next »

[J-Snake]

It comes down to repercussions you want to achieve. And from time to time I see discussions on this treated with less respect than it deserves. It is not something trivial.

For example strategy and planning, taking smart mobility and geometry into account, to surprise an enemy from the back would lose credibility if you are not rewarded for that. If the enemy has enough time to turn around since he can take a load of damage it boils down to only "stand out and fight" - skills.

As I currently see auto-regeneration is 2 wins at once for the "casual" dev. First it eases up game-design, second it satisfies the big amount of lazy "gamers".

[ThemsAllTook]

As I currently see auto-regeneration is 2 wins at once for the "casual" dev. First it eases up game-design, second it satisfies the big amount of lazy "gamers".

Those sure don't sound like wins to me. You get to apply a bodge to your game design so that you avoid tackling the problems that would make your game really stand out, and it ends up as something mediocre that satisfies the lowest common denominator of player? I guess if you're a businessperson this might make sense, but from an artisan's point of view it's definitely lose-lose.

[gimymblert]

It's all about what is the goal and the gameplay function. Most enemy are just obstacle, so having internal organ simulation is overkill, it only had to the tediousness. I played deus ex, killed all enemy but had my legs broken, tedious crawling ensue

nintendo should remake deus ex as a sonic game with motion controls imo

I was stuck in a room because I could not jump noreach the door handle, nintendo would not let that happen  hasn't play since! However I was more like referring to COD like for the overkill But deus ex did get a bit overboard, I could not die

[s0]

should have just reloaded 

[J-Snake]

As I currently see auto-regeneration is 2 wins at once for the "casual" dev. First it eases up game-design, second it satisfies the big amount of lazy "gamers".

Those sure don't sound like wins to me.

It sure does sound like wins for AAA studios, judging by what they decide to do.

[baconman]

Pacing on regen-health needs a little better management, to encourage a prolonged, but not big time of concealment. 20-30 seconds should suffice as opposed to the 5-7 they have now, because it allows you to dip into that slight anxiety/uncertainty about survival you're *meant* to have at that point, long enough for it to matter.

I mean, plenty of us love Roguelikes, and that also features health regen, right? But it's not like you press '.' ten times and you're MAX HP again.

Now, the weapons are another big factor in exploring the potential of the genre, and as I argued once upon a time, was a major factor in how Duke 3D and/or Quake 3 totally outshines this current gen. Specifically because the weapons selection is NOT entirely realistic. I mean, when was the last time you shot a freeze gun or "Devastator" that bounced off of walls? Or set up a laser tripbomb and chased/lured adversaries into it?

The problem with so many of these brown shooters now is that they're all very copypasta'd and limited.

[ThemsAllTook]

The problem with so many of these brown shooters now is that they're all very copypasta'd and limited.

Yeah, this is another unfortunate side effect of attempting realism...your thoughts end up getting funneled to the same place as everyone else's who's trying to make realistic games. Borrowing from reality for metaphors players can immediately understand is useful, but if you try to borrow too much it'll stifle your creativity and make your game worse.

[J-Snake]

Even the small fragile girl(which they try to work out convincingly) in the new Tomb Raider is now on auto-healing. If that doesn't tell you a story.

[s0]

I mean, plenty of us love Roguelikes, and that also features health regen, right?

not mine

also idk if it's even possible to pass judgement on regen health as a mechanic in and of itself because it's used in different games for different purposes.

for instance regen health in modern shooters comes with a whole design package that also includes linear "setpiece" based levels and, often, cover mechanics. what it comes down to is that the games are stripped of most of their "strategic" elements (i.e. resource management) and focus on constant engagement w/ as little "downtime" as possible.

otoh in roguelikes regen health usually exists to balance out some of the inherent unfairness that comes with relying on a RNG and is limited by a hunger mechanic.

[s0]

The problem with so many of these brown shooters now is that they're all very copypasta'd and limited.

Yeah, this is another unfortunate side effect of attempting realism...your thoughts end up getting funneled to the same place as everyone else's who's trying to make realistic games. Borrowing from reality for metaphors players can immediately understand is useful, but if you try to borrow too much it'll stifle your creativity and make your game worse.

but then the problem isn't "borrowing from reality" it's everyone borrowing the same shit from each other. also i severely doubt that so-called "brown shooters" attempt to be realistic on any serious level, other than possibly graphics.

[Muz]

Personally, the only FPS I've ever really enjoyed was Counter-Strike. While it could use more realistic additions (like peeking out of corners or crippling damage), IMO, it hit a good balance between tension and frustration.

I dislike FPSes where you have to shoot the guy several times ala Half-Life or Halo. Tracing your mouse over the opponent for a period of time in order to 'win' is lame. Counter-Strike wasn't quite one hit, one kill... there were plenty one hit kill weapons out there, but they were counter-balanced with things like high recoil, low ammo, low recovery times, loud sounds, and so on.

