In multiplayer you have the option of a medic class, which IMHO is even better because it encourages teamwork and tactical play.kebab4you said:In single player I can accept it merely for the argument that it makes for better level design(bullshit argument but still). However in multiplayer it should be as illegal as it is to have aimbot.
Mhm. If people truly didn't like it, developers wouldn't put it in games. The video game industry doesn't exist to not sell games.IBlackKiteI said:THANK YOU.Shio said:If health packs win, we have some liars amongst us; regenerating health wouldn't be in video games if people didn't like it and therefor by into it.
The poll results are ridiculous, regenerating health is commonly used in console shooters, so therefore its automatically hated despite any advantages it may bring.
As for what I reckon, I don't really care.
Know why health regeneration exists? People complained home video games were too hard. They didn't want the extreme challenge that arcade machines offered, as the only reason they were that hard and used that style of health, was so the machine would take more of your money.Haakong said:Well, games can be great even if they have a flaw, no? Many just "go with it".Shio said:Mhm. If people truly didn't like it, developers wouldn't put it in games. The video game industry doesn't exist to not sell games.IBlackKiteI said:THANK YOU.Shio said:If health packs win, we have some liars amongst us; regenerating health wouldn't be in video games if people didn't like it and therefor by into it.
The poll results are ridiculous, regenerating health is commonly used in console shooters, so therefore its automatically hated despite any advantages it may bring.
As for what I reckon, I don't really care.
Like for me, CoD:MW are great games. I love em, but I dont like the regenerating health in them. It makes me play recklessly and take silly chances, since if I mess up I can just take a nap for 10 sec.
Maybe its ok in multiplayer where you should have a way to make every 1v1 fight fair, but not in single player.
Healthkits were commonly used in shooters before regenerating health and I don't remember these being particularly hated.IBlackKiteI said:THANK YOU.Shio said:If health packs win, we have some liars amongst us; regenerating health wouldn't be in video games if people didn't like it and therefor by into it.
The poll results are ridiculous, regenerating health is commonly used in console shooters, so therefore its automatically hated despite any advantages it may bring.
As for what I reckon, I don't really care.
Err... the mainstream target audience of Halo and Call of Duty is hardly the kind to spend any significant time on a website dedicated to criticism and analysis of the video game medium and industry.Shio said:Considering how average the members here are, it's a safe bet the people that use this site are also the ones buying Halo and Call of Duty.JediMB said:Or, brace yourself, the majority of the players that prefer regenerating health don't go to gaming forums like these.Shio said:If health packs win, we have some liars amongst us; regenerating health wouldn't be in video games if people didn't like it and therefor by into it.
I would dare argue that it's the opposite, or at the least highly dependent on how it's applied. Medipacks are from the days of Doom and such, which as I recall correctly were all about running and gunning like there's no tomorrow.voorhees123 said:Regenerating is fine as long as its quick. Although i would prefer it to go down fast so you can make those life/death dashes to cover. I guess you could have the medi packs for heath, and then a shield system that can take a few hits to decrease. Then that would be good.
But then medi packs only can make you play more strategicly so you dont just blindly run from cover to cover knowing you will get full bar when you get their. But then the regenerating promotes a faster passed game.
So i guess its:-
medipacks = slower methodical game play.
Regerating = faster, more risky game play.