There are two ways to write the same thing, one is distant (3rd) and one is personal (1st). I find that writing in first person a lot more anecdotal, meaning small personal stories come to me more easily, and because it is the view of the 1st person, I pay more attention to other characters and bring them life rather than what's specifically important for the plot. Writing in 3rd person, in contrast, feels like the more appropriate format to present the story in, more cinematic so to speak, where I focus heavily on descriptions and scenes and what's more important to the plot. Do I seriously need to write two version of the same story and then a third to finalise? Plot in 3rd, draft in 1st, and finalise back into 3rd. Please shoot me...
I'll shoot this idea past you—third doesn't need to be distant. There's what's called close or subjective third, which can be just as interior as first. Really the only difference is the use of pronouns, you can go just as deep inside the character's thoughts and feelings as you do in first. You could test it by just doing a find and replace—he for I, him for me etc. Just be sure you get in the thoughts and feelings like you would in 1st, and get in the plot and description in the narration as well.
As Xoic says, 3rd person isn't distant. You are inside the character's head and seeing things from their POV, but if necessary you can also move into omniscient or another character's POV. Personally, I find 1st person much more limited because you can only show what's unfolding through their experience and no one else's. I would stick to one or the other unless you are experienced or a genius.
In fact I did a few blog posts related to this recently (after I learned about it myself): Objective vs Subjective in 3rd person New Round of Thoughts on 3rd Person Objective/Subjective Switching between close and distant 3rd
The problem with the sentiment of "distance" in the initial post is that 3rd is not a singular thing. There are several kinds of 3rd person, and failing to note which of the varieties one is speaking of is the source of perennial confusion. 3rd omniscient, 3rd limited, rotating 3rd limited, 3rd close (deep), 3rd objective, etc. Just saying 3rd person is not enough. That's like asking how many gears a car has in the transmission and the answer keeps being "it's a stick shift". Yes, we know it's a stick. 3 speed? 4 speed? 5 speed? 6 speed? 3 on the tree, 4 on the floor? WHICH ONE?
3rd Omniscient - This narrator is a disembodied entity that is not a character in the story. This narrator is free from the constraints of both physical and temporal presence for the reporting of phenomena that take place where there is no character to witness it. We are permitted to know about the miracle happening on the other side of the garden wall where there is no one to see it. This narrator may or may not have their own opinions to drop on the reader, opinions that are not connected or sourced from any character. This last feature, the "opinionated narrator", tends to be more in evidence in older works. 3rd Limited - The narrator is still a disembodied entity, but everything that is reported through the narrative (not the dialogue, but the narrative) is understood to be sourced from a particular POV character. This narrator is not permitted to have its own opinions and is not permitted to report on things that are unknown to the POV character or outside that character's capacity to observe or engage. 3rd limited is allowed a certain latitude to borrow from 3rd Omniscient, but only into the shallows. If you start reporting on things for which there are no valid reporting agents, you are no longer in 3rd limited. Rotating 3rd Limited - Just like prior, but here we cycle through different POV characters, sometimes at scene breaks, sometimes only at chapter boundaries. Think of it like a relay race, passing the baton. 3rd Close (Deep) - This is also a sub-category of 3rd Limited. The difference here is somewhat technical in that, just as 3rd Limited is allowed to lean a bit into 3rd Omniscient, so too 3rd Close (Deep) can lean into aspects that feel 1st person-ish. Internal thoughts do not always need attribution, and we are allowed to engage narrative that is the POV character's internal machinations without all the he thought, he wondered, he contemplated, etc. If you happen to have read the ASoIaF books, Tyrion's chapters are very much in 3rd Close because it better displays his inner cunning. 3rd Objective - This is the 3rd person where we are forbidden from knowing any internal machinations of the characters through the narrative. The only things that may be reported through the narrative are things that are engageable through the five senses: sight, sound, touch, taste, smell. Other than that, the characters must literally speak their minds if we are to know what's in them. Writing a story in 3rd Objective is an excellent way to come to grips with the difference between Show & Tell because you can tell nothing. It must all be shown. It's also an excellent exercise to understand that there are some very wild notions as to what Show is. Show is simply evidence of the fact. The idea that somehow it is a heavy-handed way to inform the reader is utterly incorrect. A 3rd Objective story will teach you that.
Wow! That last post was not there when I started typing mine! This article should help a lot: Third Person Narrative Theory Made Easy. Keep in mind, you'll find different names for the various POVs (points of view). 3rd Person Subjective also = 3rd Close 3rd Objective = 3rd Cinematic or 3rd Distant And then there's one called 3rd Omniscient, which is the Eye of God viewpoint. In this one the narrator is omniscient and can see everything whether any particular character would be able to see it or not (or whether they would know about it or not). In Omniscient you can move freely from the Godlike narrator into the heads of any character and back. Look up articles on Literary Point Of View to fill in your toolbox on this subject better. The site I linked to above has some really good articles (a lot of them, covering pretty much every aspect of writing a novel).
there is also a variation on rotating third where third and first alternate or vary between, generally at chapter breaks... i did that in my book 'border crossing' all the Dusty chapters are in first, and all the Hawke chapters are in Third Limited you also sometimes see rotating first, where the first person point of view switches at chapter breaks
In John Gardner's book The Art of Fiction, he describes another one called 3rd Authorial (not sure if it has other names?). It's a form of 3rd Omniscient with one big difference. In Omniscient the narrator's voice is neutral—it can range across anything and everything, even things the characters themselves have no knowledge of, but it remains professional. In Authorial the narrator has opinions and passes judgements. It takes sides on moral issues or issues of the times. It has more flair and personality than Omniscient, and can dip into any character's head just like Omniscient can.
of course there are few books written in second... where the narrator describes things happening to the reader addressed as you. "you walk down the corridors surrounded by corpses, the grip of the pistol sweaty in your hand"... that is very difficult to pull off effectively however https://bookriot.com/2019/04/23/books-written-in-the-second-person/
China Miéville's Perdido Street Station (2000). 3rd omniscient save for the chapters that are in 1st person, always from the garuda's POV. Interesting in the way the chapters that broke form made sense because the idea was that the garuda is alien to New Crobuzon. A stranger not just to the city, but to the idea of city, thus, his chapters were apart in form.
