PVP Mode

[PMP_GunSlinger]

I've been playing this game for a few days and I really like it. The teamwork aspect brings me back to the days of Socom: US Navy Seals.
That being said, I would love to see a PVP mode at release. That would add to the longevity of the game as a whole. COOP games like World War Z and others seem to get old fairly quickly.

[Tito]

seeing as no one will ever be playing the role as an insurgent, highly doubt we will have PvP.

[Obelus]

The devs have already said players wont be able to play as insurgents.

[Sgt.Shadow]

With the amount of controversy the game had up to this day, it would kill it if the media knew insurgents were playable.

Also for PvP we already have too many games, the devs should focus 100% on a great cooperative experience rather a competitive one, that's what is lacking in the market.

[Chonkems]

PvP would outright ruin this game. This is about real events that happened during the 2nd battle of Fallujah. It's not some twitchy shooter, it's a tactical game, where a single round can mean it's over.

[AmperCamper]

I totally understand your sentiment, as SOCOM was a staple for adversarial multiplayer in the space. With that being said, we don't have any news to share on PVP.

[Sgt.Shadow]

Originally posted by AmperCamper:

I totally understand your sentiment, as SOCOM was a staple for adversarial multiplayer in the space. With that being said, we don't have any news to share on PVP.

Thx, you are doing great focusing and improving/buidling on an already amazing SP/Coop experience. Play your updates right and you will be one of the best tactical FPS shooters for some long years

[DankTank93]

Not every shooter game needs to be PVP. This game is trying deliver on a certain type of experience and portray actual events and the ominous feeling those actually there must have felt at times. PVP would ruin this game and its intended purpose. Plenty of others out there with PVP so go play one of those and leave this one alone.

[Gruntelici0us]

Originally posted by PMP_GunSlinger:

COOP games like World War Z and others seem to get old fairly quickly.

And PvP Games get casual fairly quickly.

[Denbot]

Originally posted by Chonkems:

PvP would outright ruin this game. This is about real events that happened during the 2nd battle of Fallujah. It's not some twitchy shooter, it's a tactical game, where a single round can mean it's over.

so was delta force: black hawk down..... the PVP on that was good at the time, and the mods kept it going for years.... then joint ops came after it, was it 150 player servers... mad how they did it back then but warzone cant handle 100 players today

[Delta Dagger]

Originally posted by Denbot:

Originally posted by Chonkems:

PvP would outright ruin this game. This is about real events that happened during the 2nd battle of Fallujah. It's not some twitchy shooter, it's a tactical game, where a single round can mean it's over.

so was delta force: black hawk down..... the PVP on that was good at the time, and the mods kept it going for years.... then joint ops came after it, was it 150 player servers... mad how they did it back then but warzone cant handle 100 players today

The competitive play was pretty damn good in it, but it wasn't at all tactical. I could run riot with an M-16 in that, treating it a lot like Quake or something.

[Dedoxxed]

PVP could consist of a training area like the alpha/beta/whatever Ready or Not had with bluefor

[Southpaw]

I like it, as is. Forcing, well not really "forcing", but you need to work with a 'team' to succeed is something I as army-vet really love(and miss). PVP is fun and all, but sooo many games already have that. Glad to see a game that tells (story)history and is never the same.

[Delta Dagger]

Originally posted by Lefty:

I like it, as is. Forcing, well not really "forcing", but you need to work with a 'team' to succeed is something I as army-vet really love(and miss). PVP is fun and all, but sooo many games already have that. Glad to see a game that tells (story)history and is never the same.

It really is nice to see these experiences return after 20 years or so.

A dev needs to understand their audience. They need to have a good grip on who, exactly, they're selling to. A great example is the recent retro-shooter revivals. Very few of them have multiplayer in any form. Simply put, if you want that? You're already playing OG Quake on modern source port or Quake Live.

Six Days finds itself in the same situation. If you wanted competitive tactical shooting, you're already playing ArmA or Squad. By the very nature of singleplayer and co-op experiences, they're a "smaller footprint" on the player base by virtue of needing little or no other players to enjoy. The emphasis on the singleplayer and cooperative experience is probably the most logical choice of action from the POV of the developers, here.

We always hear this line that a game NEEDS PVP. It neeeeeds it or else it'll fail.

Well, then Six Days, a game in rough shape because it's in early access, has to compete with the likes of Squad which has a fairly well developed framework, devoted fanbase, and multiple theatres. It has to compete with ArmA which has unprecedented creative freedom in terms of what can be done in the mission editor for scenario creation.

It seems to me, at least, that PVP in Six Days is a recipe for failure to begin with.

Trying to pull fans of those games away for your own smaller scale PVP experience is a tall order. But, what Six Days does offer is an already tight CQB experience that can be played in a procedurally generated battlespace. Squad offers nothing like that at all that can be played with so few people and while ArmA's coop is fantastic, the AI fills its shorts when presented with the idea of navigating around buildings and rubble.

Tactical shooters need their coop, it's that simple. And, it needs to be the emphasis. Competitive play is nice, but it should be simple in that you're given a map, you're given weapons, go at it. If the developers were to consider add PVP? I'd suggest remembering America's Army from back in the day; everyone played as the US, but the other team appeared as OpFor.

[RawDawg]

OMG please no!! You give them PVP and then it will be perks/loadouts, ect. It's a rabbit hole. Plenty other games to defile with PVP

[MonsterDeadWood]

Originally posted by AmperCamper:

I totally understand your sentiment, as SOCOM was a staple for adversarial multiplayer in the space. With that being said, we don't have any news to share on PVP.

news to share about VR?