Regerating Health Systems

Post » Sun Oct 20, 2013 9:24 pm

I noticed a lot of the dicussions on games recently has been on the "health" system of the player's character. Personally, I've liked a system that was mixed; in other words, there's still a health bar, but it only regenerates to a certain point, like half or so, and the rest has to be reclaimed by way of a health pack or medic.

Halo CE (and subsequently Reach) did something different where instead of having armor and health pickups, the "Armor" regenerated, and health had to be replenished by a pickup. In more modern shooters, we see only where the health is regenerating, or has pickups to "heal."

In Brink, we have something where your Health will only regen to its current "pip," and the medic has to heal you to give you the rest of your health back.

I'm curious to know what others like in a health system as well.

User avatar
Farrah Lee
 
Posts: 3488
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 10:32 pm

Post » Sun Oct 20, 2013 4:38 pm

Depends on the game honestly.

User avatar
Leticia Hernandez
 
Posts: 3426
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:46 am

Post » Sun Oct 20, 2013 11:07 am

I think any health system should match the behaviour of AI routines so that both end up complementing gameplay. If you have a run and gun game where the player circle strafes while firing nonstop rockets, and the enemy is doing the same, health should drop fast and punishingly but also get buffed back up just as quick with pickups (see Doom, TF2, etc.) In games where the player takes a more measured approach, uses stealth or keeps behind cover, popping in and out of a firefight with enemies doing the same, a regenerating shield system allows the player to brush off the occasional hit but still be forced to stay out of prolonged incoming fire. If the game aims for a more realistic ideal - my preference, personally - then taking damage should be violent and debilitating, where you have to stop bleeding, apply bandages and/or meds, and eventually repair any armor or recover from the wounds. This would of course only apply to milsim tactical shooters like SWAT and ARMA, gritty FPS-RPGs like New Vegas or STALKER, and games where the AI react with similar regard for their personal safety to ensure a level playing field. All three mechanics can work in the right circumstances; in the wrong ones they just seem jarring.
User avatar
Leah
 
Posts: 3358
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:11 pm

Post » Sun Oct 20, 2013 12:50 pm

I don't mind it if it is minor and earned, such as in New Vegas where you had to spend quite a bit of money at the clinic to get that perk.

I don't like it if it is automatically just there, like in Skyrim.

User avatar
KRistina Karlsson
 
Posts: 3383
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 9:22 pm

Post » Sun Oct 20, 2013 5:57 pm

I hate regenerative health in video games so much. If it's regenerative shields like in the Halo video games and Mass Effect video games then regenerative shields is ok because those 2 video games are in the future with advanced technology. If it's video games like The Elder Scrolls video games and Fallout video games then I do not want to see regenerative health in those 2 video games because The Elder Scrolls video games are set in medieval times and The Elder Scrolls video games have healing potions and healing spells those 2 are the only things that should regenerate your health in The Elder Scrolls video games. In the Fallout video games there should be no regenerative health because the world is destroyed from nuclear bombs and medical science advancing should cease and not advance so much like before the world got destroyed by nuclear bombs so our health should regenerate only from using bandages, food, health kits, health packs. med kits, and med packs.

User avatar
Sun of Sammy
 
Posts: 3442
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 3:38 pm

Post » Mon Oct 21, 2013 12:09 am

The regenerative shield feature in Halo: Combat Evolved was acceptable because there was still an underlying life bar which complimented the concept rather well.

In every other case I can think of at the moment, no.

I mostly hate regenerating health.

User avatar
Saul C
 
Posts: 3405
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 12:41 pm

Post » Sun Oct 20, 2013 9:43 pm

Yeah, gonna have to go with this.

User avatar
Alessandra Botham
 
Posts: 3440
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 6:27 pm

Post » Sun Oct 20, 2013 6:35 pm

I think this goes more to the way they do game balance, to make a game playability. I see games with regenerative health as more the the fun entertaining games that you can just play not expecting, to be playing, Operation Flashpoint or ARMA, if im playing Mass Effect, and trying to immerse myself into the characters and storyline, i dont want to be going back constantly because im dead in one shot, some games it really it can easily apply, if i was playing ARMA then no and Call of Duty is more in the category of mindless, fun entertaining game, rather than an attempt at a military simulation.

