Oh, I'm a hardcore FPS player and I think regenerating health is great. Let's face it, how much more realistic is it than having to run around and find little boxes with a Red-Cross on it that does essentially the same thing?
I'm not sure how you can call yourself a hardcore FPS player if you can't distinguish between the significant gameplay ramifications of regenerating vs finite health.
When you have regenerating health, you don't care about getting hit. Getting hit doesn't really matter because you can just hide behind cover for a few seconds and completely heal. The only hit you really care about is the one that will kill you. With finite health, every hit matters because you don't know when you'll next have an opportunity to heal. With regenerating health, you don't really have to think in the long-term or even be careful. You will always enter and leave all battles with full health no matter how many times you got hit. With finite health, this is not the case. Take too many hits in this battle and you may be at a significant disadvantage in the next. Use a health kit now and you may be screwed when you really need it later. Finite health simply offers a much more intense and cerebral experience.
Regenerating health has become standard for two reasons:
1) It makes games much easier and more accessible to casual gamers.
2) It is much, much easier for designers to implement.
Implementing a finite health system takes a lot of effort. The frequency and placement of health kits (or stations), the HP gain of each kit, the health replenishment rate, the delivery system (instant use vs inventory)... finite health has many more variables to consider than regenerating health. It's much easier to just say "Okay, if the player doesn't get hit for 2 seconds, he regenerates his health at 35 HP/second." Regenerating health is conducive to lazy game design.
This comment was edited on Oct 18, 2009, 20:00.