Auto-aim, cover, health regen in shooters: why the hate?

[rsvp42]

I apologize in advance if this has been addressed already, but why is there so much contempt for these shooter game mechanics?

Auto-aim: Basically it adds a little extra precision to console FPSs, right? Because the all-superior mouse and keyboard aren't the standard control scheme for a console? So what's the problem? Sure, if it's magnetizing everyone's reticles into instant headshots, there's a problem, but the latest instance of it for me has been Halo: Reach and I'm not really any better at headshots because of it. Controllers lack precision in some ways. Also EVERYONE has it, so it's a level playing field. A wash.

Cover systems: It's a pretty logical type of mechanic, correct? We would take cover where we could, blind fire, all those things. I agree that if it turns every fight into a long-range game of whack-a-mole or you have an overly magnetic back it's bad, but a "cover system" isn't the problem, it's the way it's implemented. Obviously, this is more of a TPS mechanic, but I still see a lot of commentary on it.

Health regeneration: Also, shield regeneration. Ultimately, how a game balances the difficulty of making a kill is a choice of the designers. What matters is balance. Health regeneration is only a problem if it makes getting kills unreasonably hard when weighed against the other demands of the game. I like it. It means that finding cover can be a viable way to survive a fight and puts emphasis on efficient attacks. Especially good for a game with special weapons to grab. Then again, another game with quicker deaths and faster respawns can be fun too (TF2?). It's all about how it works for the game.

Feel free to add your own gripes about shooter game mechanics, defend those that come under fire, or ignore the entire post if this has been done to death.

 

[Kollega]

Why the hate for cover systems and health regeneration? Overuse. That's it. They are used too much in current generation of shooters, and of course many instances are implemented poorly due to Sturgeon's Law [footnote]90% of everything is crap.[/footnote].

I have to say, i don't like "pure" health regen, when you can just hide behind a wall after getting shot with a rocket launcher and be fine in ten seconds (like in Modern Warfare 2). It's shallow in tactical terms and rarely makes sense from a narrative standpoint. What i do like is when health is restored with medkits, but you also have a regenerating shield (original Halo, Borderlands). Such system adds some tactical depth and is a bit less conspicuous than just "walking off" bullet wounds.

 

[IBlackKiteI]

I see no issue with auto-aim, I dont agree or disagree with it.

Cover systems are great when they work, although they never have.

As for health regeneration it depends on the game.

 

[The Rockerfly]

Because that makes it too easy for console gamers who don't deserve fps's

/PC fanboy troll

Actually, it is quite common for a lot of pc gamers to say that. Not in those exact words and not even knowing but those things are a necessity for console gaming while many pc gamers think we should have them

Not all, but a lot of people I've argued about this have said that games shouldn't have them in. Then it goes off topic with the pc gamers saying the same elitist bullshit and the console gamers saying the same whiny shit. All in all, everyone gets pissed off because neither can accept some people want a sofa to play games on and another want a desk

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I think you meant aim-assist. I personally hate aim-assist offline or online, I hate when the game moves my crosshairs. I don't mind auto-aim in shooters though, it works great in Metal Gear Online, and it's completely balanced because of its short range.

I'm getting tired of cover-based shooters but online I don't care about cover because in most online cover-based shooters if you take cover you are usually going to get killed easily (see Uncharted 2).

I do hate health-regen in online shooters because there is no penalty for running around getting shot (but not killed) since you regen health. MAG is a great example of how to implement a health system into an online FPS, and it's the best online FPS this gen.

 

[migo]

I apologize in advance if this has been addressed already, but why is there so much contempt for these shooter game mechanics?

Auto-aim: EVERYONE has it, so it's a level playing field. A wash.

Yeah, everyone has it, but it's like playing tetris and have the game automatically place the blocks for you once you've got it near where it needs to go.

Cover systems: It's a pretty logical type of mechanic, correct? We would take cover where we could, blind fire, all those things. I agree that if it turns every fight into a long-range game of whack-a-mole or you have an overly magnetic back it's bad, but a "cover system" isn't the problem, it's the way it's implemented. Obviously, this is more of a TPS mechanic, but I still see a lot of commentary on it.

I actually like cover mechanics in principle, but they should be a substitute for regenerating health, not used in concert with them.

Health regeneration:. quote]

It usually crops up in realistic games, and as unrealistic as health packs are, health regeneration is more unrealistic, which really breaks any sense of immersion - very important for an FPS. Also, like auto aim, it feels like the game is cheating for you.

 

[Eric_Autopsy]

Auto-aim: It's hackable. And by god does people hack that stuff. It's also overused, but I have no grapes with it, really.

