257 réponses à ce sujet

[Crimzoneyed]

No!
No!
Why?
Because the classes / races aren't balanced for pvp purpose.
PvP would mean biotic explosion would be way to OP since you could kill the whole enemy team and such.
Or stun locked by a overload.
No.
No
No
NOOOOOOOOOOOO!

[PluralAces]

who wants PvP? I sure dont...

[SovereignWillReturn]

Won't happen. Four man Vanguard Teams, Stasis bubbles, Biotic explosions, it's all too op and will degenerate into a massive shnoz fest.

[stu_]

NO.

Balance issues much!

[Bone_Mosaic]

The only way i see it working is if it was like Dead Space 2 MP.

4 N7's Vs 8 of whichever faction you choose (if random enemy is chosen) then you could spawn immediately as a grunt class eg: Assault Trooper, but if you want to use a more powerful class them the enemy team has to earn enough points to unlock higher tier enemies to use eg: Phantoms. Point's could be earned by simply damaging the enemy. There would be a match timer like usual pvp. In the evnt of a tie, an extra round is played.

But to use the stronger classes, you'd also have to wait a certain amount of time to deply as one, so the team isn't overwhelmed by a bunch of Phantoms and Atlases.

N7's retain all abilities their classes have in the co-op.

The N7's would have to move around the map completing objectives like usual, except every round.
If the N7's fail, enemy faction wins round, if N7's complete objective/s (depending on difficulty) N7's win.

That's all I could come up with. But I'm all about the co-op. I only play Horde in Gears. : )

Modifié par Bone_Mosaic, 17 avril 2012 - 08:11 .

[LeandroBraz]

Painis Cupcake wrote...

There is way way WAY too much that needs to be added/adjusted to make PvP possible.

- Maps are too small, snipers will suffer massively
- Powers and weapons need a major balancing. Imagine a krogan sentinel with Claymore X versus you.

If you want a PvP game, play Tribes: Ascend or Combat Arms (I don't recommend it) or Team Fortress 2.

TF2 *__*


 
 Biotic explosion would kill PvP. It's really hard to divert the banshee warp, imagine a adept warping you, then throwing you into a biotic nightmare. How you survive that?

 The powers are all made thinking about AI enemies, work for it. For PvP, they would need to make a new game...

[Sgt.Catman]

PVP making no sense at all aside, they didnt even balance some of the classes and most of the weapons right to begin with. PVP= disaster. Besides, we have more than enough PVP MP out on the market right now.

[Mystical_Gaming]

 

Erosuntzu wrote...
Those who do not want to PvP are the minority only bad players cry so much to not bring pvp.

wat.

5 Star General in Halo 3, 2.0 k/ds across any Halo game I have played on any account I use, usually top scorer in CoD and Battlefield games.

I do not want PvP in ME3 MP. I like the co-op aspect just fine and enjoy beng able to play a multiplayer game that is not full of k/d spread threads, elitist players who judge others on rank, and call others bad when they don't play well in PvP games.

Lets keep ME3 MP the way it currently is: fun.

Modifié par Mystical_Gaming, 17 avril 2012 - 08:13 .

[LeandroBraz]

Bone_Mosaic wrote...

The only way i see it working is if it was like Dead Space 2 MP.

4 N7's Vs 8 of whichever faction you choose (if random enemy is chosen) then you could spawn immediately as a grunt class eg: Assault Trooper, but if you want to use a more powerful class them the enemy team has to earn enough points to unlock higher tier enemies to use eg: Phantoms.

But to use the stronger classes, you'd also have to wait a certain amount of time to deply as one, so the team isn't overwhelmed by a bunch of Phantoms and Atlases.

N7's retain all abilities their classes have in the co-op.

The N7's would have to move around the map completing objectives like usual, except every round.
If the N7's fail, enemy faction wins round, if N7's complete objective/s (depending on difficulty) N7's win.

That's all I could come up with. But I'm all about the co-op. I only play Horde in Gears. : )

Left 4 Dead have something like that too. Two teams alternate between survivals and zombies, with the specials zombies beeing controlled by players, that change wich special they will control after they die. This could work

[iPryde]

PVP would be pointless. Noooo.

[iNyxs]

OP are you serious? this made my day

[Rasputin17]

I think it could be fun. I understand why not though. It would be hard to balance.

[Bone_Mosaic]

LeandroBraz wrote...

Bone_Mosaic wrote...

The only way i see it working is if it was like Dead Space 2 MP.

4 N7's Vs 8 of whichever faction you choose (if random enemy is chosen) then you could spawn immediately as a grunt class eg: Assault Trooper, but if you want to use a more powerful class them the enemy team has to earn enough points to unlock higher tier enemies to use eg: Phantoms.

But to use the stronger classes, you'd also have to wait a certain amount of time to deply as one, so the team isn't overwhelmed by a bunch of Phantoms and Atlases.

N7's retain all abilities their classes have in the co-op.

The N7's would have to move around the map completing objectives like usual, except every round.
If the N7's fail, enemy faction wins round, if N7's complete objective/s (depending on difficulty) N7's win.

