I don't personally prefer first-person just out of habit and sometimes visual motion sensitivity (I also like seeing facial expressions on characters when it's done well, though it's rarely done with any great level of detail.)
...However, come on, some of you are acting like a a story can't be told in first-person. We've got lots of examples of games which have compelling character-based gameplay in first-person. I'm pretty sure you'll be able to figure out who this Indiana Jones fellow is and what he's up to even if you can't always see his face.
This thread is bringing back flashbacks to the Metroid Prime reaction era.
Bingo. Dont make an indiana jones game if you cant make third person games. plain and simple. Say no and keep making immersive sims.
A game can be immersive and be in first-person. The first cinematic hero move adaptation ever worth anything was Goldeneye, and world-renown James Bond regularly returned in first-person adventures. (I loved Everything or Nothing, but it's the uncommon Bond game, it didn't reset expectations of how much Bond himself should be on screen.)
you cannot have a FPS game ("you are indy") with Third Person Passive cutscenes. (you are not controlling indy)..not anymore after what uncharted and tomb raider have accomplished.
If there is a set piece which is a cutscene due to the need to sell a "cinematic narrative" but then you are only playing in a first person view... its going to feel outdated, subpar, jarring to the whole (you are indiy and the First Person is more immersive). it's going to take you alout of the experience.
Why not? When Master Chief gets in a vehicle or starts a conversation with Cortana and the game cuts to a third-person view, are you going, "Who the fuck is this green guy?"
Should’ve been third person.
At times the game looks great for faces and environments , along with fps. Other times it looks plastic, flat, and odd.
...And you want it to be in third-person so you can see
more of the plastic, flat, odd instances?
