Support NeoGAF

[Wonko_C]

...The fact that it tries to be as close to reality just makes it so much more apparent that those sensual impressions aren't there that, contrary to what might seem logical, those games pull me out of the experience.

 

[Pirabear]

I don't mind first person, but I feel that most of the genres I play/my favorite genres don't lend itself well in that perspective. That, and I don't really feel any "more" immersion from first person compared to third.

 

[Tain]

Breakdown was a really cool game.

I just like posting that.

 

[lazer_bean]

i enjoyed some games in first person perspective (bioshock was one) but not many.
but usually i dont like those games. It's just hard fo me to move or be aware of the space around me. It's like im disorientated. i get killed by enemies i had not even seen, it might be a good thing for a horror game but then you get that "i didnt see this one coming" feeling in dead space too for example, and it's a tps

FPS multiplayer i just cant take it. i get bored qiuckly and im really bad at it (this being said i've never played a FPS multi for very long).


when people say they like to be able to look at their body i think they mean the whole character ?
because thats what it is for me: maybe i if i actually see what he/she looks like i care more or like them more easily, i dont know. Also i like to see my character evolving around the environment, but i dont like to BE him immersed in that same environment.
In a car game too, i wont choose the cockpit view, it's just not a perspective i like to play as.

 

[Dion Blaster]

I just don't like how characters move and control in first person perspective. Seems limiting for any genre other than shooters. And in shooter's there's not exactly a lot of gameplay variety.

edit- You don't get little things like Link's facial expressions in Wind Waker or Mario looking around for coin stars unless you have a 3rd person perspective.

 

[MrBig]

I don't think it's so much a "which is better" debate as is commonly held.

In third person games you're usually controlling a character, following their story, not necessarily under the freedoms that first person games generally implore you to explore.

In first person games I've observed that the perspective is used to put you into the action and have you create your own experience under looser obligations as to the hows, whats, and whys.

They're both devices that are used when they are called for. Then what you'll find is people either like feeling like they're in the action or they like to be invested in a character - that is where the distinction is drawn imo

 

[MidnightCowboy]

You know, I will say say something like

Spoiler

walking around in the village

in Uncharted 2 would not have had the same effect if it was in first person. At least for me, there was something uniquely serene about observing Drake in that situation, rather than experiencing it from his perspective. I guess I don't think immersion is tied to a particular perspective, both are equally suited to producing amazing moments that only video games can produce.

 

[StAidan]

I usually dislike first-person perspective. Not because of realism or motion sickness, but just because it feels strange to me.

I feel disembodied (not the same argument as "I can't look down and see my character") and find it difficult to gauge where exactly my character is in the game space. I have trouble with jumps in particular, or sometimes jumping is so dumbed-down that I can successfully complete a jump but it looks like I'm just standing on empty space. (And I'm pretty good at suspending my disbelief in video games, but that just breaks my immersion totally.)

 

[Silas Lang]

I prefer 3rd person because its easier to navigate the character. I can see my surroundings and judge spatial relations much better. First person games are more disorienting for me personally. I always feel like I have less control for some reason. Maybe I just suck at them though.

 

[SmartBase]

I like the first-person perspective but not when it feels like you're just controlling a floating camera, ie. Skyrim.

 

[Hawkian]

Once the Mirrors Edge fans finds this thread you will learn how reality opposes the OP.

*shrug* I loved Mirror's Edge, I don't know what else to say on the topic

 

[Artanisix]

Most FPS games where you're playing as a human-controlled character just feel wrong. I totally understand and agree with the people posting about feeling disembodied. The only FPS game I really feel immersed in is Hawken, and that's because you're a human... in a giant mech warrior robot. They get the feeling and weight and perspective of the machine just right, and the limits of your view make sense as opposed to normal FPS games.

 

[Sapphire Dreams]

I love first-person games.

I like the sense of being in a space. I'm enamored with the way that they enhance immersion. After playing Thief, I can't play stealth games any other way, because they just aren't as good (Mark of the Ninja aside). Likewise, best horror games I've ever played are in the first person, because they don't let you see what's coming up behind you. By being in first-person, stealth and horror games require players to listen as much as anything, increasing the amount of sensory dedication players must use, resulting in an increase in player immersion.

The best sense of motion I've ever felt in a game was in a first-person game--I couldn't stand playing games like Dishonored or Mirror's Edge in the third person, and I think they'd suffer massively from doing so. This year's Black Mesa felt incredible in part because of all the subtle camera tilts they used to really nail that kinetic feeling.

