Well if people praise 6 for doing almost the same thing as 2042, its going to be really telling.
I thought they might try to do something a bit more involved. I've played a lot of 2042 and I wasn't looking forward to them just doing a slowed down version of it, without really thinking about it.
For example, there really isn't a lot of consideration for the "future" in 2042, or "modernity" in 6. It still plays essentially on the same ruleset as 1942, without much more. They aren't considering a more serious damage model for vehicles other than "SHOOT REAR FOR MORE DAMAGE!" for example. It's not like you can play out scenarios like knocking the tread off a tank, so it goes static in 50 feet, and needs to be repaired specifically on that side. It doesn't look like they really considered FPVs at all even though a lot of combat in modern times seems to be drone based. Yes i understand that it seems much more boring that way if there is a "Drone operator" loadout that has 3 explosive FPVs that can either take out soldiers or damage vehicles, but normie gamers hate it when you can't mark a target that pops up on their hud or minimap, which aren't realistic things. Besides, if you just make hard counters that you have to resupply, then a lot of skill can be rewarded, and the game stays competitive.
It doesn't look like they considered kit being more expansive than "ONE LETHAL GRENADE" + "ONE GADGET" which is stupid, because role playing wins battles, and squad playing dominates them.
6 looks like it doesn't really play around with any defense building like BFV which could have actually been an interesting way to counter the destruction. Dropping in defensive loadouts that can replace blown up territories you capture might actually make long battles more interesting. It's not like people aren't doing similar things in squad, and normies do it in fortnite to a cartoony degree. BFV just didn't let the player place the layout of the sandbags. The sandbags themselves werent the problem. Squads are still not being emphasized with 6 players working together for common objectives, and it doesn't look like they really considered a new system for resource float like "squad points" for vehicle or supply call ins that could develop squad hardpoints. Likewise, It doesn't look like it has artillery or air strikes, or an expanded map for aerial combat to hard counter static defensive buildup.
Call of duty has been like this for years. Everyone "knows what call of duty is" so they just assume it has to stay exactly with that format. Which is ironic because it took PUBG and Fortnite to make COD become a more open map type game with Warzone. Meanwhile Battlefield the whole time has had an open map format that could've been used for a lot of different game types and systems, but its stuck in the corporate world. It's more important to have these limited engagements in specific areas that the developers control than it is to open the game up, and let the community decide what they like. Remember Hazard Zone? nobody gave a shit, they just go to Rush and Conquest. If I want to play Hardcore, i either have to go to the private server, or wait for it to come into rotation. That's not how Battlefield had such a long run. The modding community took BF2, turned it into Project Reality, and then we got Squad out of it. That all just came from people liking BF2 a lot. Which is a problem for EA. They don't want you to love any one game too much, because you need to buy the next one. Even with the modern day "live service" concept they still want to release individual titles yearly? If there is an issue it is this idea that the developer/publisher/corporate guys have to be in charge of whatever we're playing because "they know how to monetize it" and therefore the game can't really be much beyond COD or Battlefield 3/4/1 whatever they think gamers are nostalgic for.
They literally had "Battlefield Portal" which sounds like "Play any Battlefield era in the game, your way!" but is not really that at all. But it should've been, because then anyone wanting to play a WW2 game could just stay in the Battlefield meta, which would keep retention up. I know thats what corpos want, yet they don't do this? I can't even imagine Halo's multiplayer history being what it was without Forge for example.
The corporate slop side has to sell skins and battle passes so if they embrace the community to make custom maps, or mods how can they sell a map pack? And the limited amount of maps in the first place is silly. How many maps exist on a server somewhere in a previous frostbite Battlefield that they could probably batch convert to the new format? Shit, you could probably make Battlefront 1&2 map conversions based on the assets that are there. Shame. There has to be at least 60 modern era maps, and maybe 45 WW1 and WW2 maps that could be converted. Plus you have the ability to recreate around 50 maps from the refractor generation, and that isn't even addressing Bad Company. Which by the way, they have never been smart enough to go back to for the sake of selling a singleplayer campaign. Hopefully they realized that if they generate a mega ginormous map and give AI objectives with story elements it would actually work.
The problem with 2042 was that they took all the gadgets that could have been cool when put together and just split them into heroes thinking that they were going to edge each other out. In BF2: Special Forces the cool thing was multiple kits had grappling hooks or zipline crossbows so you could go from building to building as a squad. You could drop ammunition to your teammates so they could control a position, or repair vehicles which made holding areas more intense. with 2042 the likelihood someone will drop you an ammo pack that can help you take out a set of vehicles with AT weapons is really low, because even if someone picks that class they might not pick that loadout item. If the "Support class" could do all of the support roles in one kit then maybe the game would be more dynamic. As in, if the Ammo carrier could drop ballistic walls, call in ammunition drops, and shoot people with the medic gun, how much different would it be?
But the main TL;DR point is:
Put the power back in the gamers hands, and they'll perfect it. All the options for comprehensive fun for many tastes are there, you just can't access them to build the community because the common thing now is to gatekeep everyones time into battle pass events and daily objectives. And because of the trend focus by the corpos, the game will just stay memefield, where modern day US forces have to fight Russians and you're going to be M4ing it up against some AK47s going CYKA again. Enemy Tank Spotted! 4 shots with the RPG on the tank, call for ammo, no one has any, get shot by xXximaonlysniperxXx from 1923m with the GOL Magnum, guys skip over your body ignoring the enemy right behind them because theyre stupid fucking IDIOTS. respawn on stupid fucking IDIOT, run the opposite way hes going towards the objective. Wish you spawned the other class, because that would be good right now. Repeat.
