An Argument for a First-person Zelda

[ZeldaPrime]

The argument for a first-person Zelda

Ever since Zelda has entered the realm of 3D games, it has been played in third-person. It's a constant in every Zelda game, but why? Originally when Ocarina of Time was developed it was meant to be in first-person so the developers could focus more on enemies and environments. When child Link was introduced, it was deemed necessary for the player to see the character change, and from then on it was made third-person. Remnants of this still exist in Ocarina of Time, and is even possible to do with glitches.

One thing about Zelda games is that the player is link, they are one. Link isn't a character, you are. Voice acting hasn't been implemented in games because of this, it breaks the immersion. The game being in third-person contradicts this philosophy, yet it's still played like this. The immersion would only increase if played in first-person, but no changes have been made.

When you are stuck at a point in a dungeon, what do you do? You usually enter first-person to look around, but you are limited to standing where you entered first-person. Skyward Sword changed this, you can walk in first-person. It's great for looking around and exploring new areas. It almost feels like you're in the game when you do this, it's most immersion into the Zelda universe you can experience.

Skyward Sword is only a taste of what could become of a first-person Zelda, but what if a full game was made out of it? How could it effect the game? Would the puzzles have to change? Would it still feel like Zelda? The best way to find out is to look at other first-person adventure games and how they do this.

Let's start with the Nintendo franchise Metroid Prime. Metroid Prime's jump from 2D to 3D was rather controversial, fans called it a first-person shooter when the heard it was played in first-person. It was hated across the Internet; shamed by fans. They ate their words when the reviews came out, IGN reassured fans that it definitely felt like a Metroid game. This shows that a franchise can switch to first-person perspective and still remain part of the series .

Metroid Prime isn't always played in first-person, when you switch into the morph ball the camera switches to third-person. Most of the puzzles in Metroid Prime involve morph ball gameplay, showing that puzzles are not easily implemented in first-person. Skyrim is another first-person adventure/RPG that is not locked to first-person either. The switch in Skyrim from first to third-person doesn't involve a shift in gameplay like Metroid Prime; the game still focuses on adventure. Skyrim is the same game regardless of what perspective it's played in, but it's widely played in first-person. Again, it offers more immersion; you feel like you are the character in the game.

 

[A Link In Time]

Personally, I did not enjoy switching to a first person perspective when dowsing in Skyward Sword. It provided nothing short of a headache as it was a pain to control. One of the problems with full first person as opposed to the limited variant incorporated in most 3D interactions is the inability to gain a view panoramic view of the enemies surrounding Link which can make battles appear excruciatingly difficult and unfair.

It's interesting you mention Miyamoto's intention to allow players to see the transformation from Young Link to his adult counterpart in Ocarina of Time. This appears to have set in stone the perspective which all future 3D installments will bear. Metroid Prime had the advantage of being the first game in a series with the added z-axis. After five third person 3D games, fans would certainly revolt at an alteration to the formula especially given the bipolar nature of the Zelda fanbase. It's be Metroid: Other M all over again albeit reversed-with emphasis on first person rather than third.

 

[Cfrock]

Playing Zelda in 3rd-person has never been an issue for me as far as immersion goes because I've never felt that Link was a link between me and the game world. Nintendo have always made him out to be an established character (most notably in the modern games like The Wind Waker and Skyward Sword) in my eyes and so I've always played the adventure as Link, not myself, so to speak. While I will agree that going into 1st-person to look around is quite immersive (especially when on the 3DS where you have to physically turn to look around fully) I never felt it was necessary in making me feel like part of that world because I already did.

I have to agree with A Link In Time about the reduction in visibility during combat. It's not an issue in something like Skyrim because you only fight a small number of enemies at once, usually, and they mostly only attack from the front. Zelda however tends to throw more enemies at you at once and they are more likely to attack from all angles. Being restricted to a 1st-person view would make such fights a lot more difficult. That's not mentioning environmental hazards like cliffs or pits or whatever. I admit, I've had fights on Skyrim which ended rather abruptly when, just as I was getting into my stride, I took one wayward step backwards and fell off a waterfall and died (whoopsie daisy ).
Having your view restricted like that would change Zelda's combat and not in a good way I think.

There's also the issue of puzzle solving. Most puzzles in Zelda require you to observe your surroundings which is just easier in 3rd-person. Like you said even Metroid Prime reverts to 3rd-person for its more puzzle based Morph Ball sections. It just works better in general. That's not to say puzzles don't work in 1st-person, just that they work better in 3rd.

I would still give a 1st-person Zelda game a try because there are 1st-person adventure games that are very, very good. I just don't feel that it would really be right for Zelda. The limited use of 1st-person they have now is good enough for me so I don't really think they should change that too much.

 

[Castle]

No.

