Considering we’re living through a period where it feels like every other game is a remake, remaster, or throwback of some sort, perhaps I should be less surprised that Battlefield 6 feels a lot like Battlefields 3 and 4. They were, of course, the glory years for EA and DICE’s large-scale multiplayer shooter – excellent maps, engaging objective-based modes, spectacular destruction, and the all-important class system. It seems like Battlefield 6 replicates all of that, at least as far as I can tell after having played two hours and change of the new, contemporary-set FPS across a number of maps and modes. That is a good thing, of course, especially since recent Battlefield history has been a bit of a rocky ride. But is this resurrection of past glories actually exciting? In the moment, absolutely. But on a grander scale? That’s a more difficult question.
Those exciting moments are often the result of the well-defined class system, which returns in a comfortingly familiar guise following Battlefield 2042’s missteps with its hero shooter-like Specialists. The Assault class can use their grenade launcher to breach through walls and then turn the startled soldiers who once huddled behind it into swiss cheese. The Engineer is the vital cog in a tank battle, using their acetylene torch to repair friendly armour and keep the cannon fire rolling, even as an entire building collapses around them. The Support is the squad’s literal lifeline, diving onto the objective with bags of spare ammo and soldier-reviving defibrillators at the ready. And finally there’s the Recon, the tactitician who marks enemies for all to see before scoring a hattrick of headshots with a sniper rifle.
There’s nothing revolutionary about these classes, but they are much clearer in their parameters than they have been in the past. You won’t find the team’s dedicated infantry killer fulfilling anti-tank or medic duties, for instance, as the Assault has been forced to do in the likes of Battlefields 4 and 5. But as clean and traditional as these roles are, there is a minor shake-up. Like Battlefield 2042, any class can use any weapon, but now each role has a “signature” specialism designed to encourage you into the specific loadouts of yesteryear. For example, the Recon is able to hold their breath while aiming sniper rifles, making them the clear choice for long-range engagements, while the Engineer benefits from improved hip-fire control when using SMGs. As someone who would score a low-end grade in a sniper exam, this means I can play Recon while swinging around an assault rifle or LMG, which fully opens up the class roster. But I can’t help but wonder why I should brute-force my way into playing Recon when I could find my specialism elsewhere. Isn’t that what class play is all about?
The odd, freeform elements of 2042’s weapon system saw their fair share of criticism, and I agree that tighter restrictions would have been of benefit both there and here in Battlefield 6, especially since there’s real strength in the design of the prescribed specialist gadgets for each class. The Support’s deployable cover is a solid example – it’s great for hiding behind while resurrecting fallen squaddies, provides a safe space for allies to restock on the ammunition bags you can drop, and acts as a surface to mount the LMG that the class specialises in. In short, the components of each kit can harmonise wonderfully, and I think the interesting choice is finding which class kit provides the best melody for your playstyle, rather than adjusting the individual notes within that.
Ultimately the weapons system is a small wrinkle in a very familiar package, and that applies to basically all the new ideas present in Battlefield 6’s demo. A new movement system (ridiculously dubbed the “Kinesthetic Combat System”) promises smoother leaning around corners, bracing against cover to reduce recoil, combat rolls as you land from high jumps, and several other improvements, but I can’t say I found these valuable additions – especially the contextual lean, which rarely seemed to activate. Like the omnidirectional movement in last year’s Call of Duty: Black Ops 6, I wonder how much genuine impact this will have on the experience of regular players. The one addition that I do love is the ability to grab a fallen soldier by the scruff of their neck and drag them to safety before reviving them. It’s a useful ability that everyone has access to (which admittedly does infringe on the Support’s duties, but it’s far from the instant revive of the defibrillator.) More importantly, it’s something that creates a “moment” – there’s few things more heroic than dragging a buddy to cover while machine gun fire kicks up dust around you. If all the small additions add up to something that feels as good as that, then maybe Battlefield 6 will develop a more distinct character in time.
This is a series that needed to find secure footing after a couple of wobbly outings, and it certainly feels like this new iteration is standing on reinforced concrete.