It had a bit of strategy as well.. you had the weaker damage wall-piercing rifle shots that netted a fun kill to person hiding. You had the very low damage, but almost no recoil, high ammo Glock, which required quite a bit of finesse to pull off. There were like 5 SMGs, and 3 of them were solid choices for different situations or play styles.

[moi]

The solution is to not play videogames
ther's all dumb, there is no solution to make games better, because videogames are all just a waste of time

>2013
>still trying to improve "videogame experience"

I like indie games because there self-accepting and parodying 30 years old games is less involved and also they waste a lot less time

[ThemsAllTook]

also i severely doubt that so-called "brown shooters" attempt to be realistic on any serious level, other than possibly graphics.

Yeah, I suppose that's not entirely accurate. It's probably more a matter of trying to be cinematic. These kinds of games are poor copies of films which themselves are poor copies of reality.

[J-Snake]

The only shooter I have enjoyed is the original Far Cry from Crytek.

[gimymblert]

I still like slow aiming fps liek golden eye with license to skill (one bullet kill) it has better emphasis on positioning and outmaneuver evasion. The mind game over a simple door was lol. It wasn't until modern warfare that "a bit" of that was recaptured. Mice FPS tend to be see = kill.

[vids]

High bullet damage translates to a low TTK (Time To Kill). I used to dislike games with a high TTK (Battlefield 1942, CS, Halo) over games that did it more realistically (CoD), but not anymore.

Usually, the games with a higher TTK require more skill, emphasizing more on the difference between a body shot and a headshot. CoD needs to be more frantic, they don't want players to be following each other emptying out whole magazines.

[Konidias]

Honestly I think most shooters should do away with health regen... Just let players survive a few more shots instead. This way you get shot in the leg, it does like 25% health damage that you just don't get back.

You are now essentially "wounded", and already at a disadvantage against a player who is at 100% health. You don't regen, so now you have to play with that "injury".

If you then go and slow down the player, or make them hop around on one foot, or whatever realism you layer on top of that, it will just be annoying.

It really depends on the shooter, obviously... but I think for online shooters, or multiplayer shooters, no regen is the way to go. There's much more of a rush when you kill 2-3 people while having 20% health than when you can just get shot a couple of times and then hide behind cover until you're fully healed. Without regen, getting hit actually matters a lot. Aiming matters a lot because the guy with the better aim will do the most damage, and damage has more value since it can't be replenished.

You then just tweak the TTK (which would be determined by how much damage each hit actually does) and you balance from there. If you absolutely *must* have healing in the game, do it manually, so the player needs medical kits or whatever. Don't have it just automatically regenerate.

edit: I just want to add that I'm actually against headshots... I think they actually reduce skill required. The reasoning behind this is because people can just "spray and pray" and land a lucky headshot, getting an instant kill they didn't really earn. Sure it's great for the "pros" who can aim at little targets better, but "pros" should have enough advantage being pro that they don't need headshots to give them even more advantage. (and screw them over when a bad player gets lucky and nails them in the head)

[Belimoth]

That seems like it's based on a pretty backwards definition of skill. The player who gets the kill has the better strategy, yes? It all depends on what kind of gameplay you want to funnel your players into.

Understand that I am looking at this from the perspective that there is no athleticism involved only player choice.

[Graham-]

High TTK requires more skill? ... I don't even know what you're saying. I think it's design dependent.

Headshots don't reduce skill. Averages work: science. If you get lucky headshots, and they are only lucky, then the same amount of luck goes to your opponents who get headshots on you. It evens out.

You can talk all you want about how "better" realism is but the fact is this: regen balances the challenge curve. The challenge curve is an important part of design. If you want to remove the regen then you need something comparably better in exchange, or a replacement for what originally handled the curve.

[Muz]

edit: I just want to add that I'm actually against headshots... I think they actually reduce skill required. The reasoning behind this is because people can just "spray and pray" and land a lucky headshot, getting an instant kill they didn't really earn. Sure it's great for the "pros" who can aim at little targets better, but "pros" should have enough advantage being pro that they don't need headshots to give them even more advantage. (and screw them over when a bad player gets lucky and nails them in the head)

I love the idea behind headshots. Heads are a really small target, very hard to hit while moving, and they're great as a 'bonus points' to excellent aimers.

Headshots are great when combined with sniper rifles, which in itself is a weapon used by players who love precision.

Headshots work great with low recoil, low damage weapons which are used by players who want to hit a small difficult target multiple times.

The spray and pray style is punished by games like Counter-Strike. If you miss on the first shot, the recoil makes the shots really inaccurate, and you're unlikely to score normal hits. You can also have headshots actually not be critical. Instead of making it a one hit kill, you can require 2-3 shots from a typical 'spray and pray' weapon to take them down, when the same weapon might need typically 6-10 body shots to kill.

Headshots also force another tactical decision in CS - helmets. Helmets don't save you from a headshot by a disadvantaged weapon (sniper, desert eagle, AK47). But they'll double the hits needed from weaker weapons like pistols and SMGs.