Solution to 1st person view deficiencies (not being able to quickly look around):

Build in small screens (that can be moved to wherever the player wants them to appear on screen... if he wants them to appear at all) that show side views (after all, even when you''re looking straight ahead, you can still see movement from both sides... not clearly, but you can see something... to simulate this, make side view foggier, or just small enough not to give too much detail).

Sample setup:

Full screen = 1st person view.
Small screen at bottom left corner = foggy left side view
Small screen at bottom right corner = foggy right side view

When player turns character''s head to the left to focus on a movement he saw on his small screen, the small screen in bottom right corner will now show what''s ahead of the player and the small screen in bottom left corner will now show what''s behind the player.

With a setup like this, the player will have a clear view in front of him (as any human being has) but still has some indication of what''s going on around him (except what''s going on behind him... if the character is non-human, perhaps he can have eyes in the back, but that''s another topic).

I agree with the point of letting the player choose in the end, but different RPGs may lend themselves more to a particular view point. Take (off of the top of my head) Ultima Underworld or a similar game. This game was first person, and was rightly done so since you (the player) defined who your character was. In games like Final Fantasy where you control your a character with a personality, history, and outlook on things that may be different from yours, 3rd person really works best since you''re following someone who you''re not.

I didn''t like any of the 1st person RPGs... I think that in RPGs, the FP perspective does NOT create atmosphere, it just makes you feel lost and confused in some places. When I play an RPG, I need the optimal overview of all things. I have to see all the characters in my party and all enemies at a time. Of course, that is not 100% realistic, but what game is?

My favourite RPGs were also the good old 2d birds-eye games (especially these on the SNES). That was really fun. But I imagine that today''s RPGs should focus on 3D... I think it would be great to have a 3D engine but limit the view on a birds-eye perspective... You could also make a kind of intelligent camera system, smarter than the one in Vampire, which was a good RPG IMO.

But let''s face it: Why were these "old school" RPGs that great? Because they were well designed and made really fun. Today''s RPGs should consider both aspects: A good game design AND nice graphics.

I''d say 3rd person with a combo or 2d 3d aspects. Every fully 3d RPG that I have played has has some camera issues. 3d could work effectively given better camera placement I suppose. 1st person RPG tend to give characters less personality IMO

I think that when you discard the 1st person view altogether, you may lose a certain aspect of paranoid atmosphere. Many things can be accomplished from a 3rd person view, but if you''re in danger, the ''tunnel vision'' effect of 1st person veiws can really boost that ''I''m buggered!'' feeling.

for game where the player defines his/her own character I find that (if possible) a third person view will accentuate the feeling of cool, because you made up this character in your head and then brought him/her to life and now you get to see just how cool he/she really looks beating up the trash in the dungeons. I also think that semi-transparent walls are a cool effect.


George D. Filiotis

But as far as paranoia goes for 3P, it's possible (I won't say it's easy) to prgrom your engine so that you only see what your character can see. You could also work it so that the parts of the map that you've seen before but cannot see now are viewable in grayscale tones. so you'd have a 180-degree arc infront of your character which is in collour and pleasantly viewable, and behind you would be the black/white rendition of the tunnel you came from.

I can sense that this method may become bogged down if the POV is too far from the character, but it would be an elegant solution as long as the currently viewable terrain is much brighter than the previously seen terrain.

The real prevention is the dificulty involved in writing such a complicated raycasting engine.

EDIT: sorry about the double post

George D. Filiotis

Edited by - symphonic on October 20, 2001 6:44:35 PM

quote: Original post by Symphonic
But as far as paranoia goes for 3P, it''s possible (I won''t say it''s easy) to prgrom your engine so that you only see what your character can see. You could also work it so that the parts of the map that you''ve seen before but cannot see now are viewable in grayscale tones. so you''d have a 180-degree arc infront of your character which is in collour and pleasantly viewable, and behind you would be the black/white rendition of the tunnel you came from.

funny you should mention that... i am currently working on an RPG that does that because you can only see 15x15 tiles at a time onscreen, and the way i did the field-of-view coding, it still renders very quickly. i use the same thing for the lighting...
still, i''d prefer a first-person view... it makes the world more engrossing, and it changes the game from "click on this guy to attack him or cast a spell" to wandering in a realistic world. it takes a LOT more work though, otherwise i''d be programming one right now ... also, puzzles in the game could be more realistic, as the world as a whole would be more realistic. of course combat would be harder, and you could be snuck up on (instead of the game informing you that you were snuck-up on, and letting the baddies hit you twice before your menu pops up)... but it would be more fun too.

--- krez (krezisback@aol.com)

personally i prefer 1st, other than that it pretty much depends on the kind of RPG you´re doing.

Does it matter? Couldn''t with DirectX simply change the camera angle to satisfy the user?

I find the tunnel vision thing in 1st person to be too limiting. Yes it gives you the chars perspective but its still not convincing. IMO what''s missing in 1st person is peripheral vision. You know that blurry edge your aware of but not focused on. If a 1st person game had peripheral aspects to it it might be more engrossing for me, specially if it was a suspense/horror game. Until then I''ll stick with 3rd person. Just my personal taste.