I love first-person games. I even love the "trend" (air quotes since it's absurdly rare) of adapting games to FPSes because that almost always ends well, resulting in games like Metroid Prime, Fallout 3, SWAT 3/4, Ultima Underworld, etc.

But some people don't.

When I've asked the question before, I've received basically two answers: first, "it's unrealistic, because I can't look down and see my body," usually followed with some praise for third-person games, and second, "I get motion sickness."

The first one confuses me, because it seems like it's even more unrealistic to watch yourself from some weird third-person perspective. Besides, the times when are required to look down at your body are fairly rare, much like real life. It seems like a baseless argument, demanding realism from FPSes and FPSes only, while ignoring that all games feature some form of abstraction. No one talks about how they feel like they're controlling a marionette in third-person games, but it feels like the complaints about 'feeling like a camera with a gun attached' never cease.

The second complaint I can appreciate, since I suffer from mild motion sickness issues myself. The way to rid yourself of this problem is to play first-person games with a wider field of vision. There are quite a few ways to do this, though I personally find that Flawless Widescreen works the best. If you get headaches from first-person games, I implore you to adjust the FOV to something closer to 90-110. It should solve your problem.

So... if one reason is stupid, and the other reason's solvable, what other reasons do people have for not liking first-person games? "It's just not for me" is something I completely understand; I'm looking for legitimate arguments against first-person games, because it seems like they could be really interesting.

Because you're not yourself when playing in third person, that's why.

Personally, I don't mind the perspective as long as it serves the game well.

 

[LeleSocho]

Because most of the games with that perspective sucks ass and since people like generalizations people say that they don't like first person games.
There are also people who say that they don't like FP games but it's not because they don't like it but because they can't play it (motion sickness)... the fox and the grapes.

 

[terrisus]

Basically all first-person games (at least any with more movement than something like Shadowgate or Myst) make me sick. I guess it's essentially reverse motion sickness - seeing motion, but not feeling it, as opposed to feeling motion but not seeing it (I can read, play video games, whatever, in a moving vehicle and it doesn't bother me any). Especially games with headbob (was really dissapointed that the preview videos for Legend of Grimrock showed it as smooth-scrolling, and then they randomly decided to add in head-bob at the last minute. It's somewhat tolerable since it's at least a slow game), but still.

Fortunately, there aren't too many first-person games which interest me. I have no interest at all in FPSs (possibly the first-person issue is part of the reason, but, running around and shooting stuff just doesn't appeal to me very much regardless), and other than that it hasn't been too much of an issue. But, yeah, if nothing else, the above is a reason.

Adjust FOV. Solve all problems.

Not all games have a FOV adjustment.
And, I've tried adjusting it as much as possible, still no good.

 

[RM8]

It seems like first-person games try to achieve mostly immersion and realism. I have zero interest in those elements, personally.

 

[dead souls]

First person games make me nauseous and I constantly find myself getting lost in them. Give me a third person perspective any day.

 

[DocSeuss]

Thanks, guys. Today is terrible and you're making it worth surviving through.

I just don't like how characters move and control in first person perspective. Seems limiting for any genre other than shooters. And in shooter's there's not exactly a lot of gameplay variety.

edit- You don't get little things like Link's facial expressions in Wind Waker or Mario looking around for coin stars unless you have a 3rd person perspective.

The point of first-person games is that you are making those little facial expressions, because you are supposed to be feeling that feels.

Have you ever played a first-person adventure or melee game?

I don't think it's so much a "which is better" debate as is commonly held.

In third person games you're usually controlling a character, following their story, not necessarily under the freedoms that first person games generally implore you to explore.

In first person games I've observed that the perspective is used to put you into the action and have you create your own experience under looser obligations as to the hows, whats, and whys.

They're both devices that are used when they are called for. Then what you'll find is people either like feeling like they're in the action or they like to be invested in a character - that is where the distinction is drawn imo

I definitely wasn't trying to start a "which is better" discussion. I was just interested in learning why people who don't like first-person perspective don't like it. I'm well aware that they both have their uses; it's the people who say "THIS THING IS BAD AND I HATE IT" that interest me.

You know, I will say say something like

Spoiler

walking around in the village

in Uncharted 2 would not have had the same effect if it was in first person. At least for me, there was something uniquely serene about observing Drake in that situation, rather than experiencing it from his perspective. I guess I don't think immersion is tied to a particular perspective, both are equally suited to producing amazing moments that only video games can produce.

This is definitely one of the things Uncharted 2 didn't screw up.

I usually dislike first-person perspective. Not because of realism or motion sickness, but just because it feels strange to me.

I feel disembodied (not the same argument as "I can't look down and see my character") and find it difficult to gauge where exactly my character is in the game space. I have trouble with jumps in particular, or sometimes jumping is so dumbed-down that I can successfully complete a jump but it looks like I'm just standing on empty space. (And I'm pretty good at suspending my disbelief in video games, but that just breaks my immersion totally.)

I don't understand this. How can you not know where you are located in space?

Because most of the games with that perspective sucks ass and since people like generalizations people say that they don't like first person games.
There are also people who say that they don't like FP games but it's not because they don't like it but because they can't play it (motion sickness)... the fox and the grapes.

Such delicious irony of using two generalizations to explain how generalizations lead to stupid points.

Basically all first-person games (at least any with more movement than something like Shadowgate or Myst) make me sick. I guess it's essentially reverse motion sickness - seeing motion, but not feeling it, as opposed to feeling motion but not seeing it (I can read, play video games, whatever, in a moving vehicle and it doesn't bother me any). Especially games with headbob (was really dissapointed that the preview videos for Legend of Grimrock showed it as smooth-scrolling, and then they randomly decided to add in head-bob at the last minute. It's somewhat tolerable since it's at least a slow game), but still.

Fortunately, there aren't too many first-person games which interest me. I have no interest at all in FPSs (possibly the first-person issue is part of the reason, but, running around and shooting stuff just doesn't appeal to me very much regardless), and other than that it hasn't been too much of an issue. But, yeah, if nothing else, the above is a reason.



Not all games have a FOV adjustment.
And, I've tried adjusting it as much as possible, still no good.

Ouch, sounds like you have a genuinely severe case of motion sickness. How big is your display and how far is it from your face?

 

[ZZMitch]

I agree, I really enjoy the first person perspective. I like looking at games from a characters eyes.

 

[shtkn]

i dislike fps because they're advertising it as "you ARE in this word", then proceed to give me a body that doesn't do the things i expect my body to do.

*most fps feel like i'm a turret with legs, not a person. i can't even see my own damn body
*peripheral vision is pretty terrible. put on goggles and notice what you can't see. that's so annoying.
*there's no kinesthetic feedback, so i can't tell if i'm touching a wall or a chest high box when i'm strafing around
*again kinesthetic feedback, when i get shot i can't get taht immediate feedback of where i was shot from (no those red arrows showing the direction of pain aren't good enough imo)

also, because i don't have teh twitch reflexes to aim fast enough in a shootout and i always end up dead.

 

[Skilletor]

This is an understandable point of view, especially if you've had the misfortune of playing bad shooters, or if you play shooters incorrectly (thinking they're only about pointing and clicking).

What games would you recommend? I'm open to trying anything out. I have every console and a good PC.

 

[Zephyrus]

I find it boring.

And poorly made.

I'd rather see a character that is well animated than some poorly moving "thing" trying to emulate our movements as if we were the ones picking up the guns.

Not a fan.

Between TPS and FPS I will always choose TPS.

 

[Alej]

I'm playing Skyrim on 3rd person right now.

So, for me, it's not about motion sickness. It's much more about the immersion resulting of playing a character in a world, like if you control him, he is into your hand. It's very immersive for me because i don't want to be the character, i'm controlling him. In fact, i don't understand how 1st person can be more immersive, it's a paradox, a "mise-en-abîme", you are playing first person whereas you already see through your eyes, it's an inception lol, it can't be.

I want to see my avatar and control his space.

At the end of the day, i think i don't want to limit gaming by only one element of gameplay: to aim. Because in 1st person, you are doing everything through aiming. There has to be an abstraction sort-of in gaming, you don't have to be the character and you definitely can't.

This is definitely one of the things Uncharted 2 didn't screw up.

What the...! Uncharted2 is one of the best game ever made. He did NOT screw anything! Uncharted2!!22!2!2!!!22!!!!

 

[Nightstick11]

How is it visually or artistically lazy or dull? The level of art and detail that goes into the game does not solely hinge on whether or not the player can see his or her character.

