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

[Asdalan08]

About Health Regen, although the life-bar is highly unrealistic but in modern FPS's you could be shot in the head and survive just barely and within a few seconds your up and running again like nothing happened, I could possibly see this happening ONCE in a hollywood movie but you could do this 50 times and you'd still be alive. 50 bullets to the head would kill you either way, a few seconds between them shouldn't matter.

 

[jopomeister]

If they claim to be realistic, they shouldn't contain Auto-aim or health regeneration. -Looks at MoH-

 

[John the Gamer]

They're all fine by me, except health regeneration. shield regen is OK, but health should only regenererate slowly over time*. not like Halo does it.
(*actually take days or weeks to fully recover or something)

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Auto aim is complete and utter shit. It is basically trying to cover up a flaw in the system. The fact that auto aim even exists or needs to exist proves the point that consoles should include keyboard and mouse support. You're actually giving people a watered down aimbot hack and that is all it is.

Cover is fine if done correctly but is being way overused.

Health regen is way over used and not needed in many circumstances and encourages lack of tactis. Regen health encourages run in style play and lack of team work. As if you have limited health you need to work together more to help stop untimely deaths and it involves the implementation of an actual class system not the build system that CoD has introduced.

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?

CoD series had it and then they removed it for MW2. Some do but other don't it is more to do with a hardware restraint on consoles and the simplifaction of control schemes not being redevloped properly for PC. You could also say it is due to lazyness of lack of implementation of proper keyboard and mouse support for consoles.

 

[shootthebandit]

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

1) 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.

2) 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.

3) 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.

1) i hate autoaim, i just feel really cheap when its obvious (MW2 in looking directly at you) although most games its not noticable

2) cover systems are meh, i dont really care

3) health regen, nothing beats the good ol' medikit and health bar

 

[Ascarus]

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.

the other elements the OP brought up don't really bother, but this i agree with. regenerating health always felt odd to me.

 

[spartan231490]

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.

Auto-aim: I despise it and really wish it had a fucking off button. I don't need auto-aim to get hits and headshots, to me it is actually detrimental cuz the damn thing always tries to lock on to someone other than the guy I'm shooting at. I have yet to play an auto targeting game when i didn't aim at one guy, have another run in front, and end up firing my sniper into a tree halfway between. I'm more than precise enough with a controller to rack off headshots without auto aim, which means that my reticle moving on it's own, even if it's towards my target, is detrimental because it causes the retical to move at a different, less predictable speed.

cover: I think it gets a lot of hate just because there haven't been any games that had a really good system to implement it. Usually it's too hard to get out of cover in a hurry, or the cover doesn't do much, or my personal favorite: when ur in cover, you cant shoot in the direction directly in front of your character, cuz the game wants you to fire over the damn cover.

health regen: never heard much hate for this. I hear people say, "that's unrealistic" once or twice per game but i don't generally see much hate for it. I like the way cod did it, any faster than that and it can interfear with a fight, but at that speed you wont see much health regen until one of u is dead unless your doing a range fight. It also allows you to have a good chance of getting killstreaks.

I'm going to add one: blood on the screen animation. god i hate that with a flaming passion. Yeah, it's sorta realistic, except I'm pretty sure that if you get shot anywhere that makes you bleed into your eye, it's either a graze, or an insta-dead. it pisses me off so much, it's annoying, and gives me a god damn headache. It doesn't impede you in a fight, cuz it's just a red tint, not an opache color to block your sight, it just makes your screen blindingly bright and irritating and causes headaches for no god damn good reason. /rant

 

[DazBurger]

I like the Halo version of Auto-aim... Or in its case, Aim-assist.
It lowers your sensitivity a bit when aiming at someone, making it easier to make a accurate shot.

 

[Netrigan]

I'm rather fond of hybrid systems that use health units and only recharge one of them. That way you'll never get stuck in that impossible situation where you have one unit of health and a room of baddies until your next power-up. Better mix of aggression and caution from me. Prey's system of recharging to 25% was also good.

But I find recharging shields work in two types of games. First one are the ones that make you feel godlike 90% of the time (Prototype and Saints Row 2). Mayhem is great with regenerating health. The other type is at the opposite end of the spectrum where the game just hammers you constantly(Gears and CoD4). Straight shooters that use the mechanic either feel too easy or too hard with nothing in between. Halo CE was stupid easy... until it wasn't, then went immediately back to stupid easy. Never did warm to it.

 

[Hosker]

I hate PC users always saying the mouse and keyboard is more precise. It all comes down to what you use more.
I play FPS games way better with a control.

Anyway, I only have a problem with auto aim, it usually makes the game too easy.

 

[s0p0g]

auto-aim - because you only need this if you suck at shooters. i mean, ain't it exactly what shooters are about? also, you can play shooters on consoles just fine without auto-aim; GoldenEye, Perfect Dark, Quake, (name of a shooter here), they are all very much playable without auto-aim. that's why auto-aim is for them so-called n00bs.

cover - cover's fine. as ong as it's not only chest-high walls i liked cover in rainbow six vegas pretty much.

auto-regen: well... because only trolls regen that fast. humans need med-packs, or painkillers, or force heal, or... you name it. that way, you'll watch your health more carefully, and thus play more intelligent, with tactics and stuff like that, to keep your health, instead of thinking "hey, i just need to wait x seconds afterward, so i'll just rush in, head first" wtf?!