But what about the battlefields themselves? The series has always had to find its own formula when it comes to level geography, simply because the classic three-lane design doesn’t work for 64-player chaos. Thankfully that rule still applies, which means Battlefield still feels unlike any other shooter out there. The flagship Conquest maps retain that almost open-world feel – much more expansive than Call of Duty arenas, with an eye for real-world authenticity. City streets feel like genuine (albeit thankfully evacuated) population centres, and buildings are realistically laid-out with coherent stairwells and floorplans. The designer’s hand can be felt when you realise that there are maps nested within maps, but they leave a good impression. The broad edges of Empire State replicates the wide, tank-friendly streets of New York City, but push further into the centre and there’s rabbit warren-like alleys and a large concrete multi-storey building that’s perfect for claustrophobic, close-quarters fighting.
One or two matches simply isn’t enough time to understand the nuances of a map, and so I can’t say where exactly the few on offer would rank among the all-time greats. But Liberation Peak, set along the slopes of the Pamir Mountains in Tajikistan, provides the ideal amount of wide, rocky terrain for land vs air battles alongside pocketed military bases that give birth to desperate infantry fights, while Siege of Cairo has the dense street networks ideal for luring tanks into RPG ambushes. With no demolition centrepieces there’s nothing that instantly becomes a map’s signature element, but I hope that continued play will reveal carefully-placed details in each street, room, and capture point.
Talking of demolition, Battlefield’s trademark chaos remains very much in-tact. It is somewhat restrained in comparison to the map-shifting “levolution” system that powered Battlefield 6’s most obvious touchstones, but the alternative is much more useful in the minute-to-minute play. Entire building facades crumble away under cannon fire, opening up buildings like sardine cans to reveal the fleshy fiends hiding within. You can breach floors, allowing for Rainbow Six Siege-like downward assaults… or simply blow the support from beneath a pesky sniper. This late into Battlefield’s lifespan it’s hard to be truly excited about all this – this is the series’ schtick and likely always will be now – but it’s nonetheless impressive. As much as it is a technical feat to be boasted about alongside the most photo-realistic graphics in the series’ lifetime, it’s also a foundational tool that makes Battlefield its own distinct beast.
If it seems odd that we’ve reached this far into the preview without mentioning the multiplayer modes – you know, the things you actually play – then it’s only because they almost blend into the background among the explosions and squad roles. The hands-on session provided matches of Conquest, Breakthrough, and Squad Deathmatch, and they’re exactly as Battlefield tradition dictates. Personal preference naturally applies, but at least from my perspective it’s the classic story of the objective-focussed modes reigning supreme and the smaller-scale, kill-everything-in-sight games still feeling like a square peg in Battlefield’s round hole. It’s not that they’re a bad time, it’s just that the “Battlefield Moments” EA likes to shout about seem to only happen when you’re desperately holding down Point C during a close game of Conquest, or pushing tooth-and-nail through the fiercest defence in Breakthrough.
As part of what seems like a project attempting to recapture the glory days of Battlefields 3 and 4, I don’t hold any grudge against these modes feeling like business as usual. This is a series that needed to find secure footing after a couple of wobbly outings, and it certainly feels like this new iteration is standing on reinforced concrete. But I can’t help but feel that those old, faithful objectives could have been freshened up a little, perhaps with unconventional capture point designs or equipment used specifically for objectives. Perhaps new thrills lie in the new Escalation mode, which was unavailable to sample at my hands-on demo, although considering the official description provided to press claims that it “sees two teams fight to capture strategic control points,” I’m not expecting it to add too much extra fizz to the established formula.
When Battlefield 6’s open betas go live across a couple of weekends in August, I expect there will be a lot of fans who will be relieved to find a package that largely seems focussed on returning Battlefield to its peak years. And I can’t deny that the modern combat aesthetic, equipment, and classes speak to me in a way that the series’ near-future and pseudo-historical guns never could. I had a good time. More than a decade after Battlefields 3 and 4, though, it doesn’t fill me with the same sense of adrenaline it once did. But nostalgia’s still a hell of a drug, and maybe that’s just what the medic ordered.
Do you have any questions about Battlefield 6? Tell us what you want to know in the comments, and we’ll do a follow-up soon to bring you as many answers as we can.
Matt Purslow is IGN's Senior Features Editor.