No, but when entire swathes of the genre look indistinguishable from each other, that is definitely visually dull. There's only so many different ways a developer can render a WW2 tank or a blown-up building in the first-person view. The genre as constructed does not allowed for eye-popping environmental designs or character designs. It's just a bland attempt to render the coolest, most photorealistic military or corridor imaginable.

There is no emotional connection with the main character--because that's supposed to be you.

That is the fundamental problem with the first-person perspective: We don't want it to be us.

Do you prefer choose-your-own-adventure books , or do you read books to enjoy the story the author is trying to tell? Do you watch movies because you want to be in them, or are you trying to watch the movie the director shot?

We need a main character that we have an emotional connection with, not one we need to pretend to be. That just leads to laziness and an excuse to not fully flesh out the game world.

I disagree with this. Few game narratives have any degree of soul, and I say this as a writer. First-person shooters have some of gaming's best stories. System Shock 2, for instance, is one of the few games that has a story that wouldn't be embarrassingly bad in any other medium. Marathon (particularly Marathon: Infinity) is a work of metatextual brilliance. Portal oozes with soul.

This is just your opinion. The facts are that game narratives spawn some of the wildest fandoms known to humanity, and they inspire all kinds of fan-created content, expression, and general fan behavior.

People dress up as Warcraft characters or Final Fantasy characters and write entire books and direct movies based on game narratives.

You know what these games have in common? They are not in the artistically lazy first-person perspective. They provoke the imaginations, however crazy they may be, of fans through world-building, relatable characters, and a powerful (this is debatable) structured story, not by throwing a gun into your hand, dumping you off on some planet or military battlefield, and saying you can be John Lance Corporal in the Eastern Front.

If anything, it's the first-person perspective that, when used properly, proves that the first-person perspective is the most powerful use of the medium, because it is the way in which video games as an art form can be unique. No other art medium has the capability to put the audience so directly in touch with the game.

As explained above, the first-person perspective is weaker than 2-D sprites in being able to portray video games as an art form.

It's the equivalent of choose-your-own-adventure books, pick-your-own-ending movies, build-your-own-bear. You are trying to strap a diorama on your head, claiming it is "immersion", and passing it off as the highest paragon of videogame-as-art; I'm sorry, but in my opinion, central to art is having it relate to humanity, and games in the first-person perspective consistently and constantly fail to do this dating back all the way to Wolfenstein 3D.

 

[Subaru]

I don't like it because:

1 - Motion Sickness - even PORTAL is hard to me =/

2 - I prefer games that I have to fight than games that I have do shoot. Example: Gof of War > Uncharted - altought I really thinks Uncharted is one of best games of his style and GoW one of the worst (really love DMC, Bayonetta and Ninja gaiden).

3 - I love games that I can DODGE.

4 - I love games that I have to jump precisely.

All that said, I really enjoy Metroid Prime series because it's less shoot, more exploration/jumping experiencie. Love Goldeneye (n64) because I love the exploration. And almost love mirrors edge because makes me vomit =/

 

[Regulus Tera]

Immersion isn't all that important to me.

 

[Izayoi]

Mech Warrior, Battlefield, Halo, Metroid Prime, Call of Duty, Elder Scrolls, Minecraft...

It seems kind of difficult to make the argument that people in general don't like the first person perspective, considering that many of gaming's most popular and critically acclaimed franchises are first person.

I personally love first person games. Can't get enough of them! The Oculus Rift is going to be fucking great.

 

[MrBig]

I definitely wasn't trying to start a "which is better" discussion. I was just interested in learning why people who don't like first-person perspective don't like it. I'm well aware that they both have their uses; it's the people who say "THIS THING IS BAD AND I HATE IT" that interest me.

That wasn't directed at you, rather the people who commonly lump things together and say "FPSes are bad" or vice versa, and the OP title that would suggest such a discussion, which differs from the actual OP.

 

[Dali]

I don't dislike first person games as a rule, but my biggest gripe is I lik to see my character. I like a cool character design and seeng myself control that badass. First person puts the focus on the fodder. Some games do it right and add a lot of personality to the first persn perspective, but in general id rather see a character like Jackie from the Darkness wearing his awesome suit from the comics rather than just lame ass tendrils in first person.

 

[Izayoi]

That wasn't directed at you, rather the people who commonly lump things together and say "FPSes are bad" or vice versa.

Yeah, there seem to be some pretty broad blanket statements being made in this thread. There are lots of bad FPS games, but there are also lots of great ones. The same could be said for almost any genre in gaming.

