Games need more scarcity. Death to quick Regen!

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

magomago

Lifer
Sep 28, 2002
10,973
14
76
I disagree with lots of the comments. It isn't a cop out, having regen is a good thing.

It gets rid of the 'oh crap I'm scared to take 1 damage' mentality. Imagine playing a game and being nickle and dimed and then crawling afraid to take 5 more HP damage. I've done it like many of you, and by the time I'm done I don't feel thrilled with barely squeezing it through, but I feel "Man that would have been SOOOO much easier if I had some more life".

Giving me to regen or form to recover life (health packs) is a cop out for bad game design as well - devs can put not much effort into the enemies because they know for many people just a couple of weak hits will kill them since they aren't near full life. Having regen isn't a sign of lazy design any more than not having it. Its how its utilized.

If implemented right, if you do something wrong, or do approach it correctly, you should still die. It isn't supposed to act as a means of making you live/last longer in a fight. I've always preferred it because I can play to enjoy and think about the bigger picture, not freak out about every little bit (which i have the tendency to do)
 

Raduque

Lifer
Aug 22, 2004
13,141
138
106
I like how Mass Effect 3's regen works. You have health sections, and you regen within each section, but once a section is completely depleted, you can only get it back after completing the mission or using Medi-Gel.
 

exdeath

Lifer
Jan 29, 2004
13,679
10
81
Pft. Lazy whiners. Back in the old days, uphill both ways in the snow, blah blah blah, you made it through with the life you had, and if you died you started at the beginning of the level. No hand holding, no apologies, no coddling, just a straight ass whoopin for failure.

Learn to play the game.
 

Zenoth

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2005
5,148
133
106
Meh, depends on the game itself, its story, context, etc.

I thought it was alright in Halo, but would have been unfitting in STALKER games, and I loved STALKER games the way they were. Then again no regeneration in Halo would have felt strange... dunno. It was alright anyway (with those two examples, and more). I like challenge, but not frustration. I don't want a simulation either. I do NOT want to have to crawl and bleeding out until death if I get shot by one freaking bullet... BUT... if I play a simulation "game" and that happens then that's fine I would have asked for it.

But... say Halo again, would it need to be like that? Would Halo need to have those energy weapons turned "more plausible" and after one or two shots Master Chief goes down? No, why? Because it doesn't fit, it's an action game, take it with a grain of salt (then again play it on Legendary and that can happen, anyone recalls the Jackal Snipers in Halo 2 on Legendary? One shot, dead). Really, not all games need to have "this and that" (simulation or action). The games need to be the way developers wanted them to be (I mean game-play mechanisms here, not necessarily the story). The "down side" to that is of course the risk to be a bad game, but that ain't a big deal is it? There's risks for everything out there.

Just give me a middle in there somewhere, some games can be good with health regeneration, some wouldn't be. Some games might be good even if not a simulation but still challenging (still, I wouldn't want one bullet to kill me unless it IS a simulation game). I don't mind dying and having to try a few times, and that's they key (for me). If I die say... 3 or 4 times and I've spent 1 hour trying to save some hostage from the same freaking room but each time he(she) would die instantly from a bullet to the head because I need lightning-fast reflexes then I might as well just train for that in real life and realize it ain't for me.

Anyway, point is there (speaking for myself if anything), it just depends on the game. There's one thing I don't really like anymore though, and I agree with those who say it needs to go away in favor of other "damage/death" mechanisms, and that is the Health Packs... man that's old. Ironically they are in Halo and there's regeneration anyway, although I know, there's actual health bars below that shield regeneration which I always tend to call health regeneration, even though I know it's really just "shield" regeneration.
 
Last edited:

mizzou

Diamond Member
Jan 2, 2008
9,734
54
91
Take this a step back, what made it popular? Was it the first Medal of Honor?
 

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,024
78
86
Pft. Lazy whiners. Back in the old days, uphill both ways in the snow, blah blah blah, you made it through with the life you had, and if you died you started at the beginning of the level. No hand holding, no apologies, no coddling, just a straight ass whoopin for failure.

Learn to play the game.
And most of those old games can be beaten in like an hour. That shit ain't fun.
 

Veliko

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2011
3,597
127
106
This. It was invented to allow for stream lined development so they could pump out a game every year consistently. Total lazy cop out that definitely reduces the quality of games.
You say 'this', but then the rest of your post has nothing to do with what he was saying in the first place.
 

EDUSAN

Golden Member
Apr 4, 2012
1,358
0
0
Ironically they are in Halo and there's regeneration anyway,
yeah, some games did that... like Borderlands, in which you would equip yourself items that had health/shield regen but you had the health thingies... and Rage had it too, a slower health regen to force you to use health pack items during battle if you got massacred
 

motsm

Golden Member
Jan 20, 2010
1,822
2
76
Take this a step back, what made it popular? Was it the first Medal of Honor?
I believe Call of Duty 2 was the first that most resembles what is widely used today. Medal of Honor: AA used health pickups from what I remember.

As for health regen, I just don't play games that have it or that it can't be modded out of it. Certainly has been limiting my choices now a days, but it typically just paints a bigger picture of what the game is going to be like anyway, so it's almost like a Mr. Yuck stamp to me at this point.
 
Last edited:

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
82,076
15,899
126
Also theres the problem with games like New Vegas where you start off with no resources and limited HP then after grinding away for a while all of a sudden you have tons of slow healing and instant healing items then the game is kind of a joke.
 

