Quote:
Originally Posted by dmouse097
3rd person. I like being able to see what's around me and how it responds to me, if the game is well-designed. Even worse, quite too many 1st person games are designed static - as you look around, nothing changes, no extra characters walking around or whatnot (see Myst, my least favorite game ever, or even Faust, which I liked).
|
Surely, it's third person games that are static? For any given location there is just a single screen that the character walks across, whereas in first person there is much more of a sense of movement and progression across a landscape as the player move across in in stages.
And there is lots of character movement in Myst, I feel the need to point out. Try Myst IV: Revelation. You will be surprised by it.
The 'solitary' issue is one of personal preference. Like Colpet above, I adore the solitary nature of the Myst type games, that whole abandoned world atmosphere. There's no urgent story forcing you on, no badly acted characters that talk for 5 minutes about self-evident things, whislt standing in front of an unmoving backdrop and sending you on ridiculous sub-quests* . Just you and the environment. And it is up to you to manipulate that environment to continue your 'journey'.
*Nothing annoys me more than clicking on an interactive spot in a game like Black Mirror only to be told "it's just a vase" or somesuch. What the f?! Why tag it then? It's not even adding adding colour or background to the world - no additional infomation is supplied. You can get sick of the character's voice really easilly. Or the example given above: clicking on a painting and getting a description of it. Well, why not just show us it?