Maybe there was a reason they didn't go first person? I don't like first person games. People claim they "increase immersion" but they don't. Not for me, anyway and here's why.

The edges of the screen define the players "view" on the game world. IRL, most humans have what's called peripheral vision. We do not see things directly in our peripheral vision but we can still detect subtle changes in light or motion that draw our attention. Video games do not have this nor can they simulate it when the players view on the game stops abruptly at the edges of the display device.

Also, kinesthetics. Essentially, the motion of our bodies as we move. We don't notice it, but as we walk our heads move with the rest of our bodies. Sure, many games have effectively simulated this before but it has to be done right. If not, when coupled with the lack of any sort of simulated peripheral vision, players see and move about the game world like a tunnel visioned paraplegic in an electric wheelchair.

My senses are all off in first person games. I get frustrated at backing into walls when backpeddling while enemies bum rush me from the front or running into something from the side because some solid object was off screen - a problem that wouldn't exist IRL with the benefit of peripheral vision.

First person games also don't "put me into the character" as is so often the claim. I am not that character. I do not feel like that character. Just because the character isn't even there (i.e.: can't see him can't hear him) doesn't mean that I feel any bit like him. I like seeing Link. I like hearing Link (although I wish he'd do more than scream).

I prefer first person games that put something between the players perspective and the game world, like a visor. This is a major reason I really favor the Metroid Prime game's first person perspective. It eliminates the peripheral vision (or lack thereof) problem entirely because there is no peripheral vision when looking out a helmet, and having something that close between the player and the game makes me feel like I'm wrapped up in something (in Metroid's case, Samus' Varia Suit). This actually does help put me in the world.

A first person perspective Zelda would play an awful lot like the Elder Scrolls games. I detest melee combat in Elder Scrolls for these same reasons.

 

[KawiNinjaZX]

Call me lazy but I love Z targeting an enemy and being able to use the bow or boomerang. Won't say Zelda wouldn't work in first person, but I prefer third person.

 

[ZeldaPrime]

Lol I was told I would be met with a critical response. Let it be noted that I do NOT want Zelda to be strictly a first person game. Metroid Other M isn't just bad because of a perspective shift, and while dowsing in SS wasn't nessecary the controls for it worked like Metroid Prime 3.

 

[DarkestLink]

No.

3rd Person>>>>>>>>>1st Person.

 

[Tin Skulltula]

Ya know what? They've tried so many different things with Zelda, why not?
I mean look you've got fishing simulators, flight simulators, 3rd person perspective, top-down view, target shooter mini-games, FPS sequences, winter sports stuffs, so on and so forth.
If they were to do a 1st person version of LoZ, couldn't that widen the demographic a bit? There are so many FPS's out there that gamers just eat up. I know CoD and MoH and Halo are in a different class than Zelda, but you can't tell me fantasy doesn't work. Skyrim, one of the best games last of 2011, IS a 1st person fantasy RPG/ adventure game. It does, and it has, worked. Look, some games just work better with the formula we all know and love. I'm not saying a 1st person shooter is a good idea, but maybe the option of it being either 1st or 3rd person in a start menu wouldn't hurt. It's a good way to see what new fans want, without alienating old ones.

ZeldaPrime called it.

 

[KawiNinjaZX]

Do you honestly think the average Call of Duty player would play Metroid Prime let alone even know what a Metroid is. Samus does a ton of shooting, and Link is all about the sword.

BTW I loved Metroid prime as well as all the 2D games.

 

[Seth]

Why not just do what some series allow, like Elder Scrolls, and just switch between 1st and 2nd at the players choice? When playing Skyrim or Oblivion I switch between the two. I like 3rd person a vast majority of the time but usually switch during combat or just to get a different perspective in the area. I see no reason whatsoever that it has to be just one or the other.

 

[Sir Quaffler]

I don't really see any problem with this. SS already had a big focus on 1st-person exploration, why not use it more? I mean hell it worked for the Prime games. As long as we have the option to switch between 1st and 3rd as per the norm, that'll be fine.

Although, I would still tend to fight in 3rd-person. I tried fighting 1st-person with swords in Oblivion, and rather than getting more immersed in the world it actually took me out of it, although that has much more to do with the subpar fighting mechanics of the game than anything. The reason it worked so well for Metroid Prime was, like what Castle said, it had the view cropped in the visor and it actually made me feel like I was seeing the world through Samus' eyes.

 

[Zorth]

If I were the developers I'd just design it so that the player can switch between the two camera perspectives, Personally I'd feel trapped when playing in 1st person constantly, although I'd have no trouble using it for short moments like aiming with the bow or looking around the room to find clues for a puzzle etc. But I'd use the 3rd person camera at all other occasions.

So best thing to do would be to just give the player two options.