company focus on either 1st person or 3rd person, not both, easier that way. But still would be nice if there is a vanity camera so we can look at our character tho.

[hawkhill]

Originally posted by Half-Vampire:

This is not Bethesda game, most game company focus on either 1st person or 3rd person, not both, easier that way. But still would be nice if there is a vanity camera so we can look at our character tho.

I know it's not Bethesda, but the creators/devs behind this game wanted it to be like their best work from Fallout so much.
Yet they didn't think about being able to switch perspectives, even though they actually did with the idle camera? It's not like they'd be sued for having a third person mode.

[Dex]

> Why no third person view?

Because the developers didn't want one.

[Jurassic Fart 1]

Well, I'm not complaining that there's no third-person view, but, considering that, isn't it rather stupid to waste time and effort and code on something that...you can't friggin' see? Not exactly what you'd call sound development strategy to lower cost and maximize profit. I mean, really: Why waste labor (man-hours) on non-appreciable cosmetics?

(just started playing) Are there even mirrors that the playing character can admire herself in?

[hawkhill]

Originally posted by Gecko:

> Why no third person view?

Because the developers didn't want one.

I mean why. It's clear that the devs wanted a third person mode. Otherwise they wouldn't let you customize yourself so much, and give you an idle camera.
My best guess is that they wanted to have one, but they couldn't due to the size of rooms would make it hard for the camera to not get obstructed by your character.

[Homer Morisson]

Because gameplay-wise this is pretty much an egoshooter, not a cover shooter, and those work best in 1st person.

While cover shooters do indeed work better in 3rd, egoshooters suck in 3rd, so why bother.
And since Bethesda/Skyrim was brought up:

Personally, in Skyrim, I always play in 1st person view, due to, once again, especially ranged combat working that much better and feeling that much more immersive in 1st over 3rd.

[Jurassic Fart 1]

Originally posted by hawkhill:

It's clear that the devs wanted a third person mode.

Ummm...no, it's not clear, de lo contrarion, señor—¡qué[DELETED]! These guys didn't learn coding from Dummies books out of Crackerjacks boxes—most of them actually benefited from university educations, ergo, if they wanted to give players the option of selecting third-person viewpoint in the game, they would have given them the option.

And the—this is really amusing!—idea that "the camera" took up "too much room," that the rooms were too small for "the camera" to fit...wow. It's hilarious. The so-called camera is perfectly capable of pulling back THREE FEET, which is all that's really required for a close-in third-person view...they simply chose—for whatever reason—not to code that viewpoint option. A lot of games DO have it coded in, and in confining spaces as well, like the Borderlands games, for instance. There, because they coded it in this way, because they WANTED to, they implemented a variable aspect third-person view, so that, depending upon how much you rolled the scroll wheel of your mouse, you could enjoy an over-the-shoulder three-foot viewing aspect, or ten feet back, viewing the whole backside—or all of the front, if you dragged the mouse around.

If they WANTED to, they would have done it. There was NOTHING stopping them from doing that other than their DESIRES. Even if the character was in a space as tightly-confining as a telephone booth, an over-the-shoulder third-person view was still technically possible.

I just didn't understand why they went through the trouble of allowing players to customize appearance unless...they were going to code for it in the beginning, but changed their minds later in development. ...and developers HAVE been known to alter initial development plans. That's the only way the customization makes any sense at all, because if they never ever intended to code in third-person from the beginning, then they wouldn't have bothered with customization at all.

[Jurassic Fart 1]

Ah, Homer? You have mixed up the definitions for cover versus ego shooters. Ego shooters are first person, and cover shooters are third, the nomenclature originating from the type of shooting being done, like from behind or under cover, or stand out in the open and blast away I'm-friggin'-bulletproof ego.

[hawkhill]

Originally posted by Jurassic Fart 1:

Originally posted by hawkhill:

It's clear that the devs wanted a third person mode.

Ummm...no, it's not clear, de lo contrarion, señor—¡qué[DELETED]! These guys didn't learn coding from Dummies books out of Crackerjacks boxes—most of them actually benefited from university educations, ergo, if they wanted to give players the option of selecting third-person viewpoint in the game, they would have given them the option.

And the—this is really amusing!—idea that "the camera" took up "too much room," that the rooms were too small for "the camera" to fit...wow. It's hilarious. The so-called camera is perfectly capable of pulling back THREE FEET, which is all that's really required for a close-in third-person view...they simply chose—for whatever reason—not to code that viewpoint option. A lot of games DO have it coded in, and in confining spaces as well, like the Borderlands games, for instance. There, because they coded it in this way, because they WANTED to, they implemented a variable aspect third-person view, so that, depending upon how much you rolled the scroll wheel of your mouse, you could enjoy an over-the-shoulder three-foot viewing aspect, or ten feet back, viewing the whole backside—or all of the front, if you dragged the mouse around.

If they WANTED to, they would have done it. There was NOTHING stopping them from doing that other than their DESIRES. Even if the character was in a space as tightly-confining as a telephone booth, an over-the-shoulder third-person view was still technically possible.

I just didn't understand why they went through the trouble of allowing players to customize appearance unless...they were going to code for it in the beginning, but changed their minds later in development. ...and developers HAVE been known to alter initial development plans. That's the only way the customization makes any sense at all, because if they never ever intended to code in third-person from the beginning, then they wouldn't have bothered with customization at all.

Chill out dude. I'm just asking.
What's you're idea why they didn't have third person? You say they wanted to not have it, but what changed their minds?
Why leaving in customization if you can barely see it?
That's what I was trying to ask from the very beginning, but you just said "they wanted to".
If you don't know why they changed their minds, then neither of us know the reason for their weird choice.

[Jurassic Fart 1]

So...what you're saying is—I'm just trying to understand your point—you're just as stupid as I am for asking? If you're willing to plead guiltily, then I'm big enough to join your ranks, 'cause I'm sure that we aren't the only two such Silly Billys.

And I am sorry if you perceived that I was being a smart-ass or snotty. I'm not mean, just a bit deficient in social skills.

[hawkhill]

Originally posted by Jurassic Fart 1:

So...what you're saying is—I'm just trying to understand your point—you're just as stupid as I am for asking? If you're willing to plead guiltily, then I'm big enough to join your ranks, 'cause I'm sure that we aren't the only two such Silly Billys.

I was just asking a question, and you didn't know anymore than I did, yet it felt like you were trying to argue that "they wanted to" was the answer to the question I was asking, when my question was "why did they want to?"

[Homer Morisson]

Originally posted by Jurassic Fart 1:

Ah, Homer? You have mixed up the definitions for cover versus ego shooters. Ego shooters are first person, and cover shooters are third, the nomenclature originating from the type of shooting being done, like from behind or under cover, or stand out in the open and blast away I'm-friggin'-bulletproof ego.

No I haven't, "those" clearly refers to ego, not cover, as denoted by the use of commas.
You know, grammar?

Learn it.

[Locklave]

Originally posted by Half-Vampire:

This is not Bethesda game, most game company focus on either 1st person or 3rd person, not both, easier that way. But still would be nice if there is a vanity camera so we can look at our character tho.

They ran out of time developing it is the actual reason, it's the reason several things are missing. Not because it's not Bethesda...

[K►]

maybe the devs are too incompetent making a 3rd person game. almost going to buy this actually, luckily i did some research

[The Inept European]

You can see yourself and your gear in the Inventory screen. If that helps.