Just remember (cod players) A high K/D looks good on the scoreboard A captured flag looks good on the victory screen

I first laid eyes on Battlefield in 2013. I was around 14, on the floor of my apartment, with a scratched PS3 copy of Battlefield 4 that my cousin had given to me. I had no idea what to expect. My first online game was a disaster. Jets roared overhead, tanks shook the streets, and bullets whizzed past me in all directions. I didn't get a single kill that game, but I was sold. For the first time, I felt part of something more than myself and my controller. A couple of days later I stumbled across this YouTube video of a player performing a Rendezook. I must have watched it a hundred times. I eventually decided to give it a go, so I leaped in a jet, chased an enemy up into the clouds, ejected, took the shot, and completely missed. The rocket flew off into the distance (offing a seagull or something). My jet stalled and plummeted into the sea and I, right after it, laughing all the way down. A couple years later, I was at college, staying up for no reason, and downloaded Battlefield 1 at 2 A.M. The second that main menu music came on it was like listening to a song I forgot I loved. Loading into St. Quentin Scar, racking up the kills, and then a couple minutes later getting eviscerated. I couldn't even take five steps out of spawn before getting domed. Good times. Battlefield became that one game I always returned to. All the rooftop antics on Siege of Shanghai, every last-minute push on Amiens, random teammates and their quiet, bullet-saving calls. Little moments like that reminded me why I loved this series in the first place. And this Battlefield isn't just a game. It's the bridge that carried me through hard times, one respawn at a time.

Battlefield 6 is an overrated and overhyped game that is mediocre at best. I simply cannot recommend the game with its currently lacking content for a whopping €70. The gunplay is easily the best part of the game, but it is overshadowed by the poor map selection and the limited vehicle arsenal we have at launch. We are getting 15 vehicles, while BF4 had 36 at launch. After the live action trailer, it becomes clear that the goal is to win over as many CoD players as possible. However, this comes at the expense of the classic Battlefield map design, and the All-Out Warfare sandbox feel of the game. I am aware that this debate feels older than both games themselves. It is what it is. Battlefield 6 has a solid foundation. It has the potential to become a fantastic Battlefield game if some of the following points are improved. Maps • By far the biggest problem is the maps. They are tiny, and in terms of gameplay, almost all of them feel like classic meat grinder maps, such as Operation Locker or Operation Metro. 64 players are crammed together, and sometimes a tank is thrown into the mix • Huge All-Out Warfare sandbox-style maps with a large variety of vehicles that the series is known for are completely missing • The biggest of the 9 launch maps is the remake of Operation Firestorm, a medium-sized map from BF3 and BF4 and they had the fantastic idea of reducing the original size of it • There is a lack of verticality. There are no tunnel systems, no bunkers, no mountains, no large multi-story buildings, no skyscrapers with accessible rooftops. Everything feels basic and flat • The 8 new maps have no memorable or interesting POI’s whatsoever. Only the remake Operation Firestorm shows that a map can be unique and have its own character. All other maps are very forgettable • The map “Saints Quarter” doesn’t feature Conquest, Breakthrough, Rush or Escalation. This map will be useless for many players, myself included • 7 out of 8 maps have a 5-flag layout, one has a 6-flag layout. Every other Battlefield game had at least a few maps with a 7+ flag layout at launch, some even had 10+ flag layouts • Only 2 out of 9 maps focus on vehicle gameplay (Operation Firestorm & Mirak Valley). Only 5 out of 9 maps feature air vehicles and only 3 out of 9 maps feature jets • No 64+ player maps. Larger maps with more than 64 players remain a dream. Thanks, BF2042! Back to 64 players, which we have known since 2002. No improvement in 23 years • 48 player Breakthrough on most maps, often with a single flag in a sector and never more than 2 flags. 3-flag sectors from previous games like BF1 are entirely missing Missing Features • Poor vehicle arsenal: 15 at launch, while BF4 had 36 at launch • No dynamic weather. No sunrise, no sunset, no fog, no rain, no night, no snow, no wind, no storm, etc. Every single map features the same boring clear sky at all times. Static weather in a 70€ Triple A title • No Levolution (BF4) • No Naval units: No jet skis, no transport boats, no attack boats, which were all featured in BF4 at launch • No amphibious vehicles either • The “spiritual successor of BF3 & BF4” doesn’t even feature a Little Bird (?!) • No beloved fortification system from BFV • No Practice Range to test weapons and vehicles (BF4, BF Hardline, BF1, BFV) • No Platoons (BF3, BF4, BF Hardline, BF1, BFV) • No traditional server browser and no community servers. Instead we get the horrible Portal experience from BF2042 again • Servers close after each match and players must requeue again, with no proper match rotation or Map voting. • No “Closed Weapons” or "Hardcore" search in “Custom Search” • No beloved Operations Mode from BF1 and BFV • No Commander Mode (BF2, BF2142, BF4) • No exceptional Ray-Tracing like in BFV, not even RTAO like in BF2042 • No Ribbons I hope that many of these features will be reintroduced in the future. Some of them, such as naval warfare and platoons, have already been officially teased by DICE. I'm cautiously optimistic. Battlefield 6 isn't bad, but it lacks content, especially some huge vehicle focused maps for the €70 Triple A price tag. If the upcoming maps remain just as tiny, the wait for the “spiritual successor” to Battlefield 4 will continue.

I could be coordinating the perfect assault, with synchronised smokes, and flanking sniper overwatch, feeling like a tactical genius. Then out of nowhere, a guy named “Jesus Christ Of Nazareth” writes “Prepare to meet your god” in chat and launches himself and a jeep packed with C4 straight into the enemy point, wiping the entire sector and somehow winning us the point. I don’t know if this game is a shooter, a comedy, or a religious experience, but It is a lot of fun, especially with friends. 10/10, every match is a war movie directed by lunatics..

Spawned. Ran 5 meters. Get sniped from another dimension. Tank exploded behind me. Game’s perfect. 10/10

EA: Nerf the fun, expand the grind huge disappointment compared to the beta Battlefield 1 is still the best option out there

Just remember (cod players) A high K/D looks good on the scoreboard A captured flag looks good on the victory screen

Imagine buying the game for $70 then after two weeks they drop a Battlepass for $25. What a joke!

There are some positive points, sure — but first, I want to talk about what I already know from the beta, and what clearly has not changed since then. First of all, the queue system is okay, cause temporary — but the real issue is that it’s impossible to play properly because the game changes the resolution, aspect ratio, and other settings every time you Alt+Tab. Ahah… €70 game. It is still absurd how developers promote DLSS or FSR to justify their lack of optimization. Now they ask you to buy the latest CPU and GPU, for a setup costing more than €4,000, just to run a game sold for €60 to €100. All this simply because they would rather save money on optimization. As a result, if you do not have a powerful system, you are stuck playing a slideshow. Classes Classes are once again poorly balanced. You get too little ammunition, so everyone ends up playing Medic—not to heal, but simply to access the ammo crate. And this is where Battlefield V did better. In Battlefield V, you could find ammo crates directly on objectives, letting players resupply without depending on the goodwill or proximity of a teammate playing a support class. That support class has now been completely removed. The ammo crate also serves as a health kit, making the system even more confusing and unbalanced. Some design choices seem clever on paper but are actually double-edged. For example, vehicles now spawn directly on control points, without going through the spawn menu. At first glance, this is convenient. However, it creates major risks: the enemy can capture or destroy your team’s vehicle before anyone uses it, and the vehicle will not respawn until the previous one is destroyed. So instead of improving gameplay, it can frustrate teams and disrupt the flow of the match. And of course, the ammo/health crate appears on the map for everyone, enemies included. So if you want to flank stealthily, forget it. People will see your position thanks to your own crate. Brilliant design choice. Perks Perks sound nice on paper, but in practice they are a real problem. You unlock stronger perks as the match progresses. So if you switch classes to adapt to the situation, you start over from zero with your new class. And if you join a game mid-match or late through matchmaking, you will be less effective than players who have been in the game from the start and already leveled their perks. That is disappointing, to say the least. As a result, players are pushed to stick to the same class, otherwise they become less efficient. A perks system that almost makes me miss Battlefield 2042’s specialists. And that says a lot. Anti-cheat Electronic Arts keeps repeating the same line in every Battlefield: “We are investing in anti-cheat.” We heard the same thing for Battlefield V, and we all know how that ended. Back then, their anti-cheat system captured screenshots to detect wallhacks or visual overlays. But cheat software quickly found a workaround: disable the overlay for a microsecond during the capture, then reactivate it immediately. Players would not even notice a detection attempt. And Electronic Arts never fixed it. Today, they still implement protections such as Secure Boot that inconvenience legitimate players more than cheaters, while ignoring the two most common forms of cheating: Cronus devices, which can turn literally anyone—even a quadriplegic, no disrespect—into a professional-level player without skill. PC macros, which automatically compensate for recoil. Electronic Arts has mentioned anti-cheat measures against Cronus, but we are still waiting to see real results. And it gets worse: influencers openly show how to gain unfair advantages using methods that break the terms of service, and even when you show EA the proof directly, nothing happens. Maybe their bot doesn’t understand that this person should be banned? Good luck — I’ll give you a cookie if you manage to get an actual human at EA support. And what truly amazes me: Electronic Arts reassures players by saying they can disable crossplay. Apparently, that is their idea of an anti-cheat system. Incredible. Except disabling crossplay has already been possible in previous games, and from experience on earlier titles, you would often wait hours to find a few players on a server with crossplay disabled, and there were never enough to actually start a match. Matchmaking still prioritizes players with crossplay enabled, leaving some servers nearly empty. Electronic Arts’ Business Model It is always the same strategy: a hype-fueled launch, promises of investment, and gradual abandonment once the public relations buzz dies down. With Electronic Arts’ recent acquisition, shareholders pocketed massive profits. And it is worth noting that these same major shareholders were the ones making the decisions, while leaving behind billions in debt for the company to repay. Of course, it is all “for the benefit of the players.” What casts serious doubt, however, is whether they will actually invest in anti-cheat measures, among other things — past experience suggests this is unlikely. Summary In the end, they repeat the same mistakes as in the past: the same marketing campaigns, the same promises, and the same illusions. The environment destruction? Just recycled from previous Battlefield titles. No real improvements. Worse still, the game is less optimized than Battlefield V. Design-wise, the same story: they sell pre-order skins. Players get black outfits, slightly less visible in-game. Not as pay-to-win as some Call of Duty skins, but still the same concept — a subtle visual advantage disguised as a cosmetic. Anti-cheat? Hard to believe in it. Optimization? Even less. And looking back at the beta, nothing really changed. I will update my opinion after more gameplay, but honestly… it just makes you want to vomit, seeing how much they take players for fools. I have been playing since Battlefield 1942, and now it’s up to Electronic Arts to show me I am wrong and actually deliver on their promises. Ah, and beware of the very, very many people paid to only say good things (people I will clearly never be one of).

This review is borne out of genuine frustration. I am enjoying the core gameplay of Battlefield 6, but the current weapon and attachment unlock system is actively sucking the fun out of the game. The challenges required to unlock basic and essential weapon attachments are excessively tedious and demanding, often requiring thousands of kills per weapon. This isn't a challenge; it's a punitive, soul-crushing grind that forces players to ignore the objective and focus on senseless metrics. It feels like the requirements were generated by an algorithm, not a team that actually plays the game. To make matters worse, the developers have decided to target the only viable workaround: nerfing progression in Bot matches. Players were using bot matches to bypass the impossible grind in the main multiplayer modes, and instead of addressing the root problem—the ridiculous challenge requirements—the developers simply punished the players for trying to catch up. This decision sends a clear message: "Play our game our way, even if it's not fun." The only result of this will be player burnout. No one wants to spend dozens of hours unlocking the basic components for a single weapon. This current system is: Anti-casual: It completely locks out players who don't have infinite time to grind. Anti-teamplay: It encourages players to farm specific stats rather than playing the objective. Anti-fun: The process is boring and repetitive. DICE, you must revisit these challenges. Dial back the required numbers significantly. Stop trying to force a ludicrous grind for attachments. If the goal is player retention, this system is a spectacular failure. Right now, it feels less like a game and more like a second job, and that is not what Battlefield should be. Do better, please.

No fishing. My disappointment is immeasurable

And the "Fell For It Again" award goes to us. The season 1 skins are actually hugely disappointing, so much for "Let’s keep it real, keep it grounded.” that lasted exactly 2 weeks. We were straight up lied to. Panopticon is simply awful and ruins the entire atmosphere of the game. Edit: Originally I said that the battle pass was $25, but people have mentioned that it's actually just $10 if you only get the pass and not BF Pro. My mistake. STOP PUTTING BRIGHT YELLOW/GREEN/ORANGE ON EVERY NEW SKIN, IT LOOKS TERRIBLE!!!! Plus 90% of the stuff in the battle pass is just garbage. The new map, Blackwell Fields, is not only the worst map in the game, but likely one of, if not the worst maps in all of battlefield's history. Frankly, all the maps are pretty bad, the map borders are just awful, they entirely hinder any sort of frontline combat, even in breakthrough. Defenders are able to get behind attackers in way too many situations and access areas that should not even be in the play area. Constantly getting killed right after you spawn by someone behind you in, or very near your spawn is NOT FUN. Not to mention the drone exploiting that's rampant, with people using it to get onto roofs and areas not intended for gameplay, like the bridge on the Manhattan map, or even the roofs on Siege of Cairo, which they said they fixed, but are still accessible with the drone exploit. Then they slap on a battle royal that nobody asked for. Not to mention that they said that the BR was supposed to be separate form the main game, but half the weekly challenges are for the BR. The game is fun, and the gameplay is solid in my opinion (with some bugs that need fixing), but the theme they are building is a generic one that makes the game indistinguishable from every other shooter on the market. Stop trying to be COD and be unique, be Battlefield.

░░░░░░░░░░░█▀▀░░█░░░░░░ ░░░░░░▄▀▀▀▀░░░░░█▄▄░░░░ ░░░░░░█░█░░░░░░░░░░▐░░░ ░░░░░░▐▐░░░░░░░░░▄░▐░░░ ░░░░░░█░░░░░░░░▄▀▀░▐░░░ ░░░░▄▀░░░░░░░░▐░▄▄▀░░░░ ░░▄▀░░░▐░░░░░█▄▀░▐░░░░░ ░░█░░░▐░░░░░░░░▄░█░░░░░ ░░░█▄░░▀▄░░░░▄▀▐░█░░░░░ ░░░█▐▀▀▀░▀▀▀▀░░▐░█░░░░░ ░░▐█▐▄░░▀░░░░░░▐░█▄▄░░░ ░░░▀▀░▄Black ops 7 ▄▐▄▄▄▀░░░ ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░

Pay $70 just for the game to hit you with a battle pass ad every time you launch it. Great.

Feels like my character weighs 180 kilos and every step is a struggle. Running in this game feels slower than loading into it.

Imagine removing Portal XP like in Battlefield 2042 so nobody even feels motivated to play custom modes. Fixing challenges? Nah, just remove XP in Portal. Fixing progression issues? Nah, remove XP in Portal instead. Let players have fun and make progress at the same time? Nah, we lied — XP’s gone again. In the Battlefield 6 – Official Maps, Modes, and Portal Trailer, they literally advertised: “All with full progression and XP gain.” Now there’s absolutely no reason to remove XP from Portal. The only explanation that makes any sense is if EA plans to monetize progression — like selling XP boosts, skins that were once unlockable through grinding, or future Battle Pass level skips. It feels like they’re intentionally slowing down progression to push paid shortcuts in the future.

Since nobody is gonna read this, I just go ahead and say I am gay

Press F to pay respects to Call of Duty. It's almost like the Battlefield devs listened to their community about the stuff they wanted in their video game. Now all we need is a Bad Company 3.

just as expected this game is a literal joke overhyped and overloved by coping simps.

I've played Battlefield since 1942. The current game isn't terrible, but it just doesn't feel like a Battlefield title. It feels more like Call of Duty—and I've put in plenty of hours on COD as well. The Conquest maps mostly feel small, with only one exception. We're missing the signature large-scale, dynamic events that made past games memorable. There's no blimp exploding, no battleship crashing onto an island, no skyscraper collapsing—just a crane you can knock over. It seems like Battlefield is trying to sit in a middle lane between traditional BF and COD gameplay, which might end up alienating fans of both. We’ll have to see how future updates shape the game, especially now that EA is in uncharted waters after being sold off.

Gender locked classes confirmed. Forced to play as screeching strong independent womyn with powerful birthing hole. Woke garbage.

I've spent the first 34 mins of launch figuring out why I can't simply launch and play the game. Turns out I have to modify an entire Windows setting just to be able to launch it, Not a good first look, I'll keep an eye on it and adjust my review, if appropriate. Update: BF6 is... not COD. Yet it tries to be, and that's why it's not BF. I haven't played the last few BF versions, so I have nothing to compare to other than many hours of BF:BC2. The maps are big, yet they feel small. Weapons have COD-like spread. Non-existent recoil. There is no directional flow to the maps: enemy is everywhere, all at once. Movement is too fast, too snappy. It doesn't feel like the slow, proper BF experience. And that is disappointing. Gameplay is too rushed, there is no time to breathe. I'm not Gen Z or Gen Alpha, I don't need to keep my brain entertained 120% of the time. Slow it down and let me experience the game, then maybe you'll have me. If every time I launch the game I have to think to myself "maybe it'll be better this time," it's not fun.

If there were a "mixed" option, then I would pick that. The core gameplay is pretty good, IE gunplay, classes, vehicles. The maps, on the other hand, are quite bad. Just about every map is a meat grinder, and it really lacks that big, open battlefield feel. You know, the sandbox where you're free to approach engagements how you'd like. They're very chaotic and the flow is often poor. There also seems to be a very small amount of content right now. Each class has a handful of gadgets, with recon and assault only getting 6 each so far. Unlocking guns is also REALLY grindy. This game is much better than 2042, but it's also worse than BF4, BF1, and BF5. Nothing sets apart. There's very small innovations, but nothing like levolution or behemoths or fortifications. It's the bread and butter of battlefield, plus mid maps. Edit: They added a FOMO Battle pass. That's WHILE the game is still suffering from game breaking bugs.

A Step Backwards: Ignoring a Global Player Base I was incredibly hyped for the new Battlefield, and in many ways, the core gameplay lives up to expectations. The scale of the battles and the graphical fidelity are impressive. However, my excitement quickly turned to deep disappointment when I discovered the complete absence of Russian language support. The decision to exclude the Russian language, whether for political reasons or simple oversight, is profoundly misguided. Video games should be a medium that brings people together, not a tool to punish ordinary players for the actions of governments. This move doesn't affect politicians; it alienates a massive, dedicated community of gamers who have supported this franchise for years. The developers seem to have forgotten that the Russian language is not confined to the borders of one country. It is one of the most widely spoken languages in the world, with over 250 million speakers globally, and is an official language of the United Nations. There are huge Russian-speaking populations in many countries, including Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Belarus, and many others across Eastern Europe and Central Asia. For many players in these regions, Russian is their primary language for communication and entertainment, and they may not be fluent in English. By excluding Russian, you are effectively telling millions of potential customers that they are not welcome. From a business perspective, this is simply a baffling decision. To invest millions in developing a AAA title and then deliberately cut off a significant portion of your potential market makes no sense. The Russian-speaking community represents a substantial revenue stream, and ignoring it is not only disrespectful but also poor business strategy. Until EA and DICE address this glaring omission and add Russian localization, I cannot recommend this game. It's a matter of principle. We are players, a global community, and we deserve to experience the game in a language we understand. This exclusion is a step backwards for a franchise that was once known for its global appeal.

You know... I really thought maybe they'd manage to do it. Maybe they'd bring back the Battlefield we once knew, and yet, they continue to stray from what made battlefield, battlefield. Because for some terribly ordained reason, some higher up said "appeal to cod players so they come play battlefield" instead of "make the game the bf fans really want." How many vehicles? How many maps? On launch!? Why are the smaller maps eerily similar to some CoD maps? Firestorm is the only good thing about the game thus far, and even then, it is smaller than it used to be. Until you have proper battlefield 2 sized maps, this game isn't gonna fill the shoes of a proper battlefield game. Where is the weather? Where is the variety? What happened to theme? And don't even get me started on no input-based queues. Forget cross play, it is basically impossible now to beat controller with mouse and keyboard. Has been for quite some time but it would appear Battlefield took 2042 and learned nothing about what makes controller versus m&k an unsolvable balancing problem. The character models are not goofy, but nowhere near the quality we saw in prior titles, and the factions dreamed up here are so boring and uninteresting I'm starting to wonder if company's are no longer allowed to use the likeness of actual nations in their games anymore. In fact, 90% of the soldier voices you hear are women. WHY The amount of content has continuously shrunk over the years in favor of providing the promise of DLC or continued live updates that, ironically, still end up providing less content than their predecessors in the long run. The shrinkflation impacting the game industry is leagues above what you see from a can of pringles on the shelf. Raise the price, lower the content. Newer generations are the none the wiser. Battlefield 2 on launch had: - 4 Nations: USMC, MEC, PLA, EU (The DLC added: 6 additional factions) - 37 different vehicles including land, air and sea (and BF1942 even offered full sized ships, submarines, and destroyers!) - 12 maps, with 4 being added in later patches to the game that were added entirely free, no DLC purchase required. (The DLCs added: 14 additional maps) - Commander Mode - Squads with map marker system the lead could use to let everyone in the squad know where to go. Mark a point on the map, and your squad sees that persist until SL removes it or changes the pin Older titles had vastly more content, and were far more thought ought when it came to the balancing and overall gameplay loop. - Server hosting: Back in the days of actually owning the game you bought, you could, on your own time and own dime, host your own server out of your room, or over the internet using a server provider. Meaning you could have a server on a select few maps, running 24/7, with a community of players that all had the same interest in the server (have fun). Not this jumbled mix of conflicting interests in the randomly generated match #494873 where timmy wants to do the challenge, johnny wants to sit in a corner, xXfAzEboIXx wants to run around with an smg forgoing any team related gameplay, and all the other benign shit you see that just makes you scratch your head in disbelief. The portal system they are offering continues to be the most half baked slop effort to allow the community to "host" servers while maintaining the ideology that no one should get to own anything. Did they really think they could create a server distribution system that wouldn't immediately hit "GAME QUOTA EXCEEDED"? Match making is and will always be direct competition to community hosted servers. One needs to go, and I vote match making. - Vehicle spawns: Giving players the ability to spawn directly into a vehicle from the spawn menu (that isn't a jeep) has ruined the series at its core because it amplifies the competition for vehicles, and often get used as some vandetta transport for a player to customize their spawn point right above the player that killed them. Ya'll need to go back to designing maps around actual runways, and bases where vehicles would likely be parked, and positioned far enough away from initial spawns into the map it naturally filters out the players not actually wanting the vehicle for use outside of a transport. The varied spawn times for vehicles across maps is also absolutely disgusting, and appears to be broken on a few maps. The vehicle just never spawns. It's so bad, people are using macros to rapidly click the spawn point! - Progression: If you want to get anywhere in unlocking gadgets for your favorite class, you're gonna have to stare at a multi-layer netflix menu to figure out that there are assignments specific to each class, and you won't be able to complete them until you've first reached a specific level. What happened to just a simple level progression + unlock? This looks like CoD's progression system ripped straight from the game! I want to make this a positive review, but I'll just have to wait and see if they address the real pains listed above.