Which is a shame because I really like CD Project Red and Witcher 2 seems like a well designed game.

So to top things off yes I am aware of a first person mod but that's not really what I want to talk about. Does anyone esle find this sort of thing happening? Where you can't get into a game because of the prospective. Weather it's a great FPS that's not in third person or something like that. I'm not sure if it's because I've played so many FPS games but what a game isn't in first person I get no sense of scale and everything in the environment feels small. When things are in first person everything seems bigger and I feel ike I'm a part of it. It's an immersion thing.

sorry, i am unsure if you meant the first Witcher game or the second.

For the first TWEE, you have the ability to change the POV with the F1 - F2 - F3 keys. F3 is the closest to OTS play. I strongly, vehemently, foot stomping-ly advise learning to use the broader views. Especially in chapter 4, there are some unbelievable vistas for you when you look about. On the other hand, each person plays the way that feels most natural for them so hopefully, one of these POV's will be just right for you.

I never have played FPS, and i cannot help feeling closed in on those OTS views but that's my issue, not anyone else's...

IT's been ages since i opened TW2, so i just do not remember if there was a setting for the POV on that one, sorry.

My first instincts were to make fun of you for this, because it really is a shame. Then you posed the question about others whether it be 1st and not 3rd or vice versa, and I realized that I have a much harder time playing first person games, because of the incredibly narrowed POV. So I guess I can understand. It is too bad, though, since this is such an amazing game series. I really think you should go with first person mode or a mod and then maybe switch back and forth so you can adjust. I hope you stick with it, because missing out on a gaming experience such as this would be terrible.

I sometimes can't get into first-person games because I can't stand not having a flexible neck and peripheral vision. In some cases it even gives me a headache. But then of course there are a few FP games I really enjoy, like Thief.

I don't really understand why all FP games don't have a TP option, and vice versa. There's no need for any game to be exclusively one or the other. Switching back and forth is the best option of all, because it satisfies every preference and it allows the player much greater situational awareness.

Yeah it's always good to read things thoroughly. Also I'm going to play Witcher 2 because it's good I paid for it and I'm going to play it. But what I mean is losing myself in the games world is hard to do for that reason. When I play an FPP game I usually use a FOV of 110 I agree it should be optional, I mean just how hard is it to do.

Over the shoulder is probably the worst style with your character taking like 60% of the whole screen.

I kind of got to like first person because there are no obstacles (yourself) in the way of your view. You can't see what's behind you, though. Still better than over the shoulder style.

While it'd be nice for all games to include this, to do so would mean extra development time for each perspective. Particularly if going from FP to TP, a dev would have to create a full animation set for the main character for all the in-game actions which would otherwise not be shown.

Additionally, there are certain game design, gameplay, and user experience consequences of each perspective, and it is much easier to design and control for the experience of one perspective than it is to try to design for a multitude of perspectives. For example, Mirror's Edge would be a very different experience if it were done in TP/mixed as opposed to strictly being locked in FP like it is. If Mirror's Edge were to be told from TP/mixed, character control may be enhanced but the sense of immersion, immediacy and adrenaline are lost.

This, basically. Some games can manage both perspectives, but it often means compromises on one or the other (third-person mode in Skyrim, for example, feels kind of weird). And for some games it really would be impossible to have both perspectives without changing the design. In the Witcher 2, Geralt rolls around, performs spinning pirouettes, and rapidly moves between different enemies with quick sword strikes. Since it's controlled from third-person, the player can manage all of this, but in first-person mode it would be a nightmare to control.

You think 3rd person mode in Skyrim feels weird, however since Morrowind 3rd-person mode in all of the TES games is far less clunky to play that first person in my opinion. So it's really personal preference. The devs really did a great job with over the shoulder in Skyrim as well. It could be argued that 3rd person is the way these games were meant to be played since there's so much visual customization to be done with your character, which wouldn't matter at all if it were first-person.

Fair enough. Although the character customization in Skyrim and Oblivion is all done in the inventory screen, so players can still check out their character there (that's what I do!).

Regardless, the combat in the Elder Scrolls games is pretty simple and can work from either perspective, whereas the combat in The Witcher 2 really wouldn't work in first-person. Supporting both perspectives definitely limits certain aspects of the game design.

OP, I feel with you. I much prefer first person to "third person" (stupid name, still just one "person" and an imaginary camera). Part of the reason is the improved immersion, but also the often effectively uncontrollable camera behavior (Tombraider, Need for Speed, I'm looking at you!), which totally breaks immersion for me. I have tried to play The Witcher in the "close" perspective, but the game does not make this fun. I died sometimes without having an idea what hit me.

Regarding the question why not more games offer both views: I would welcome this, I love it when a game gives me that choice (Bethesda to my heart!). My guess is that that choice has a cost during engine development (negligible), game design, and especially testing. In theory at least, to achieve 100% test coverage, you would need to duplicate all tests. It has been said above that moves like spinning or rolling would, from a first person perspective, not mix well with the "player sits in front of screen" setup. VR setups might be different there. :-D On the other hand, a first person perspective provides other game design opportonities, for example when something is sneaking up on you.

Both perspectives are part of game worlds, imperfect simulations. Third person allows the player to perform "inhumanly", with more situation awareness and foresight than is possible from first person perspective. I prefer the more limited, more human perspective, first person.

This is an action RPG so it has to be TP.
if it was an FPS it can be FP.

sure there are some exceptions (like deus ex)... but they use a lot of firing weapons.

hwen you don't have to shot TP is always a better choise.

Witcher 2 was always way too zoomed in. Fortunately someone made this: Traditional Camera.