Well I guess the thread is redundant then and should be moved to off topicOriginally Posted by Celani
Well I guess the thread is redundant then and should be moved to off topic
Joust in RL, Homeopath, Nutritionist and Dance Flamenco and Salsa
me too since it's not going anywhere...
Personally I prefer the 3rd person, and especially for M&B. 1st person feels too choppy, which I dont like very much. I would prefer being able to choose between both, im sure that 1st person players will just end up complaining that I can use 3rd to my advantage, but thats their own fault.
Exactly Zhulhar65. I have never said I will not play it. I am just expressing my opinion in the hope that maybe some day we will see a game like what I want or even have these devs add it at a later date.
If people do not like it they generally try to shut it down. Nothing new really
"The King is dead, long live the King"
"A horse! a horse! my kingdom for a horse!"
Can I just say in response to those making the case that a first-person viewpoint is less realistic, whatever the truth in that or lack thereof, the reason people want first-person isn't realism but rather immersion which is an altogether much more important thing in a game.
At the end of the day the devs decide what view to put in, some people want 1st person others 3rd either way one is being put in game and if the devs have time/think its important enough they might add the other choice in.
Point is stop arguing over whats better and wait till the game is out, you can't say what is better when you haven't used it/seen it in game.
Well on that basis you may as well shut down all discussion. What the devs have decided to put in or not doesn't invalidate discussion about the relative merits of any other possibility. If it does for you just avoid entering the thread.
I'm not saying this thread is invalid, what I'm saying is in-game 3rd person might be better then 1st person. Or 1st might be better then 3rd person until the game is out and officially released no one can say what view would be better, more realistic, cooler ect ect, most peoples views are based on other games that use 1st or third person, I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong but even the people who took part in the alpha can't really say as they don't know what it will be like when there are more people playing.
Hopefully when the beta is out we can use more ranged weapons THEN people will be able to truly say what they prefer for this game as one of the views might be better then on other games similar to war of the roses
It would be nice to have the choice between 1st and 3rd person, everyone has a different play style. When i play Mount and blade as a infantry man or a cav i often sit in 3rd person
mostly because its i see more of the fight and enjoy the animation and the fighting more. when i chose to go an archer i walk around in 3rd person and go into 1st so i get less activity on my
screen and more concentraiton on the player i have chosen to send a arrow to..
i think having both is a nice thing to have so everyone can chose what they want
You can see from the videos that when you use a bow or ranged weapon that the perspective changes from 3rd to 1st person. If you like ranged weapons I think you will really enjoy WOTR system.
Joust in RL, Homeopath, Nutritionist and Dance Flamenco and Salsa
In the videos, when the people play as the longbowman you can see his head when he loads another arrow were as when the person is a crossbowman you can only see his hands and weapon, so I presume that as a crossbowman you go fully into first person although I could be wrong but as an archer you are still in third person, the camera is just very close to your characters head
This looks like it might be the deal when it comes to first-person medieval combat.It's a completely different type of game, but zenoclash was pretty awesome in that respect
It even has grappling and stuff.
Oh noes, did I just do that?
That game looks way better than war of the roses ty for showin meh
pffft it doesnt look bether.. besides this game reminds me of that source game age of chivalry
It's a follow on from Age of Chivalry.
Looks good to be fair, (and because I'm a grown up and wear big boy pants there won't be an issue with me buying both WotR and the new Chiv game.)
It does look pretty nice. Mite well get it too, a bit gory for my taste and of course its first person :-p. But it is a medieval combat game and you cant have too many of them! Not sure the historical accuracy people will like it much though, I'm sure I saw a guy with a chain mail hood getting cleanly decapitated at one point.
I wonder if there are people on there forums campaigning to have a optional third person perspective introduced? :-p
Last edited by WhichDoctor; 14-07-2012 at 18:37.
It's not worse than war of the roses for accuracy, and the animations all look way better. In the clip you can see a guy getting hit and starting to stumble, then the other guy bashes him with his weapon till he falls down, awesome. I'll probably buy both anyway.
WOW! Chivalry is looking SO much better now than it was just a couple of months ago. Will be getting both games regardless and I'll decide for myself which is better/my favorite.
Personally I don't think it's a case of which is better. I think both games offer a different experience of a multiplayer melee game. My real enjoyment when playing comes from PvP and I think it's good to see more of these skill based melee games coming out.
The biggest thing that bugs me in war of the roses is the bad animations, the blocking and swinging seem worse than the original mount and blade
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