User avatar
The Time Car
 
Posts: 3435
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 7:13 pm

Post » Sun Oct 20, 2013 2:25 pm

That's why there should be bandages, health kits, health packs, med kits, med packs or whatever you want to call them to heal yourself when you are hurt, injured or wounded. Also no regenerative health makes you have more strategic tactical plans before you go into battle or combat. It makes playing video games more challenging which makes it more funner to play video games. At least for me.

User avatar
Matt Gammond
 
Posts: 3410
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:38 pm

Post » Sun Oct 20, 2013 1:39 pm

Being able to take infinite 3-round bursts to the chest under the pretense that you breathe for 5 seconds in between destroys my suspension of disbelief.

User avatar
Cat Haines
 
Posts: 3385
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 9:27 am

Post » Sun Oct 20, 2013 10:47 pm

Well, suspension of disbelief is obviously a subjective matter so I won't argue that you're "wrong" in your personal tastes. But personally, I don't find it any stranger than the pretense that a "med-kit" will grant you exact same level of immunity and recovery 9 times out of 10.

Myself, I think there's kind of a disconnect between the concept of "Hit Points" as it originated in table-top games and is generally modelled there, and it's functionality and interpretation as a core concept in videogames these days.

Dungeons and Dragons, for instance - HP isn't meant to represent "structural integrity" so much as a combination of luck, morale, experience, fatigue; and yes, physical damage. When damage is dealt, it's up to the GM to interpret that result into something concrete. Depending on the specific situation, a "hit" of just a few points could mean either a glancing blow, bruising damage that was mostly deflected by armor, a close call that didn't actually physically impact on the character, or even represent in an abstract manner the opponent gaining the upper hand for a moment (as you see in movie fight sequences where one guy is attacking aggressive and the other is giving ground and retreating,) or any number of other things.

In other words, loss of HP doesn't innately correlate to what in videogame terms would normally be considered a "hit." As you gain levels, you gain more HP. Your character's skin isn't becoming rock-solid, you're not necessarily gaining so much more muscle mass that would be able to soak up more tissue damage. Your character is simply growing more willful and experienced, less likely to buckle under pressure and more likely to roll with the punches, so to speak.

Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay even had a nifty mechanic, I thought, where reducing to 0 HP didn't mean death so much as a roll on the Critical Hit chart. The result could very well be instant death (often gorey,) dismemberment, crippling damage, etc. It could also leave you temporarily stunned or knocked down for a turn as well (all depending on the damage dealt and the luck of the dice.)

In videogames, it's rather difficult (obviously) to model such a mechanic. When you shoot an enemy, you expect to see a blood splatter and an intuitive reaction on the part of the NPC. Results that would attempt to model the mechanics as they were originally designed could be viewed as counter-intuitive (though I've yet to really see a game make much of an attempt at this.)

Probably the closest I've seen was Fear Effect, which instead of HP had a "fear meter" or whatever it was called. Essentially, all "hits" to your character were in "reality" near misses until your meter ran out and that one final hit actually lands home and kills you.

Generally, that's what I see Regenerative Health as modelling - you aren't healing from "wounds" so much as gathering your nerve, catching your breath for a moment, steeling yourself for another go.

In the end, it mostly comes down to balancing and pacing. Games with regen systems are generally balanced towards per-engagement affairs. You encounter a group of enemies in a certain area, and all the balancing focuses on one engagement at a time. Other systems go more towards a resource management/health-packs per enemy rate pace, or scatter power-ups through the level - balancing is more focused on the entire level as a whole rather than on any specific engagement within that level.

Really what I'd like to see is an attempt in an RPG to more traditionally model the original concept of what HP actually is supposed to be. That'd be my ideal. Yes, that would include concepts of regenerating "health" during downtime and limited "healing" during brief pauses in the action under cover - most importantly would be that it be accurately portrayed, however, in an intuitive manner that made it clear to the player what was actually happening, mechanics-wise.

User avatar
Captian Caveman
 
Posts: 3410
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 5:36 am


Return to Othor Games