Lunchtime Discussion: Regenerative or Limited?
I can't see...quick, hide...that's better!Published 10/12/2009 at 12:00 by Gastos84
Lunchtime Discussion: Betas [30]
Lunchtime Discussion: Demos [59]
Lunchtime Discussion: Labels [18]
What happened to the good ol’ days of having to plan your route via medical kits? What happened to the tension that comes with knowing you are only one bullet away from restarting from last checkpoint and yet the health boost is at the other end of this room filled with armed goons hell bent on pumping you full of more metal than Wolverine?….Take deep breath.
If you didn’t guess, I’m talking about the ever changing health modes within games. Nowadays it’s hard to name a game that doesn’t feature regenerative health; apart than racing games and the like, but they don’t count so ssssh! Personally I hate it. I don’t want to get shot several times and then have to hide for a minute before i’m able to once again see my character on the screen. I want to know that I have 3 health packs in my inventory and that in order to gain access to the big boss man I need to use them wisely and sparingly, which in turn means that I have to go about my game with some degree of skill and thought. I don’t like the fact that I can now run into a group of enemies firing wildly, all the while knowing that as soon as my screen goes red, or black & white (which seems to be the developers favourite these days), I have to get to safety.
Sure, it doesn’t mean that games have become easier. Play Uncharted 2 on crushing or Killzone 2 on Elite and you’ll realise that you are given about as much health as a two-legged dog with asthma and therefore the regenerative health option almost becomes defunct.
What do you prefer? Do you like the new wave of games that feature regenerative health, or like me, do you prefer the trusty medi-pack approach?
Comments
Please note that all comments are the opinion of the individual author and not TheSixthAxis.
.
Not logged in
Latest Reader Comments
- Sunday Thoughts: 14/03/10
- 02:16 tantalus_blank: hmm, I think it really depends on the genre of game. I find a lot of arcadey games age badly –...
- 02:06 tantalus_blank: Same here, 2 of my all time favourite PS2 games right there
- 01:49 bunimomike: I’ve revisted a couple of so-called “classic” ; games on the PS2 and they’d aged...
- 00:40 tonycawley: I think we all forget how crap old games are. Sometimes they’re best left as happy memories. SEGA...
- 00:34 tonycawley: I still haven’t played MGS4. If they did something as simple as a trophy patch with it,...
- Modern Warfare 2 DLC Detailed
- Wicked New PS3 XMB Concepts
- What Happened At The Weekend
teflon | 10/12/2009 12:31
Member
1965 TSA Points | Member since: May 2009
It’s not just regenerative or limited. There’s other options out there too, such as having health packs in your inventory, or having a combination of the two like in the original Resistance. Or maybe like in Halo 1 where you had the shield that recharged protecting 4 or 5 health points, that was good, and it was disappointing to see them ditch it.
Personally, I really liked Resistance 1’s system, and instead of going completely regen for R2, they should have just tweaked it a bit. Combine the bottom two health bars into once and then have the two top bars as an extra buffer, kind of like the old school armour plates in Quake or Unreal.
But really I don’t mind either way. regenerative health doesn’t have to detract from a game, so long as the game was designed for it from the ground up, with a difficulty curve that really works.
Actually, sod health. Lets get all games to go real and have us with a life span of a single bullet, no checkpoints either. Racing games where if you barrel 200MPH into a brick wall you’re dead and your life is over, forcing you to restart your career as a toddler stepping into their first go kart at the fun fair.
Severn2j | 10/12/2009 12:39
Member
1523 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
I personally like a combination of the two, where there is a segmented health bar and it only regenerates up to the segment your health is in, that way you’re not stuck in situations where you cant move out of cover because you health is so low that you’ll die as soon as a bad guy breathes on you.. It gives you enough health back that you can just make it to that medkit on the other side of the room. Hiding behind a wall for a few seconds is a bit weak imo, and even less realistic than having health packs.
bunimomike | 10/12/2009 12:40
Member
4581 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
I’m with Rabid Coot on this one. Resistance style all the way.
Partial regeneration but the impending feeling of “this is really going to go tits up if I don’t find an energy pack soon”. Works so well.