Gothgar

Lifer
Sep 1, 2004
13,463
1
0
I remember in Serious Sam having to go back to an old ass save and redo like an hour, just so that I had enough health to beat a boss when I got to him.

Good fucking times.
 

motsm

Golden Member
Jan 20, 2010
1,822
2
76
Also theres the problem with games like New Vegas where you start off with no resources and limited HP then after grinding away for a while all of a sudden you have tons of slow healing and instant healing items then the game is kind of a joke.
Instant healing items are indeed an issue in many real time games unless they are capped to a useable cool down, but game designers can't be bothered balancing a challenging game, or difficulty level these days whether it uses health regeneration or not.
 

thespyder

Golden Member
Aug 31, 2006
1,979
0
0
Fast regen works ok, depending on the situation. Where I have a problem is when it is used as an excuse to dole out insane punishment per combat. Games like D3 use ridiculous damage numbers to make it flashy and draw the attentions of ADD addled youngsters and then heals it up quick as lightning, only to do it all over again.

I say, if used appropriately, it isn't a bad thing. But when it is abused, there is a real problem that does need to be addressed.
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
82,076
15,899
126
Fast regen works ok, depending on the situation. Where I have a problem is when it is used as an excuse to dole out insane punishment per combat. Games like D3 use ridiculous damage numbers to make it flashy and draw the attentions of ADD addled youngsters and then heals it up quick as lightning, only to do it all over again.

I say, if used appropriately, it isn't a bad thing. But when it is abused, there is a real problem that does need to be addressed.
Its more than just a gimmick. It can be very challenging. If you take enough damage quickly you will die. As opposed to the games we've been discussing where you are practically immortal.

Remember that youtube vid with the level 60 Hardcore?
 

thespyder

Golden Member
Aug 31, 2006
1,979
0
0
Its more than just a gimmick. It can be very challenging. If you take enough damage quickly you will die. As opposed to the games we've been discussing where you are practically immortal.

Remember that youtube vid with the level 60 Hardcore?
Challenge is one thing. but artificially increasing health and damage and Regen rates just to bring the damage on hit numbers up is just childish.

You can do the same thing with lower overall health/damage figures. When you are talking about thousands (or tens of thousands) of hit points in a single hit, it is nothing more than a gimmick (in my opinion).
 

motsm

Golden Member
Jan 20, 2010
1,822
2
76
Challenge is one thing. but artificially increasing health and damage and Regen rates just to bring the damage on hit numbers up is just childish.

You can do the same thing with lower overall health/damage figures. When you are talking about thousands (or tens of thousands) of hit points in a single hit, it is nothing more than a gimmick (in my opinion).
Why do you care if a number is 100,000 or 100?
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
I love ramboing, I hate hide and seeking. So, I have no issues with either regen our healthpacs.
 

thespyder

Golden Member
Aug 31, 2006
1,979
0
0
Why do you care if a number is 100,000 or 100?
I am going to go with:
"artificially increasing health and damage and Regen rates just to bring the damage on hit numbers up is just childish."

If 100 will do the trick, i don't need to artificially inflate my ego by adding several zeros to the number. there is a point beyond which incremental increase goes from making sense to making sensationalism.
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
82,076
15,899
126
Challenge is one thing. but artificially increasing health and damage and Regen rates just to bring the damage on hit numbers up is just childish.

You can do the same thing with lower overall health/damage figures. When you are talking about thousands (or tens of thousands) of hit points in a single hit, it is nothing more than a gimmick (in my opinion).
I guess I see what you're saying. But I'm more interested in the actual game play than the numbers themselves. If I can die quickly by not paying attention or getting ahead too fast in the game, thats much different than a game that wont let me lose cuz its afraid my feelings will be hurt.
 

thespyder

Golden Member
Aug 31, 2006
1,979
0
0
I guess I see what you're saying. But I'm more interested in the actual game play than the numbers themselves. If I can die quickly by not paying attention or getting ahead too fast in the game, thats much different than a game that wont let me lose cuz its afraid my feelings will be hurt.
totally agree.
 

Lumathix

Golden Member
Mar 16, 2004
1,686
0
46
The early Everquest was harsh.

You could go to a dungeon and fall into a well three stories down and get killed in seconds by things you group had no way to kill.

Then you had to and beg other players to come spend hours fighting down to get to your body for you, or it'd decay and you lose everything you had with you.

Similarly, raids of dozens of players would often be a disaster when those players then had to beg dozens of other players to spend several hours to help get their bodies.

And there was no guarantee those helpers wouldn't then have the same thing happen.

Add to that when you asked someone for help, you initially to have to give them permission to get your belongings - which they could just steal, and some did.

It softened up later, as it should.
Epic.
 

Chiropteran

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2003
9,811
110
106
I agree regen is overdone these days and makes for lack of fun. I am not a big fps player, so I mostly come from the RPG/MMO side. The biggest flaw of free fast regen?

Fights are completely binary.

This takes away a huge level of depth. If you win a fight, you win, yay. If you lose, you lose, boohoo.

In the "old" days, without infinite free fast regen, there were many shades of gray between the basic black and white of "win or lose". There was winning, but you took a bit of damage, and would need to rest after several more fights. Then there was winning, but taking a good bit of damage, and only having enough in you for maybe one more fight. Then there was winning, barely, with a sliver of health and no spells, where you might actually haver "lost" overall because the cost to replenish might be more than you gained from the kill, but not as punishing as dying... etc.

These multiple possible outcomes made for a more interesting game experience.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY