First Person Shooter vs Third Person Shooter?

I am in the middle of developing a game for iOS and Android. It is a sci fi shooter. Also, the game is open world. I can't decide whether to make it First Person (like call of duty and halo) of third person over the shoulder (like dead space and gears of war). I have played Nova, Modern Combat 3, Shadowgun, and Dead Space on Android. Both fps and tps seem to have an equal set of pros and cons. HELP?

9 Answers

Relevance
  • 8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Honestly it just depends on the game and your own style. Games are made in certain views because it suits the game better, and may or may not make it more appealing to the players. FPS kind of makes it more up close and personal so to speak and a bit more realistic (which is what people tend to prefer these days. The more realistic the better. Graphics, game play, storyline, all that good stuff. The more realistic they make it the better people tend to think of it.) TPS like others have mentioned, are better for more tactical games where you need to be able to pan everywhere and see what's going on. It's usually more on the unrealistic side as well but can make up for it with unique game play/storyline. So both are appealing, it just depends on everyone's individual styles. They should start making shooters with the option to go either FPS or TPS. To be able to switch between the two at anytime you want would appeal a lot more to people I think. It'd be neat if they made more games similar to Army of Two. It had great ideas in it regarding co-op play andgame playy. They should also have a mini screen (like a type of gear on their heads like a camera) showing you what your partner sees in first person so you can back him/her up if its co-op. That'd be a nice and neat little feature I think. But for sure get your game to do both FPS/TPS. It would appeal greatly to people to have that option because some people are better with FPS and others are better at TPS. If they have that choice to switch, it would give them a far more fulfilling experience. I personally suck at most shooters regardles. But I enjoyed the concepts of Army of Two (TPS), the sensitivity of Borderlands (FPS) was perfect for me which was why I was actually able to play it and not fail miserably at it; and Brink was a unique in its own way as well, though it could have been FAR better.

    Hope that helps.

  • 4 years ago

    This Site Might Help You.

    RE:

    First Person Shooter vs Third Person Shooter?

    I am in the middle of developing a game for iOS and Android. It is a sci fi shooter. Also, the game is open world. I can't decide whether to make it First Person (like call of duty and halo) of third person over the shoulder (like dead space and gears of war). I have played Nova, Modern Combat...

    Source(s): person shooter person shooter: https://biturl.im/mSO2d
  • 5 years ago

    If your skilled enough you can make an option to toggle between the two but being a game developer myself I realize how hard it is to make options. My preferred play style is close up camera third person shooters (resident evil 6) but lots if people think differently on the subject. My best friend like first person games and my dad likes far away camera third person games (uncharted, grand theft auto). I would pick up close third person but it's all up to you

    Source(s): Game designer
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    You could do both and have a button to toggle in and out of first/ third person, but if you must choose id choose first person because it gives you a more realistic gameplay experience, unless it is a tactical strategy game, then you should use third person, it all depends on what type of game your making. If its a sci-fi shooter then the first person makes it so your range of vision is shorter and you get a more realistic gameplay experience, making it more suspenseful, but on the other hand, gears of war was third person, and some of it scared the crap out of me.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 4 years ago

    For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/ax1aW

    It depends. An FPS makes you feel as though the adventure in the game is happenning to YOU. If there`s a good story to it (say FARCRY 3 for example) it enhances your gaming experience. 3rd person shooters involve you less, but gives you usually a better view of what is going on and who's shooting who (say, MASS EFFECT for example). FPS are usually, but not necessarily, faster paced than 3rd person. As for which one is best, I think both are on par. Some very good games were made for both.

  • ?
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    Borderlands and Fallout are like that exactly. Borderlands has co-op but Fallout does not. If you really want a shooter MMO you can try Global Agenda.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    personally i would go with 3rd person, it would make for a more tactical game, cause then you can look freely around corners and such with out being in harms way..... but going with fps is more accurate in aiming, imo... so i would weigh what you want to do with the game and see what one would fit best... pros/cons, ofc, would be a good list to start with

  • 8 years ago

    Both

  • 8 years ago

    im thinking 1st cuz its more interesting that way........ although i dont play them, people have told me that. :) hope this helps

    answer mine plz

    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Al7Pi...

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.