Battlefield General - Discuss the series here

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
NeonFlux said:
I'm amazed at the ego of these devs, Aside from their sports games, EA has been overseeing failure after failure for a while now and now it seems like BF6 is going to be selling like hot cakes and they still want to publicly shit all over Charlie Kirk and customers over customization options.
Click to expand...
My theory is many of the BF6 developers, particularly those at DICE, have been dragged kicking and screaming into making a BF game fans actually want.

This Ars Technica article was published a month before the open beta: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2025...ame-culture-clash-crunch-and-colossal-stakes/

I read the article when it was published and came away with the impression BF6 was going to be another dud. Rereading the article now this part sticks out to me:
Speaking with people who have worked or currently work at DICE in Sweden, the tension between some at that studio and the new, US-based leadership team was obvious—and to a degree, that's expected.

DICE had "the pride of having started Battlefield and owned that IP," but now the studio was just "supporting it for American leadership," said one person who worked there. Further, "there's a lot of distrust and disbelief... when it comes to just operating toward numbers that very few people believe in apart from the leadership."

But the tensions appear to go deeper than that. Two other major factors were at play: scaling pains as the scope of the project expanded and differences in cultural values between US leadership and the workers in Europe.

"DICE being originally a Swedish studio, they are a bit more humble. They want to build the best game, and they want to achieve the greatest in terms of the game experience," one developer told me. "Of course, when you're operated by EA, you have to set financial expectations in order to be as profitable as possible."

That tension wasn't new. But before 2042 failed to meet expectations, DICE Stockholm employees say they were given more leeway to set the vision for the game, as well as greater influence on timeline and targets.

Some EU-based team members were vocally dismayed at how top-down directives from far-flung offices, along with the US company's emphasis on quarterly profits, have affected Glacier's development far more than with previous Battlefield titles.
Click to expand...
There seems to be massive resentment towards Vince Zampella and Byron Beede, who have set out wanting to make BF6 as successful as possible. While there might be some legitimate concerns raised in the article about the single player, the developers speaking to Ars must have known the core multiplayer was in good shape and that's what the fans care most about, yet they felt the need to try and preemptively sabotage the marketing of the game.
 
guiltyspark85 said:
"DICE being originally a Swedish studio, they are a bit more humble. They want to build the best game, and they want to achieve the greatest in terms of the game experience," one developer told me. "Of course, when you're operated by EA, you have to set financial expectations in order to be as profitable as possible."
Click to expand...
IIRC, when BF4 launched it was broken and full of bugs/server issues, and DICE LA (now Ripple Effect) ended up fixing the game to a playable state and to where it is now. The other issue is that a lot of the veteran devs left after BFV and went to Embark Studios, leaving a lot less of veteran Battlefield devs. That said, some devs, such as
David Sirland (T1ggr) did leave after BFV, but have recently joined back up with DICE to help make BF6.
 
If anyone is interested in the Middle Eastern coalition faction from the earlier Battlefield games, there is an upcoming security partnership between Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Republic, and Pakistan (a significant Iranian ally). This development brings us closer to the possibility of encountering the MEC faction in real life.
 
Blackstar said:
Cj30zmu7YCNxmwjY.mp4
Vid of the movement nerfs, love to see it. Also lmao at the cope and seethe MUH AGGRESSIVE MOVEMENT!!!!
Click to expand...
>Play defensive around every corner, rarely sprint
>Should be rewarded for being cautious
>nah nigga slides past you, looking the other way, turning 180 as he's hit with the first bullet to insta gib me
Funny how as soon as I played a 'hard' mode without sliding, my kda skyrocketed
 
BF6 will have a good launch but its honey moon phase will be quick. I have been MIA a but heres but tldr of what I think will break people

>Maps being much smaller than usual and even larger maps have small map design (Mirak Valley is the largest map but would be medium in BF4)
>The open weapon versus locked weapon debate its clear dice prefers open weapons and only will provide one playlist of just conquest locked weapon they need to just straight up admit it at this point and stop trying to pander
>The vehicles both Tanks/Helicopters/Jets are weak on purpose the tanks in the beta had this horrible "Disabled" state that lasted for 10 seconds making you not able to move or shoot or use gadgets
>Destruction is all or nothing since shooting the walls or using a sledgehammer will cause the same destruction as a C4 brick
>Movement nerfs are fine but cmon sweats will still dominate most shitters and you guys cant hide in tanks thinking the sweats wont take you down in 10 seconds either
>lack of a true server browser will make everyone stuck in shitty playlists
>Battle Royale has larger scale destruction for "balance"
>Weapons arent class locked yet grenades are???
>If the BR is more of a success itll end up like warzone where they only treat it as the main mode then
 