Cover systems: Don't really have a problem with those, although I would like to see a "lean" button in atleast ONE console game by the end of this year.

Health regeneration: It's cheap, stupid and makes no sence. Therefore it's perfect for the average joe, I guess. I personally really frikkin' hate arbitreary health/shield regeneration without a reason in games, as I much more prefere opening my inventory and right-clicking a medkit to use it.

 

[Booze Zombie]

I love cover systems, I hate auto-aim and I think health regeneration should be manual.
If you don't give enough of a fuck to the heal, why should the game do it for you?

"Oh no a bullet in my arm, I shall take that out and use my impossibly unlimited supply of medical supplies."

 

[kingcom]

Auto-Aim: If the game aims for you, why not take it one step further and auto-play for you?

Cover: I assume you mean sticky cover, which suffers from the same problem as auto-aim, you dont need to control how you move, you just run straight into a wall and it does it for you.

Health Regen: Not necessarily bad but often takes away any threat of danger when you just heal anyway.

 

[Unrulyhandbag]

Health regeneration at the speed in recent shooters is bad, in a single-player game it simply makes you into captain scarlet. indestructible.
Shield regeneration can at least be explained and has it's place if the players health is suitably tiny. Back in the day of instant health packs a lot of people disliked them and simply wanted games to be without any form of regeneration, except between levels.

The thing with health packs is you had a limited amount of regeneration if you wasted them trying the same stupid tactic over and over then more fool you. With almost instant health regeneration you can try your stupid tactic over and over until pure luck gets you through.

Auto-aim is a crutch allowing the controllers to work in the games, it simply points out that the controllers are unsuitable for first person gaming. Fortunately you can often turn it off except in multi-player. Giving everybody auto-aim isn't a solution as the crutch is as much a problem as a blessing you aim high on a target and the auto-aim points centre of mass meaning your hit strikes for less damage or hits the other players cover. So long as the current controllers are around then it's a problem that we live with, just don't be happy about it.

cover systems. No problems here, move along. Even in doom the normal way of dealing with a situation was to retreat to a corner and keep popping around it. That or strafe dodging but 65mph player characters are as much a crutch as autoaim.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Cover systems: Don't really have a problem with those, although I would like to see a "lean" button in atleast ONE console game by the end of this year.

I really don't understand why FPSs don't have a lean function, it makes no sense. I guess they don't want to deepen the gameplay at all. If you go back over 2 years ago, you'll find a lean function in an online shooter; Metal Gear Online is a TPS that allows for shooting in the 1st-person perspective and you can LEAN while shooting when in 1st-person. If a TPS can do this online, why can't a FPS do this?

 

[Meestor Pickle]

The "real" CoD's allowed for leaning

 

[Mr. Omega]

Autoaim: I personally think it removes some of the challenge, but lack of can make it too difficult for some people. I remember the system in Sin and Punishment was something I liked: You can switch from auto to manual aim. Auto aim was easier, but manual did more damage (and this was for an N64 game). Encourage people to refine their skills with maual, but don't make it so they need to spend ages in target practice to even stand a chance.

Cover systems: Agree 100%. It's not cover systems itself that I mind, it's lazy ways it's implemented (ie: conviently placed chest-high walls in absolutely random places, making ALL combat in the game cover-based.).

Regeneration: I didn't mind Halo's system. It recharged SHIELDS, NOT HEALTH. What I want to know is who decided to take shileds out of the equation and just regenerate health. What's more, as unrealistic as health packs are, when your game boasts realism (see: COD: MW2, BFBC2, Black Ops, MoH), regenration is NOT realistic (or at least less realistic that health packs).

 

[Hashime]

I like the way the STALKER games do health, how ME2 does cover, and I don't worry about auto aim.
In STALKER you take a fee bullets you die, but so do human enemies, on headshot and they are done.

 

[lapan]

The problem is that there is too little variation. Developers nowadays go for the save and easy money, while i would appreciate some innovation.

 

[Kiju]

Cover systems...I like. A lot, in fact...

Health regen is nice since it negates the concept of having to find health pick-ups without leaving the player-character either dead if they don't do something right, or too powerful to make the game challenging.

Auto-Targeting, I hate. It's a mechanic that I even hated when I played console games; it's more nuisance than help.

 

[Jimmybobjr]

Auto Aim:
Only appears on Consoles.
Play PC.

Cover:
Been so dont so damned much, its really kinda a requirement if you are making a shooter.
Not something you say in marketing "(LOOK! WE MAKE A COVER SYSTEM!)"

Health Regen:
It removes most of the danger from a Shooter.
you are mostly fine, as health recovers.
the only time you die is when you would die even if you didnt have regening health. Ie: Being shot in the face by a tank. It defeats the point of Health.