First Person Vs. Third Person.

In My Opinion I Prefer FP. They Offer More Maneuverabilty (Typo, I Know It) With The Camera, Wherea's A FP RPG Is Just... It's... It's Insane!!! It's Not Right!!! However I Did Not Mind Wizardy (PS2). Still, It's Against The Holy Law Of Gaming!

In a way 1st and 3rd person versions for gaming are both examples of 2nd person. Think about it like a book. 1st person is told by someone in the story. 3rd person is told by some narrator who has nothing to do with the story. 2nd person however is when the book tells YOU to do something. To do this turn to page whatever. I believe R.L.Stine made some books like this but anyways, All games are second person!

Yes, I See Your Point. But What I Mean Here Is The View From The Person Your Controlling, Or The Camera Behind The Character. Sorry For The Little Mishap 😄

I prefer third and thought the lesson was pretty fun (although nerdish)

first............

For certain games both are great...

im still waiting for a fp football sim...

Third when you look from the back. I just like to see the graphics of my charachter. What his doing and stuff.

In games like sonic and such of course, but games like shooters, and sports no.

Even in shooters I still like to play Third Person. Such as Dark Forces, Dark Forces II, Jedi Outcast, Jedi Academy, Doom, Splinter Cell.

It depends, Splinter Cell yes, but games like rainbow six and Timesplitters not quite.

The views only apply to the game being played. I prefer 3rd person as you actually get a bigger view of your surroundings, but less close up detail. Which brings Splinter Cell Chaos Theory into play. Good guys have better view of area as they are in 3rd person wheras the bad guys only have 1st person and only see what the look at in front of them.

It depends on the game, third person can be a hindrance in quick shooter games, that aren't based on long type strategy......... timesplitters comes to mind...........

games like star wars battlefront i use 3rd person...

games like, timesplitters or precision shooting earn a first place.

I prefer FPS.

I actually prefer the option to have both.. certain situations require a lil bit of both

Just depends.

I also use 3rd person for Stawars Batlefront. For AVP 2, theres 1st person.

It all depends on the game.

Duke Nukem was better in first person definitely.

Originally posted by Zen2nd
The views only apply to the game being played. I prefer 3rd person as you actually get a bigger view of your surroundings, but less close up detail. Which brings Splinter Cell Chaos Theory into play. Good guys have better view of area as they are in 3rd person wheras the bad guys only have 1st person and only see what the look at in front of them.

Goldeneye was the ultimate first person game. It should be remade, keep everything but the graphics. That would be sweet!!
Mario (first game that came to mind) was a good third person.

It all depends on what you want. I find that in fantasy games - mario, god of war, MK...- I like to see the characters do the stuff. Like in a book I prefer to read about the actions. I like to see the cool moves. See?
In FP, I already know wats going on- shooters, mostly- so it's nothing missed. I already know what it looks like to shoot the gun, so I don't care.Do you video tape yourself brushing your teeth to see what it looks like? No. Why? cause it's boring to watch. Why? Cause you know what t looks like already. (and it's just plane boring...)

So it all depends on what you prefer. I like the fantasy, pulling of crazy combos to kill 100 guys at once or doing the long string combos in MK. I like to see it happen and be satisfied with myself, I think thats a large part of the point of 3rd Person.
In Goldeneye (yes, I haven't sold my 64 yet. Shut up, you dirty bastards), I always smile when I see my brother's guy hit the ground. Thats the fun part.
yep... my 200 cents...