Evil Peter Griffin said:
If these Zoomers love movement shooters so much then go play Quake or Unreal. Maybe we'll get a new one.
Click to expand...
They dont they only use it to abuse movement as aim skill is not impressive anymore they need to do something else. Slide canceling ironically like bunny hopping is a bug that was abused to its fullest. However, I dont think most boomer casual gamers understand that FPS games are sweaty as fuck now.
 
iceteayo said:
BF6 will have a good launch but its honey moon phase will be quick. I have been MIA a but heres but tldr of what I think will break people
Click to expand...
Yeah the playerbase cut in half by the 2nd half of the 2nd open beta weekend, everyone probably unlocked everything, then moved on to the new slop. That's not a good sign.

The first week map set was amazing but empire was meh. The movement nerfs are promising.

They're not getting 100 million players, they're not going to hold the attention of the average goyslop enjoyer, but the average playercount will MAYBE be 25,000-50,000 6 months after launch if they're lucky. MAYBE the dudes still playing BF3, BF4 as well as BF1 and BFV will buy and play it instead if it's a good battlefield in the modern setting. I don't know anyone who still gives a shit about battle royales in this oversaturated market.

I expect everyone here to call me niggercattle for pre-ordering and ignoring the signs if it flops but I don't care, I work and DICE devs are going to be out of a job anyway.
 
Last edited:
Battlefield42 said:
Dunno why EA wants another br on top of Apex Legends. Seems retarded to compete with your own game.
Click to expand...
when you round down to populations it's more of they want BF players trying the battle royale mode in hopes they might try their gayish battle royale game and waste money in there too, EA has always been that fucking retarded.
same shit can be said for activision and warzone but warzone is COD battle royale, not a entirely different game trying to keep any semblance to anything just because of the gamemode, fagex legends has a different moveset than BF.
 
Leaked Battle Royale destruction, entire buildings can be taken down
 
iceteayo said:
BF6 will have a good launch but its honey moon phase will be quick. I have been MIA a but heres but tldr of what I think will break people

>Maps being much smaller than usual and even larger maps have small map design (Mirak Valley is the largest map but would be medium in BF4)
>The open weapon versus locked weapon debate its clear dice prefers open weapons and only will provide one playlist of just conquest locked weapon they need to just straight up admit it at this point and stop trying to pander
>The vehicles both Tanks/Helicopters/Jets are weak on purpose the tanks in the beta had this horrible "Disabled" state that lasted for 10 seconds making you not able to move or shoot or use gadgets
>Destruction is all or nothing since shooting the walls or using a sledgehammer will cause the same destruction as a C4 brick
>Movement nerfs are fine but cmon sweats will still dominate most shitters and you guys cant hide in tanks thinking the sweats wont take you down in 10 seconds either
>lack of a true server browser will make everyone stuck in shitty playlists
>Battle Royale has larger scale destruction for "balance"
>Weapons arent class locked yet grenades are???
>If the BR is more of a success itll end up like warzone where they only treat it as the main mode then
Click to expand...

NeonFlux said:
Yeah the playerbase cut in half by the 2nd half of the 2nd open beta weekend, everyone probably unlocked everything, then moved on to the new slop. That's not a good sign.

The first week map set was amazing but empire was meh. The movement nerfs are promising.

They're not getting 100 million players, they're not going to hold the attention of the average goyslop enjoyer, but the average playercount will MAYBE be 25,000-50,000 6 months after launch if they're lucky. MAYBE the dudes still playing BF3, BF4 as well as BF1 and BFV will buy and play it instead if it's a good battlefield in the modern setting. I don't know anyone who still gives a shit about battle royales in this oversaturated market.

I expect everyone here to call me niggercattle for pre-ordering and ignoring the signs if it flops but I don't care, I work and DICE devs are going to be out of a job anyway.
Click to expand...

It won't get 100 million players simply because there isn't a market for that number, even for CoD. Black Ops 6 had a peak player count of 306k and some 33 million players in its first month, which was considered a high for CoD. 100 million is an unrealistic expectation, and it remains to be seen how readily they can accept a healthy but smaller-than-stated population.

