But if you bring back health meters then you need to bring back health packs. Then the game turns into a silly scavenger hunt. If the game is balanced well (Call of Duty) then I enjoy not worrying about maintaining my health. I feel more like I'm just trying to avoid death rather than calculating how much damage I'm going to take.
Not necessarily. Halo 2 and 3 do the health thing fairly well (however, after your shields are down, there's no health meter), and there are no health packs. It's nice to be able to see how much health you have on the fly.
I almost mentioned Halo as a game that balances the permanent health bar with a recharging system pretty well.
Giving the player at least some level of recharge allows them to run into firefights without worrying about every single hitpoint.
A game with health packs can be a lot of fun. There's nothing more satisfying than after countless attempts finally being able to run across the map all haphazardly and dive for the awkwardly placed health pack inside the crate under the barrel behind the fence, then turn around and mad dash for the next level's loading trigger before any of the ridiculous looking npc enemies with horrible reaction time and perfect aim have a chance to figure out you were in town. When you have a recharging system, its turns into a game of finding the perfect hiding place, and usually slows the game play down quite a bit.
Portal didn't and they were able to pull that off just fine too.
I don't think it has so much to do with health meters or no health meters they game will still be fun if the developers are good.
Either the level design sucks or you just suck if a health meter turns a game into a scavenger hunt. It's not like Wolverine's auto-healing powers make the game any more realistic. Or fun. I'd much rather stick with finding stuff to heal myself with than a blurred screen that I can't see where the cover is.
You could also use good old one-hit kills, so you don't need healthpacks, just be a little more careful when attacking an enemy.
Anyway, in the end the problem isn't that a health bar is superior to not having one or the other way around, the problem is simply that most games these days are pretty much the same. To many conventions have creped into the genres and what once was a good idea, now simply is boring, because you already have seen it a dozens of times.
I don't play console FPS's. What's this about no health meters? How does that work then? How do you know if you're close to death or not?
What, do the characters auto heal at some absurd rate, and only several bites from a dinosaur in quick succession, or a hail of gunfire, or a grenade, or maybe a t-rex chomping on you, will kill you? And the rest, you just heal from? If so, I agree with yahtzee, that sounds incredibly stupid.
There's no reason you can't have a character heal fast AND show how much health they have remaining, if you don't want them to have to hunt for health packs.
But news flash: Hunting for health packs is FUN! Oh you might not think it's fun. But you're wrong. If you took out all the things that annoyed you in a game, like DYING, you'd find it would be a rather dull experience. People like collecting health packs for the same reason they like swapping little gems to make them dissapear. We're hunters. And hunting for health packs and such appeals to the reptillian side of our brains.
I've quite come to like not having health meters in games like Halo 3 and Gears of War. I like it better than a game like Half-Life 2 where 99% of the time you're too tough for the game to be any challenge on hard, and 1% of the time you're rolling along at 2 health quickloading every five seconds until the game decides to toss you some gauze.
not to imply that Halo 3 is better than Half-Life or anything, no amount of drugs....
I love excellent music choices like that. The last time I laughed that hard at the first 5 seconds of a ZP review was Super Mario Galaxy with "Fly Me to the Moon."
Also dugg for Aliens.
While I don't mind the whole space marine gig that games got going these days, I really don't mind now with Aliens: Colonial Marines on the horizon. But seriously, Turok? I never would have imagined.
"So while we (Austrailians) are waiting for stuff like No More Heroes or Rock Band...let's take our half frustration out on some ***** dinosaur game." He isn't waiting for Brawl? :(
TFletch..it's obviousl your youth wasn't spent in school because if it had..you whould have remembered that he said NOTHING about 007, he said he was tired of seeing that in games. He didn't point out an specific game, again..one more time...just for you...HE DIDN'T DISS 007! he dissed the games that COPY off 007!
Seriously, developers really need to stop trying to emulate the Halo formula. Halo really isn't that great of an FPS.
Halo is not the do-all-end-all of FPS. Half-Life and Half-Life 2 are way better and more fun to play online. My problem with FPS games today is that there is a total lack of innovation. I loved FPS games when they were first introduced and still like them today. I am just waiting for some innovation in the genre. Half-Life 2 was the last time I saw any innovation in an FPS game. I grow tired of the same old formula. Yahtzee I am with you all the way on this one.
You're dead on with the lack of innovation. It seems like every FPS game follows the same routine storyline and action sequences. I'd like to see someone blow the standard formula to pieces (like Bioshock)- FPS games are beginning to go downhill now that everyone plays them.
I completely forgot about Bioshock. It really is one of the better more recent FPS games. Still, it got slammed because of the lack of multiplayer. I couldn't see multiplayer in Bioshock anyways. It would just be a battle of plasmids. The developers were right to leave it out in the first place. But, the reason most companies are pumping FPS games out the door, is because they want to get into the Multiplayer arena. This is the only reason Halo did as good as it did. The story was meh, the graphics on Halo 3 were sub-par, and it didn't bring anything fresh to the genre. As long as people buy these, "By the Numbers", FPS games, there will be no innovation.
