Hi, I am currently making an RPG that is first person like Skyrim, but more party-based with various class types for asymmetrical gameplay (Like Dragon Age). Because of this, I didn’t want the main player to be able to be every class combined into one (Ex. Mage, Rogue, and a Warrior all combined into one like Skyrim). Instead, I wanted to allow the main character to only be one main class, but not limiting game-play (Such as unlocking chests as a rogue) as the player can then switch to another party member with the corresponding class. So, I was thinking of allowing the player’s “soul” to exit and enter the bodies of the different party members and allowing the player to take control. The soul would zoom out into a third-person, where the player would select a party member and zoom into its first-person. However, do you think that doing something like this would be disorienting to the player or a bad choice in design?
I think the original Dungeon Master included something like this in the story and the most recent GTA uses a similar zoom mechanic as you swap between players so it can work well without being disorientating. You could work it into the story - maybe you are not controlling a soul, but some spirit that is guiding (possessing?) individuals. Could the soul/spirit possess enemies as an attack? When you don’t control them would they think for themselves (AI) or just stand still like zombies? There could be some interesting game mechanics here, could the spirit have spirit skills - would there be enemy spirits? As many others will no doubt tell you, this is already a big game you are thinking off and this makes it bigger…
I would say id depends on the gameplay and how you implement it. By itself it can work or bomb. Your best option is probably to plan and then prototype a test how you would like it to work. If it feels good - cool. Maybe you can also show it here by then.
I agree. A prototype is worth much more than opinions alone. First-person games usually focus more on the world than the PC(s) since that’s what you see when you’re playing. A third-person perspective might be better if it’s about the characters. If you stick with first-person, what about a command system where you don’t control the rogue directly but instead ask the rogue to unlock the chest. Whichever way you go, when you have a prototype, post it on Feedback Friday so we can check it out!
It has been done in 3rd Birthday (psp game) but in 3rd person, though it switch to 1st person when selecting target to ‘dive-in’. In that game, player is actually a girl and can ‘dive’ into other’s person including male, but the visualisation keeps using the girl’s body(for fan service sake I guess, since player’s clothing can get torn).
What does exploring the environment as a ghost give you that direct swapping doesn’t?
The other area where these games fall down is AI. Brute Force was criminal for this. There were a number of times where squad mates did something dumb, getting themselves killed while you played something else.
Thanks everybody for your advice.
@SpaceMammoth The idea of spirit skills could actually be a pretty fun feature to play with. Regarding whether the characters are “zombies”, I would probably have an AI component on my characters (including main character) that I would toggle on and off, depending if they were selected as the playable character. Even though I did compare this to Skyrim and Dragon Age, I plan to make my game on a MUCH smaller scale, though it will still be considerable work (And to shrink that down more, I use the asset store).
@the_motionblur @TonyLi Yeah, it would be a good idea to probably prototype something like this, but because it is a complex feature to implement, I wanted people’s advice before spending considerable time trying to create a prototype. I will have an option for 3rd person (I am using UFPS which already includes third-person), but I do think first-person is better suited for my game. I could probably fall back to just using commands if switching between characters becomes unsuitable, or maybe use them both. I will make sure to put it on Feedback Friday, regardless of the path I chose. Oh, and while I am here let me give a shout out to your Dialogue System, it is great asset that will greatly simplify making my game.
@bart_the_13th Thanks for some reference material.
@Kiwasi I was suggesting to explore as a ghost rather than direct swapping because I think that direct swapping may make it confusing who you are (though you could easily work around this using character icons) and where you are at. One of the benefits of a ghost probe though, would be to create a tactical mode while also making it easier to tell who you are taking control of and where that person is at.
Thanks @nosyrbllewe ! I’m glad the Dialogue System is helpful to your project!
A simple prototype with a graybox level and capsules for characters should be enough to get lots of useful feedback from the folks here.
Hello everyone, I made a simple prototype of the character switching. Can you guys try it out and give me some feedback on it?
To move is WASD and mouse to look (like any FPS). To Exit a body, press E. To Enter a body, make sure your spirit is colliding with the character and then press E.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/68005625/Builds/First%20Person%20Switcher/Webplayer.html
It was actually easier to use then I expected. I don’t imagine anyone will have trouble figuring out how it is designed to work.
I agree. The switching mechanic works well. If you decide to implement this in your game, some “juice” – particle effects, sounds, etc. – would make it pretty exciting to jump from body to body.
Now I wonder how this will affect the narrative experience. Will it be disorienting story-wise for the player to switch roles? Will it prevent the player from getting invested in his or her character? Or will it be a fun, different twist on role-playing?
From a straightforward gameplay perspective, the switching animation needs to be constrained by the frequency of the switch and/or when the switch can occur.
Take Dragon Age: Inquisition, for example. You can switch during a live fight, and battle will continue unless you pause while doing it. As a result, all character switches are made instantaneous and the camera teleports to the corresponding spot behind the character you select. This is appropriate, as the combat is real-time and you don’t want to interrupt the game flow by putting in a wait when you character switch.
Now if this switch won’t have to be regularly made during battle, it can take longer, be more visually impressive, and have more of an impact. The things discussed above are primarily gameplay changes not relating to the original question, but those could all occur. (Just try to avoid feature creep)
You don’t need to worry about disorienting the player, so long as what you’re trying to do matches well with the time the player has to react to dynamic situations and the purpose of the switch.
I remember an old ps3 game that did this called Jericho.
Check it out for some additional comparisons. The first 2 hours of the game were literally all about this switching mechanic and why? 
Remember that ps2 game? ghost clancy, where you could switch between players in the middle of a fire fight? yeah not many people were a fan of that.
Thanks everybody for your advice. I decided I will probably not implement FP switching and instead use commands for the party members (Ex. Pressing ‘2’ while looking at a chest will command Party Member 2 to unlock the chest) because I realized from your guys’ responses that it will break the flow of gameplay as it would commonly happen in combat(Maybe if I did instantaneous switching it would be fine though) among other factors. Again, thanks everybody for your feedback, I appreciate it.