 

[Baron von Blitztank]

I don't mind Auto-Aim Auto-Aim if it is in a game like Doom, Duke Nukem 3D and Blood because these games didn't require you to aim in specific areas so that an enemy can be damaged and every fight came down to who gets pumped full of lead the most. I despise it in games where you have to aim at a specific spot on the enemy because most of the time you aim at either the wrong area entirely or at completley different monsters.

Cover based shooting is Ok in my opinion but then again, the only games I have played with this are Uncharted (both of them), InFamous and Transformers: War for Cybertron (to a lesser extent). I didn't mind it so much in InFamous and Uncharted where you can press a button to change your view to the right or the left depending on which direction the enemies are coming from but I was annoyed in War for Cybertron because you can only aim to the right, so if the Decepticons/Autobots are coming in from the left, you have to run/drive/fly out to find somewhere else to hide and take potshots.

Regenerating health is kind of lazy in my opinion, You can just run back into a previously cleared room or duck behind cover for a few seconds and then you are perfectly fine. I liked how Metro 2033 handled it by providing Medkits to heal you up but also including health that regenerates very slowly incase you run out. It still doesn't excuse why we can't have health-bars though and it wouldn't hurt to explain HOW you are able to regenerate from a bullet to the brain.

 

[RobCoxxy]

Health Regen amounts to at least one camper in a CoD match getting a fuckload of kills, hiding behind a box until he magically heals his gunshot wounds in his head, before killing again.

It's just not right.

 

[The Rockerfly]

for all the people saying that pc gamers are elitists, I get bullied at school for playing on a pc. "pc games are little fag nerds"

If I am honest, I even see a lot of pc gaming as nerdy. RTS's with micro managing, file management for mods, remembering hot keys, arguing that games a lot older are better then new games. It's easy to see why people would regard it as nerdy

However, doesn't mean I agree with bullying, I do enjoy my RTS's and most things pc gamers like I enjoy too. I do feel sorry for you buddy.

 

[Netrigan]

Duke 3D had a decent solution. Levels were littered with hydrants, water fountains, toilets, etc. which allowed you to manually raise your health by small increments. Duke was like the second FPS I ever played and I abused the hell out of that feature.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

As much as I'm sure it pains console players to hear, when it comes to shooters, PC is just plain superior.

While PC shooters are certainly superior when it comes to the aiming, it still requires an equal level of a different skillset to do well in a console shooter.

For example tactical thinking, knowing when to be aggressive and when to be stealthy, being aware of one's surroundings, knowing how to use the map and how to move effectively around it etc etc...

this. i'd love to see even half my pc elitist friends i know jump on a console and beat me at it since the pc is "superior" to all, in which hell they could choose the game and console and id be cool with a 1 v 7 or 8. regardless of the actual hardware itself, it takes a complete different mindset and use of timing/weaponry than it does for pc

OT:

aim assist is annoying, i turn it off when at all possible, auto aim (like in cod) isn't too bad..but still dont like that its doing it for me. but ill play along.

cover systems: personally i love them, i love third person shooters and i love having more tactics to the game rather than "LAWL TWITCH SPAM KILLED YOU WHEN YOU WRENT EVEN LOOKING! YOU BAD!", however, im still waiting for a more fluid/on the go kind of cover system.

health regen: personally i dont like FULL health regen, but i HATE not having any regen at all, it makes every 1 v 1 more fair when health/shield regen is involved, so you aren't running around on one health point everytime you kill someone in a firefight head on. halo reach i think is a perfect example of how the health + shield combo should be.

 

[Irridium]

Auto-aim I don't have a strong opinion on.

As for the other two:

Cover - its fine when implemented well, but so far in most games it just ends up being "sit behind wall, wait for enemy to show head, get headshot".

Thats it, and its boring.

Regenerating Health - It stops the game from being intense and fun. At least for me. I'd much rather games use the segmented health system that was in games like Far Cry 2(had the best one I believe), Chronicles of Riddick, Resistance: Fall of Man(the first one).

It adds the best of both a health kit system and regenerating health. You have a bar you must manage, meaning you have to play smart, and since your health regenerates each bar separately(say you have 4 bars, 2 and a half get taken out, so it would regenerate the second one, while the others are still out), you aren't stuck with the "1 hp" situations that fuck you over in most games that require health kits.

 

[TPiddy]

I, for one, absolutely love it when a battle in an FPS / TPS takes a while to play out. Whether it's a shotgun dance in Gears or a battle rifle showdown in Halo, I want people to have to work a little harder for the kill. None of this one or two bullets and you're done bullshit. Games like that give people kills by accident or spamming. Earn it you cheap bastards!

 

[Netrigan]

i'd love to see even half my pc elitist friends i know jump on a console and beat me at it since the pc is "superior" to all, in which hell they could choose the game and console and id be cool with a 1 v 7 or 8. regardless of the actual hardware itself, it takes a complete different mindset

a rather one-sided challenge as you'd be going up against someone with minimal gamepad experience, a device he considers inherently inferior. Of course he's going to get owned.

While you could use someone's gaming rig, plug in a controller you're familar with and go up against PC people with the tools they prefer and see how you fare... you know, a pretty much even fight unless they're right about your controller.

I'm a PC-to-console convert and I've come to enjoy the superior movement controls of the gamepad but I wish the percision aiming of the mouse in virtually every game I play. I'm gradually getting better and might even be able turn off those aim assists in the near future but it's night and day. And I'm not even that good with a mouse. The gaming gods can pretty much hit any moving target in their range of movement while running in the opposite direction. I've never, ever, ever have seen a gamepad player come anywhere close to that level of skill.