MVP should not go to the player in the losing team!!!

[Snow Brigade]

Couldn't agree less. I've finished many games with the highest score on both teams even though we got destroyed. It's frustrating when you play THAT well and your team couldn't help you win. It's like the consolation prize. In my opinion you should get MVPx2 because it's that much harder to do.

[Epic DOOM]

I disagree simply because MVP should go to the winners side...IDC if they did all that they didn't win the game...look at sports for example how many MVP does losers get if the lose a championship game/series??? none.

This is a horrible comparison. Professional sports is completely different because it's full of players proven to be the best in the world comprised of teams made to compete. It's nothing like a video game where one good player might be carrying his team of casual randoms that are clearly outmatched by the other team playing completely serious. Giving the guy on the losing team with the most points an MVP award is the only thing they can get out of games like that sometimes. No reason to take it away.

A more logical suggestion would be to give an MVP to the top player of each team or even make a new award for a person who has the most points but is on the losing team, but not to take it away from a player who outperforms everyone in the game simply because his team lost.

[HuntedByAngels]

I think you should only get MVP based off you k/d for the match and other ribbons not total points. More deaths subtract points.

[D4u2s0t]

I think you should only get MVP based off you k/d for the match and other ribbons not total points. More deaths subtract points.

for some modes, k/d is not the most important. I don't care how many people you kill, if you don't get the caps, you're not going to win koth. I'd rather have the guy that gets 20 caps on my team and barely goes positive than the guy that goes 50-10 but doesn't get any caps because he's only worried about his k/d. Also, support players may have less kills than others, but many times the win comes from those support players efforts, even if they don't have the most kills.

[xGeArs aNoMaLy]

MVP should go to the person who earned the most points regardless if their team wins.



As for this comment, that's false. In 1971 Quarterback Chuck Howley of the Dallas Cowboys was awarded MVP even though his team lost Super Bowl V. In 1960 Second Baseman Bobby Richardson of the New York Yankees was awarded MVP even though his team lost the World Series.

booya. 10 char

[theassman007]

Who ever gets the most points deserves MVP. Winning team, losing team, completely irrelevant. If I join a game alone and am on a bad team, and we lose, and I have more points than everyone on the other team, they do NOT deserve MVP...

[Jim Tuna]

I think you should only get MVP based off you k/d for the match and other ribbons not total points. More deaths subtract points.

I see what you mean buddy. But some people still get a crap ton of assist points without getting kills, but they should still be rewarded for helping. Because without them, that kill might not have been possible.

Say some guy went 10-1 in TDM, but he stole like 7 of them. Obviously he wouldn't have a lot of points, and he shouldn't either. Even though he might have the best K/D. Ya know?

[D4u2s0t]

I see what you mean buddy. But some people still get a crap ton of assist points without getting kills, but they should still be rewarded for helping. Because without them, that kill might not have been possible.

Say some guy went 10-1 in TDM, but he stole like 7 of them. Obviously he wouldn't have a lot of points, and he shouldn't either. Even though he might have the best K/D. Ya know?

agreed. The highest k/d is not going to always be the best player, especially in objective based games.

[TheEnvironment]

Why should the highest scoring player be punished?
That player(assuming he was on the losing team) was already given a horrible team.

[the_suicide_fox]

So when I get 12k in KOTH but lose because my teammates never tried to capture the hill you should get MVP for a measely 5k?

[D4u2s0t]

So when I get 12k in KOTH but lose because my teammates never tried to capture the hill you should get MVP for a measely 5k?

doesn't make sense, right?... highest points gets the mvp, it's fine how it is. If I play better than everyone, I get the mvp. If someone else plays better, than they get it.

[rafaeltaua]

This thread has the weirdest suggestion that I have already read here.

[TheNoHeartedBeing]

If the person did the best , they did the best.

[Gnashty NaS]

In Gears, If I stomp your team but my teamates all do horribly, I still did better than you and I deserve the medal.

I like this reply. I and others
Constantly play with bad team mates, of we whooped the other team
Individually even if our trash team wasn't good enough to get a win, at least let them have the ribbon.

[Crazycroch3189]

no, I think the best overall player should get it

[Xx Dantes Rage]

Absolutely not. If someone gets the most points in a match, they should get the MVP ribbon.

[Z7 SA Z7]

MVP stands for Most Valuable Player.

??? it does exactly what its supposed to do.

[TsuFlow]

There could always be 2 medals, MVP of the game (entirely) and MVP of the team.

[WIffyjustus]

MVP should definitely go to the highest scorer, regardless of team.

It is the fairest way. it is a simple, measurable statistic. (damage inflicted via direct kills or assists)

To make it otherwise, could be done but would be problematic. To get a genuine MVP you would need a human to watch every game and make the decision on the stats and what they have seen during the game.

The program can only judge by the score. It can't tell if you are making intelligent plays on not. e.g. Only a human can see that a low scoring last man standing wins the game by clutching a 1v5.

Fortunately, in most cases the score is pretty representative of how well you played.

The current MVP system is a balance of accuracy, simplicity and practicality.

It's also easy for players to understand. (e.g. The end of the game where you are your mate are gunning for the MVP)

[Dutchmaster Guru]

What does that have to do with Gears? Nash deserved the MVP award he got, Gears and NBA basketball are very different games.

What you say proves my point. They are both a game Steve Nash never won a championship... Or a western conference championship but undoubtably deserved the MVP during one of Kobe's best years as well.

Point being you don't have to be on the most winning team (multiple people) to be the most valuable player (one person).

Most points = MVP

[incenarated58]

actually it does makes sense...if you get stuck in a bad team that shouldn't be a excuse as to why you should win mvp...hell I admit theres alot of time I won mvp in a losing team and even I said the player on top in the other team had better stats overall than me I just beat him by 2pts...his stats were like

kills: downs: revives: deaths:
his 11 13 9 8
mines 18 2 1 8

Yet I got the mvp????? Thats not right...as you can see his overall stats were completely better than mines in 2 out of 3 category and we broke even in deaths...yet I got the mvp...and yes I was in a losing team and he n his team won. I don't think thats fair IMO hence is why I believe they should change it.

Highly doubt he had nine revives, and so if my teammates suck and I do good I am punished. Yup seems fair to me, next TU Epic make it happen.

[LambentHammerburst]

MVP should go to the MVP.

In hockey we have the 3 Stars. The #1 star of the game can be on the losing team. Just because a team lost DOESN'T mean he wasn't the MVP. You can have a player carry his entire team.
I've had games where there was a single guy on their team just dominating myself and teammates. However due to us being a team and fairly good we win. However we would of easily just steamrolled the team if it wasn't for him. He is the MVP. He was kicking our a**. The only reason his team lost was basically a numbers game. We had 5 good players, his team had 1 great player (him) and 4 weak players.

[STILRZBOY]

As the MVP is based on most points, that is who should get it regardless of being on the winning or losing team.

[Ghostofdelta2]

"cough cough" MVP (Most valuable player) IE: The player who has done better than all, not best player on the winning team. This is how it has always been and always will be.

This. I don't even get why anyone would think otherwise.

[DizzyRules]

actually it does makes sense...if you get stuck in a bad team that shouldn't be a excuse as to why you should win mvp...hell I admit theres alot of time I won mvp in a losing team and even I said the player on top in the other team had better stats overall than me I just beat him by 2pts...his stats were like

kills: downs: revives: deaths:
his 11 13 9 8
mines 18 2 1 8

Yet I got the mvp????? Thats not right...as you can see his overall stats were completely better than mines in 2 out of 3 category and we broke even in deaths...yet I got the mvp...and yes I was in a losing team and he n his team won. I don't think thats fair IMO hence is why I believe they should change it.

Wow. Just wow. If I play and lose to a team and I get, say, 3600 points. The person on the winning team has 2900 points. I did better period. So I should lose MVP for that? No. The suggestion is terrible. Doesn't matter how you think the ribbon should be handed out anyway. It will not change ever. MVP goes to the player who did the best, win or loss has nothing to do with it.

[demoneyeone]

had a game of koth the other morn. i had 12000 points. second place on my team had 4000 so we lost. top guy on other team had like 9000. the only reason the game was even close was because i carried my team. guess i didnt deserve that MVP.

[ll ALEX76 ll]

MVP is going to player who have most points.
Can't see any problem with this.

[Victimizer]

Is OP actually serious or are we all just feeding a troll? Easily the worst suggestion I've seen in a while.

[YiffYiff Hooray]

IMO Two MVP ribbons should be given out, one for each team, I hate when some COG block takes it from me by 1-10 points because he got 2 shots on a guy that went down in the last 2 seconds of the game and then he get slammed.

[Yush]

I agree, MVP should go to the person on the "winning" team.

[SH Widowmaker]

Agreed with most here. If if I get stuck with a team who are all doing horrible, not saying I'm amazing, but if I manage to get 20 kills while everyone else has 2 or 3 and my team still loses, yeah I had highest, I deserve that MVP. Could maybe see having a MVP of each team, that'd be kind of cool, but shouldn't have to be winning team

[DaZ3dNc0nFuZ3D]

Best player should get MVP regardless of which team they're on.