That's all I could come up with. But I'm all about the co-op. I only play Horde in Gears. : )

Left 4 Dead have something like that too. Two teams alternate between survivals and zombies, with the specials zombies beeing controlled by players, that change wich special they will control after they die. This could work

It'd need some tweaking/work. I forgot about Left 4dead!

[Rhaina]

Can't tell if OP is stupid, or just trolling with another pvp thread.

[R3YNO720]

No
Would ruin the game since every one would use the striker and be infiltrators

[RegularX]

IrvinTang wrote...

Even if they give us pvp would you have play it with all the lag, I love pvp but I wouldn't play it on this games. There's always Starcraft, diablo and gears of war.

That's the bit that kills the idea for me.  The lag/net code issues are bad enough for PvE.

[kiltysue]

Actually, if your blood "boils" for pvp, there are at least 5
other games with watered down pvp designed classes you
can play right now. No problema. You also get the insane
"pvp balance" whine fest community atmosphere.

But here? I have to concur, no.

[withneelandi]

We really don't.

Hilarious balance issues, and completely out of context with the rest of the game. Bioware have quite clearly stated that PVP compliments the single player story mode and is not designed to function independently.

There is not sensible reason for PVP in the context of the Mass Effect 3 story. Also, frankly the reason I play me3 is that it isn't PVP and therefore doesn't attract all the people and issues that come along with it, i.e over competative "bro" types.

Please, please no.

Realistically there is no shortage of pvp games, if you want a third person shooter with PVP the answer is gears.

[Roninraver]

Erosuntzu wrote...

It can reduce damage against other players in a large percentage add NPC, fighting on each side, reduces stun time between 1 to 2 seconds max in this way to kill someone would not be so easy. why people think they have to die with one shot or a single ability that shows the great imagination of many. the only thing they can say is, stasis, Vanguard charge, OP infiltrators. OMG stop saying the same thing over and over again just say that we are bad in pvp and do not want to be pwned.

Except we aren't bad at PvP.

I'm a hardcore Gears of War fan.  I two-piece and body fools with the best of them.  I am a terror to behold with a Gnasher in my hands.  I also rock socks in Battlefield 3, and Bad Company 2 before it.


When I want PvP, I go play a game designed with it in mind.  Built from the ground up and fine tuned toward the express purpose of allowing me and another player to rumble against one another.


Mass Effect is not one of those games.  Any PvP addition would be more of an afterthought than the current multiplayer already is.  Meaning, it wouuld have more bugs, less balance, and just be generally worse than the existing Co-Op.
No game with PvP as an afterthought has had compelling, balanced, worthwhile PvP.  Mass Effect would be no different.


So how's about we let Mass Effect be what it is?  A great singleplayer experience (until the very end of the last game...) and now a passable, surprisingly fun Co-Op mode.


If you want PVP, go to your local game shop and throw a rock.  It will hit three such PvP titles before it hits the ground.  How about you play one of those, instead of trying to fit a square peg into a round hole?

[Bone_Mosaic]

For the Record, even though I posted a very rough idea, I'd have to say no too. When I initially heard about MP for ME3 I was quite angry. Thinking it would be pvp rubbish, that would end up being a poor Gears clone.

But after finding that it was co-op, I was ok with it, and curious as to what It'd be like. I was pleasantly surprised.<3

Modifié par Bone_Mosaic, 17 avril 2012 - 08:29 .

[kramerfan86]

Id much rather they spend their time updating and keeping the current multiplayer fresh as opposed to wasting time building a PVP mode. There are a bazillion PVP titles.

[Revrant]

I love all these Bio-Drones not reading the topic, just "Nope" and sometimes a huge wall of rude text, he leaves the door open for other selections aside from our Reaper War forces, Merc groups come to mind, heck, we could even play as the bad guys against each other, there are a myriad of non-cooperative options that would be fun.

Stop equating adding content to something being "wrong" with the game, bring down your knee jerk defensiveness, I would applaud such an addition.

Modifié par Revrant, 17 avril 2012 - 08:34 .

[InstaShark]

Revrant wrote...

I love all these Bio-Drones not reading the topic, just "Nope" and sometimes a huge wall of rude text, he leaves the door open for other selections aside from our Reaper War forces, Merc groups come to mind, heck, we could even play as the bad guys against each other, there are a myriad of non-cooperative options that would be fun.

Stop equating adding content to something being "wrong" with the game, bring down your knee jerk defensiveness, I would applaud such an addition.

Bioware has stated that they wouldn't do PvP in ME3.











So no.

[Revrant]

InstaShark wrote...

Revrant wrote...

I love all these Bio-Drones not reading the topic, just "Nope" and sometimes a huge wall of rude text, he leaves the door open for other selections aside from our Reaper War forces, Merc groups come to mind, heck, we could even play as the bad guys against each other, there are a myriad of non-cooperative options that would be fun.

Stop equating adding content to something being "wrong" with the game, bring down your knee jerk defensiveness, I would applaud such an addition.

Bioware has stated that they wouldn't do PvP in ME3.

So no.

Dial back your insufferable meter for a moment, they said it wouldn't be in the spirit of the game to have the races fighting against each other, they never said they wouldn't do PvP in any sense.

So no, wrong, again.

[XxI EpiK IxX]

Lol. Damn OP that's the majority all right. 4 pages of no with one or two yes' sprinkled on top