For people who haven’t played Resistance you can only regain health up to a marker:
Michael Jackson–¼–½–¾–Fully Alive
Soild_Nat | 10/12/2009 12:42
Member
803 TSA Points | Member since: Apr 2009
There is something to be said for opening your back pack and applying that small medi kit and boosting your health, whilst hearing Lara Croft groan appropriately! The good old days…… that said it did break up the flow of the game and could be a pain if you were right in the middle of something.
Games now are all about keeping the player immersed so the regen health helps to keep that going. When i have to spend time hunting for medi packs or health instead of cracking skulls or saving the world from cragmites then i don’t really like it, so i think i prefer the way its handled now.
In FPS i think it would be good to have health packs as it’s become to much of a game mechanic and in some ways isn’t realistic, mind you blasting aliens isn’t really is it!
bunimomike | 10/12/2009 12:49
Member
4581 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
Surely looking for a medipak or locating a button to administer said item is no slower than hunkering down for a few seconds. Both pretty much stop the action (or at least leave you prone to becoming extra-deaded whilst taking such a risk). Momentum lost in both cases.
masoke | 10/12/2009 12:51
Member
315 TSA Points | Member since: Oct 2008
It depends on the way the HUD as much as anything. I like the clean look that Uncharted has with less indicators on a screen, but you need regen because it would be impossible to play once your screen is drained of colour and greyed out at the sides.
I admit to missing Resistance 1, but I don’t care for segments really. Why regen to 50% health but not 55%?
You could have a combination with a really slow regen and medpacks – like Metal Gear Solid 4. That would be my preference.
Severn2j | 10/12/2009 14:07
Member
1523 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
I like the way The Getaway did it, with no health bar at all, but you could see how your health doing was by the way he started limping and bleeding everywhere.. Of course, healing yourself by leaning on a wall wasnt great, but still.
hairfreax | 10/12/2009 12:57
Member
832 TSA Points | Member since: Jun 2009
I miss the old health bar in the top left of the screen. At least you could see how you was doing before bang bang red flashy border then dead.
CaptainMurdo | 10/12/2009 14:11
Team TSA: Writer
1823 TSA Points | Member since: Sep 2008
I prefer regenerative health. It helps the game flow and removes the whole searching-for-packs element, which I get annoyed at.
DuffyBox | 10/12/2009 16:58
Member
109 TSA Points | Member since: May 2009
Loved the health system in Bad Company, it made the “support” class truly perfect for supporting. Liked Far Cry 2’s system too, but I was kinda dissapointed when I discovered that manually healing yourself (y’know, pulling bullets out your hands and stuff) restored the 5 segment health bar back to full instead of just 2 like in the singleplayer. Overall though I don’t mind as long as the system is implemented well. Each has it’s beauties and flaws, or virtues and vices as they are here on TSA. Oh, and RPGs should never have regen health.
parker | 10/12/2009 20:07
Member
991 TSA Points | Member since: Apr 2009
I don’t mind games with regenerative health to be honest. You pretty much summed it up yourself when you said:
“Sure, it doesn’t mean that games have become easier. Play Uncharted 2 on crushing or Killzone 2 on Elite and you’ll realise that you are given about as much health as a two-legged dog with asthma and therefore the regenerative health option almost becomes defunct.”
If you want no regeneration, play on the hardest level. I usually play on normal, and then make Crushing/Veteran/Elite/etc my second playthrough.
cc_star | 11/12/2009 00:21
Team TSA: Writer
7592 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
Damn missed this, although I missed lunch as well – so I may as well join in now.
Regenerative health is ruining multiplayer gaming, people seem to survive if they are lucky enough to roll away at the last fraction of a second, although they have to do is hide for 5secs and then pop a cap in your ass despite you filling them with a whole magazine about 10secs earlier – nothing pisses me off more.
Medikits for online, and regenerative for single player!
Ed the Penguin | 11/12/2009 00:43
Member
342 TSA Points | Member since: Dec 2008
Regenerating health, in my opinion, ruins multiplayer fps games. As long as your enemy hides away, he can reheal in time. Warhawk’s system worked great. You lose health, but if you killed the enemy you can pick up his backpack which will give you some health back. It’s rewarded by doing what you should be doing, instead of camping it out!
I don’t mind single player being regenerative, as long as it’s made for the cinematics.
SYY2127 | 12/12/2009 17:38
Member
574 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
I don’t really mind regenitive or limited. I think if the game is good than they should have compensated the fact that you heal in a certain way. Making the game work well with all its gameplay.