Could Battlefield 6 run off with Black Ops 7's lunch money? Maybe. Eclipsing BO6's lifetime player count in just a beta is impressive. Treyarch has seemingly given BF6 every condition necessary to beat BO7. The game looks like every sci-fi game that has competed against - and failed - to beat CoD in the past with a Black Ops skin pasted over it. I also don't subscribe to the Reddit belief that there's an invisible legion of only-CoD fans that will always buy it now and forever; the exact same rhetoric was used with World of Warcraft (i,e.: Blizzard fanboys who only play Blizzard games) and look how that turned out.

Nevertheless, EA still has an uphill battle ahead of it. It's riding off the worst-received Battlefields (V and 2042), and EA has historically shit itself in spectacular fashion when they've been giftwrapped a victory. Most current issues are fixable - map sizes can easily be rectified with future maps, destructibility can be scaled, and vehicle durability can be tuned. All three of those are likely reactions to 2042: vehicles were too strong, maps were too big and had no cover, and destructibility was significantly scaled back. The question is whether they don't do anything about it for 6 months or not, and whether they keep trying to give their actual fanbase what they want ("grounded" skins, no movement bullshit, server browser expansion, etc.).
 
Last edited:
Core COD fans won’t budge, especially Treyarch cod fans they hate call of duty’s that lean more realistic and larger scale (MW2019/MWII) and you can’t judge playercount on a free beta that was trivial to get in.

BF1 basically ate cods money in 2016 but BF1s expansions sucked ass and its player retention sucked. 6 is a shiny new fps hyped up but it’s honestly a vocal minority since the BF fanbase has always had this inferiority complex. Titanfall 2 should have won in 2016 because bf1 is overrated

Let’s not get started on their pandering at easy victories but that won’t budge on true issues like the weapons or server browser.
 
Last edited:
iceteayo said:
Let’s not get started on their pandering at easy victories but that won’t budge on true issues like the weapons or server browser.
Click to expand...
I'm guessing the portal is their back-up plan if people aren't happy with the multiplayer and the devs refuse to budge on certain issues.

"Don't like that the BR mode has more destruction than multiplayer? make it yourself."

"Don't like seeing certain skins, want to blacklist/balance overpowered/underpowered weapons? Make a custom multiplayer server on the portal with them automatically disabled/enhanced."

"Want Metro, wake Island, locker? make it yourself."

This is likely their long-term gambit on retaining players if they for some reason can't fix the main game modes.
 
iceteayo said:
Core COD fans won’t budge, especially Treyarch cod fans they hate call of duty’s that lean more realistic and larger scale (MW2019/MWII) and you can’t judge playercount on a free beta that was trivial to get in.
Click to expand...

That is true, but I wasn't expecting beta numbers to make much of a blip in the first place. Like I said, I'm not saying it will translate into success, but the conditions for success are arguably better than they were previously. There are plenty of areas where everything could still go wrong and it subsequently tanks.

iceteayo said:
BF1 basically ate cods money in 2016 but BF1s expansions sucked ass and its player retention sucked. 6 is a shiny new fps hyped up but it’s honestly a vocal minority since the BF fanbase has always had this inferiority complex. Titanfall 2 should have won in 2016 because bf1 is overrated
Click to expand...

I thought it was weird that the game didn't even launch with fricking ribbons, and for me I got tired of the lootboxes and other busywork bullshit that got in the way. BF6 could rectify this with a more generous reward system prior to making it worse in a sequel, but I don't think developers are smart enough to implement this anymore (especially not EA), and if they do it's entirely by accident.

NeonFlux said:
"Don't like that the BR mode has more destruction than multiplayer? make it yourself."
Click to expand...

I think the most likely outcome is they'll just start making maps with the same destructible assets in them for the main game. They did it in BF2042 - The Stranded map's container ship is just a tweaked version of the one in Discarded, and Haven's buildings are copy-pasted from Arica Harbour.

NeonFlux said:
"Don't like seeing certain skins, want to blacklist/balance overpowered/underpowered weapons? Make a custom multiplayer server on the portal with them automatically disabled/enhanced."
Click to expand...

I want to see how much of a modding community can/does develop for BF6 and what they allow, since 2042 was so unpopular it basically had none at all. Closed weapons, skin toggle, proper weapon names and male-only classes are the ones I'm looking out for.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom