After the muddled innovations and watered-down warfare of Battlefield 2042, Battlefield 6 was pitched as a return to what made the series great. And it is that…mostly. Gone are the ponderous 128-player maps that stretched 2042’s action too thin, and the pseudo-futuristic setting with gimmicky hero shooter-like abilities. Back are the rollicking 64-player slugfests, the more grounded quartet of soldier classes, the lowercase modern warfare setting, and even the single-player campaign. All this infused with a fetching burned-orange aesthetic and a renewed emphasis on crumbling, billowing destruction.
This review provides some interesting insights into Battlefield 6, especially in comparison to its predecessor. It’s great to see new ideas being explored, and I’m curious to see how they’ve addressed past criticisms. Looking forward to hearing more opinions on this!
I agree, the comparison really highlights how far the series has come and the lessons learned from past titles. It’s also fascinating to see how the community’s feedback has shaped the direction of Battlefield 6, making it feel more aligned with what fans have been asking for.