 

[Sobriquet]

Motion sickness is a big one.

My friend can't play FPS coz he gets headaches and wants to vomit, he's also a huge Metroid fanboy and had to play the Prime games in like 30min stints to avoid feeling too sick.
That's commitment.

That's how I was able to play Portal.

 

[RionaaM]

Gameplay combat outside of the shooting genre has never been done well in first person.

Mirror's Edge would like to have a word with you.

 

[Bentles]

First person perspective in general is fine. First person shooters make you focus on a very specific point in space. It's about having a lot of practice at doing that and I guess I'm just not interested in the time investment it would take to get enough skill to be competitive.

Is there a non-shooter first person game with satisfying (like monster hunter/demon's souls) combat? TES games for example are really unsatisfying.

 

[Famassu]

There's nothing wrong in the perspective, just in the majority of first person games. There are examples of great first person games (Metroid Prime, Mirror's Edge, Amnesia etc.), but for every Metroid Prime there are about 15 generic FPSs.

 

[Nibel]

Someone needs to bring them to the next level already

 

[Neff]

I don't dislike first person perspective, I dislike its artlessness and over-use in gaming, and I particularly dislike it during cutscenes.

 

[NullPointer]

I don't mind first person, but I prefer third person. Both to better understand the space I'm inhabiting as well as to see my character art and personality in movement. Its also a more helpful view for things like dodges and rolling that are more awkward in first person.

Best of all are games that allow for both. So I love Skyrim for that and play the game half first person, half third, depending.

 

[Ty4on]

Isn't motion sickness a side effect of the game being immersive? My palms would sweat like hell playing Mirrors Edge, but that was kinda a part of the experience.
I love first person BTW. I want to see the game world and other people, not my character. In Oblivion I would go "Oh, that's what I look like" when looking at the character in the menus, that's kinda how it is in real life when I suddenly see how horrible my hair looks.

 

[Zoe]

Isn't motion sickness a side effect of the game being immersive? My palms would sweat like hell playing Mirrors Edge, but that was kinda a part of the experience.

No, it's usually a combination of the FOV and witnessing motion that you're not experiencing.

I get the same even when I'm watching other people play 3rd Person games because I can't anticipate the movements they're making.

 

[Kaizer]

Overall, I immensely enjoy Third-Person Perspective in games much more, but I've warmed up to First-Person over the years. In terms of FP games it's: First Person Shooters >>>>>> First Person RPGs, The perspective is the reason I can't get into games like Dragon Quest or Skyrim, I like being able to see the heroes in these grand adventures.

 

[RustyNails]

I forced my wife to play a round of Left 4 Dead...the motion sickness almost made her throw up. Yeah I guess it's that some people are never meant to play it. Too bad for them.

 

[MvmntInGrn]

And from a purely mechanical point of view, it's difficult to be creative with first person gameplay - you're a lot more restricted to the kinds of actions that are directly under the player's control.

This doesn't seem so different from, say, third person though. At least third-person where you control the character directly.

You're also restricted by expectations of the players themselves. Many people play FP games exclusively due to their preference for immersion. But FP game conventions have all run together, because people become unhappy quickly if a first person game doesn't "handle right". If any limitations or consequences of being a specific character interfere with a player being able to whip around the game world like a first person shooter. At best you can usually only make the character's walking speed slow to keep things under control.

This I certaintly agree with. Reminds me of all the mixed impressions on the weapon recoil in Killzone 2 or the mixed views on view bobbing. Many players refuse to have anything but the fastest view speeds too, which can alter mechanics especially getting into things like close combat. I actually think the way Wii Shooters (or at least the Prime games) work is a good compromise; locking speed of turning using dragging but still giving you complete freedom to aim where in front of you as fast as you want.

With third person, people will more easily accept their character having personality and quirks, because their visible animation and interaction with the environment justifies limitations. They can become crippled, slowed down by climbing, wrestle with other characters, knocked down without disorienting the player, and engage alternate mechanics. And to be fair, Mirror's Edge is probably the most sophisticated first person game so far, with regards to complexity of character abilities that the player really controls.