Ahh yes Bioshock was truly unique... wait a minute didn't they release a game before that that was very similar to Bioshock? Oh ya it was called ***** System Shock 1 & 2 (both which where better in my view)! Also Halo was only OK, but if it came out for the PC as first developed and planned it would have killed many games even to this date with innovation alone!!
It actually IS a great fps. Matchmaking, tight gameplay and controls. Balanced weapon system. Well designed maps. Graphics might not be the most innovative but still looks pretty good. (graphics are NOT the meter of a good game) There really isn't much we can do to FPS right now because it isn't really that much complicated to begin with. All halo did was really polish up the FPS system and give it accessibility to everyone who picks up the controller. I think has some innovative bullet points. Just don't be so close minded of the fact that is the case.
I agree, the half-life and counter-strike style FPS games is what future FPS's should be based on, they have the FPS idea down to a tee. Not like the big men with big armour we see so often in games like HALO, GOW, Crysis etc! But i'm not a Console Gamer, so maybe FPS's have to be seriously dumbed down for controllers.
.. yes, because as we all know, Gordon freeman doesn't wear any armor whatsoever.. oh wait.. *points to hazard suit*
I personally like gordon A LOT more than the crysis and other characters, because he at least has the common smarts to STFU about things. Also, you can go through half-life shooting all the scientists, which you can't do in halo/crysis/whatever .. it's ***** annoying, if somebody gets in my way, I KILL THEM, I'm the guy with the gun *****! RUN!
Halo isn't a good game because
A) all the games are trying to copy off of it?
B) the game sold $300mil USD in the first week
C) The game broke Xbox 360's record for sales
D) it crashed the Online network when it came out.
yea..you're right...only horrible games can have those kinds of stats.
See, yet another FPS I forgot. Why is it that Valve seems to lead innovation in the FPS genre? Oh yeah, that's right, because they have the balls to give new ideas a try. And every time they do, it's a hit. That's because the average gamer is tired of the same old ***** in FPS games. They want something fresh and new. Not like Bungie and their Halo 2.5, err Halo 3.
Because they are the only one willing to invest in R&D for innovation and not better eye candy. Game developers will keep on releasing the same ***** video game clones every year because they know they will sell, period! Until the gamers start to say "Hey, there no point in buying these anymore lets all move to the Indie game market where real innovation is being done". The indie & MOD market will be the only areas where true innovation can occur in the gaming market because it is the only place where they have to risk development in innovation to gain the experience to be hired at one of these top marketed developer or publisher companies.
Theres also TF2. The '30s to late '40s theme has not been done in an FPS to my knowledge. The balance in that game is amazing too. Its a fresh and fun FPS that innovates while retaining core gameplay concepts. (Wow, I sound like a buzz word obsessed advertiser...) HL2 is great and so is Portal and TF2. VALVe seems to get the hint that the best formula for FPSs is not to have one. VALVe may take their sweet time (10 YEARS for TF2), but it all seems to work out in the end.
Anyone else get the feeling that if anyone said halo was mediocre in another thread they would get buried 6 feet deep? It must be ok to have an opinion as long as Yahtzee feels the same way.
Correction, the first Halo, when it came out was quite amazing. Good controls, for a console, wide expansive spaces, and vehicle controls that felt natural. The subsequent games, didn't screw this up, but at the same time they didn't push the franchise any further.
Yahtzeeday is the best. It's better known as "Make-Your-Own-Rules-Day" here, though. Why? Have you ever seen the traffic in Southern California on Wednesday? Everyone driving on that day displays notably worse judgment and execution than during any other day, save Sunday. So, from a weekday-commuter aspect, everyone drives like incestuous lovechild r-tards on Wednesday and that's what makes it great.
Having Yahtzee rape and pillage "XYZed-random" game designer for their lumps of gaming offal just makes it all the better of a day.
I'm not sure how many people played Prey but it was a pretty impressive (and, yes, innovative) FPS as well.
Sadly, the rest of the FPS market short of vALVE wares is complete garbage as stated above, but I've always felt that Halo was pretty mediocre and over-rated anyways so it doesn't help when a million other people try to emulate it (poorly).
You have to disable the bore in multiplayer. An instant kill with no splash damage? goodbye interesting multiplayer battles. Without it though, Turok 2 is my favorite N64 FPS multiplayer game. Well, maybe a tie with 007, but I liked turoks control scheme better.
Turok 2 was amazing until you get to the end and find out that if you didn't close the gates on every level then you can't get to the last level and there's no way to redo the levels. Why did the game even let you go past the current level if you didn't close the gates??