I don't think the problem is with players accepting as it is not many First-Person games really attempting to portray personality period. Mirror's Edge is one of the few games that I've ever seen try to portray personality in something other than voice-over (and even then few games move from the silent protagonist) by little things like the hug that takes place between her and her sister as well as other small movements and even then most of the narrative rolls out over animated sequences. Of course it doesn't help, like you mentioned earlier, players aren't keen on altering what seems to be a concrete definition of how first-person feels like. Personally I think all the little things like becoming crippled, slowed down, wrestling, and being knocked(though I think some disorientation could be worked positively into the game) down could all be MORE impactful in first-person if done correctly(no you shouldn't be hit and spiraled across the environment regulary, but being knocked back maintains player orientation with what I would argue is still a more impactful effect) and if players will take a momentary lapse in their speedy movement.

 

[NullPointer]

I forced my wife to play a round of Left 4 Dead...the motion sickness almost made her throw up. Yeah I guess it's that some people are never meant to play it. Too bad for them.

Left 4 Dead messed with me for a while because the movement doesnt feel planted. You just kindof slide across the ground with sway. Doesn't feel organic.

 

[Salacious Crumb]

I really dislike controlling first person games with dual analog, it feels cumbersome and claustrophobic. Mouse or bust for me.

 

[RustyNails]

Left 4 Dead messed with me for a while because the movement doesnt feel planted. You just kindof slide across the ground with sway. Doesn't feel organic.

Yeah, I guess it was a bad intro to FPS. All the Source engine games are like that.

 

[Shinta]

I like seeing the character I'm playing as, the animations and costumes. I like the body language of a slickly choreographed gun fight or melee fight in third person. I find that platforming, running, quick turning, and any kind of movement is dramatically easier in third person. And finally, RE4, RE5, RE6, and Vanquish have already completely proven that you don't need to be limited to first person to be able to aim well in an aggressive shooter. In reality, being able to see your character's body allows the shooter to be much more aggressive, like Vanquish.

I just don't see what FP offers as a perspective. I tolerate it for the odd game here or there, but I pretty much wish every time that I had the option to not use it. It feels lazy because you can't see your character do anything. Compare the combat in Skyrim, which was designed to be played in first person, to the combat in Dragon's Dogma. Compare fluidity and movement in Halo, to the unparalleled movement in Vanquish.

After RE4, I honestly felt like the whole perspective was proven to be mostly obsolete.

 

[RoboPlato]

I love it but I think the constantly narrowing field of view has done damage to the perspective. It's starting to feel claustrophobic, even for someone like me who plays a lot of first person games. This is probably alienating a lot of people.

 

[Waaghals]

I love first person games, but that is not to say I want all games to be in the first person.

I believe that most problems with immersion, awareness and motion sickness can be solved by using a decent FOV.

If your baseline FOV is the console FPS standard, then you have a lot of room to maneuver before you start to get notable warping. First person console games in general have absolutely horrid FOV to the point where you can "lose" a 2 meter tall cyborg commando in your peripheral vision.

Wait, did I just read that FPS are unsuitable for fast paced gameplay? What the planet am I on?? Quake anybody?

 

[MvmntInGrn]

I like seeing the character I'm playing as, the animations and costumes. I like the body language of a slickly choreographed gun fight or melee fight in third person. I find that platforming, running, quick turning, and any kind of movement is dramatically easier in third person. And finally, RE4, RE5, RE6, and Vanquish have already completely proven that you don't need to be limited to first person to be able to aim well in an aggressive shooter. In reality, being able to see your character's body allows the shooter to be much more aggressive, like Vanquish.

I just don't see what FP offers as a perspective. I tolerate it for the odd game here or there, but I pretty much wish every time that I had the option to not use it. It feels lazy because you can't see your character do anything. Compare the combat in Skyrim, which was designed to be played in first person, to the combat in Dragon's Dogma. Compare fluidity and movement in Halo, to the unparalleled movement in Vanquish.

After RE4, I honestly felt like the whole perspective was proven to be mostly obsolete.

From what I've played of RE4 and 5 I don't see how you can say it disproves First Person for fast shooters. Most enemies in RE are not firing projectiles and while they can move fast I thought even in RE5 many stoped a few feet away to slowly come at you with a melee weapon. They are not the same kind of game.

Vanquish is incredibly smooth. That said I think that's partially because of the time-altering system which is a major (and fantastic) gameplay element.

As a perspective I don't see how its even a question. You'd have to believe that every FP game ever should have just been in third person instead and that it would result in the same experience.

 

[-Winnie-]

Third person works better for character driven games, since it lets you identify with them when you can actually see them on screen.
For instance, in Black Ops 2, outside of cutscenes, I'd have little to connect me to the character I'm playing as. That said, first person does make for a more immersive experience.