How Battlefield 6 Can Be Even Better Than Modern Warfare

How Battlefield 6 Can Be Even Better Than Modern Warfare

Contents

Battlefield 5 has had a rough time at the end of this console generation, and may need to mount a serious comeback to take on Modern Warfare.

You Are Reading :[thien_display_title]

How Battlefield 6 Can Be Even Better Than Modern Warfare

EA’s had a tough time with some of its biggest franchises at the tail-end of this console generation. Even Battlefield, one of its longest running and most successful franchises, has not been immune to the effects of controversy and criticism. Games like Battlefront 2 and Battlefield 5 each getting its own respective controversies show the publisher may need to make some serious adjustments to its development pipelines and release schedules before Battlefield 6.

Battlefield 5 had a lot of marketing hype on the way to its release, but quickly found itself under pressure from fans due to the live service approach being the source of many complaints. Over time the game struggled for a number of different circumstances, while games like Modern Warfare mostly saw praise. Even though Modern Warfare had its own share of problems, the game was very successful and is still riding great momentum. Battlefield 6 may need to make some serious adjustments if the series is to mount a comeback.

Managing Expectations

How Battlefield 6 Can Be Even Better Than Modern Warfare

Battlefield 5’s reveal and lead up to release genuinely had a lot of hype surrounding the game, despite igniting an equal amount of controversy over its depiction of World War II. DICE’s development team was rolling out an ambitious update schedule based around real-life events from 1940-1945. Each expansion would emphasize several milestone events that occurred chronologically throughout the war. Conceptually, it was a radical and positively received idea, one that’d be worth revisiting, but the main issue with Battlefield 5 was mounting stability issues and competition getting in the way of the game’s ambition.

EA CEO Andrew Wilson notes that delaying the game to November of 2018 instead of its intended October release meant the game faced stiff competition, but it was more than just its release date. Fans consistently criticized each update with performance degradation issues, and while many were resolved, the game had a lasting stigma of stability problems. Many new content updates saw delays as a result, which lead to criticisms for lack of content as well. EA’s concept of making Battlefield V a proper live service experience was continuously marred by issues and complaints, but that doesn’t mean the series can’t bounce back in the next entry.

See also  Harleen Updates a Problematic Aspect of Harley Quinns Origin

Meaningful Destruction

How Battlefield 6 Can Be Even Better Than Modern Warfare

One thing in particular that newer Battlefield titles seem to gloss over is the potential in functionally destructible environments. Sure, every Battlefield game since Bad Company has featured highly destructible environments, but never as functionally important as the first few iterations. Destruction quickly became a defining difference between Battlefield and Call of Duty, but future iterations have subdued the importance of destruction. Earlier titles like Battlefield 1942 and Battlefield 2 featured destruction in a limited form, only allowing for certain geometry (like bridges) to be destroyed while the rest of the landscape remained unchanged. With the advent of the Frostbite engine, Battlefield games were able to craft near-fully destructible environments for all geometry and not just certain objects.

“Functionally” is the key word there, as later games featured destruction as more of a gimmick rather than a pivotal game mechanic. Battlefield 4 harkened back to this idea with its “Levolution Events” during certain Operations, but they were highly scripted and not as dynamic like the Bad Company games. The beauty of Battlefield: Bad Company and Bad Company 2’s destruction wasn’t in the mechanic itself, but how each map was designed with destructibility in mind. Strategy for rushing M-COM stations in Bad Company 2 could change depending whether it was worth it to plant a bomb, or if it was more feasible just to take the entire building down. Bad Company 2 excelled at balancing environment design with destruction mechanics very well, a concept that’s been lost on recent Battlefield games.

Emphasizing Team Composition

How Battlefield 6 Can Be Even Better Than Modern Warfare

2019’s Call of Duty: Modern Warfare made an interesting change to class customization called Gunsmith, allowing greater customization of weapons and attachments. While Gunsmith was completely new for attachments in Call of Duty, it was very reminiscent of the loadout customization system introduced in Battlefield 3 and expanded in subsequent entries. Integrating that much weapon customization was a first for the time, considering most Call of Duty games stopped at one attachment per gun unless players used something like the Bling perk. But where Battlefield distinguishes itself from Call of Duty in regards to weapons are the classes.

Team composition and/or dedicated roles in Call of Duty multiplayer is a very rare thing. Average players will stick to their favorite guns and perks in Modern Warfare, and the match will play out to various results. It’s a highly open-ended approach that’s proved to be the boon of the franchise thus far, but Battlefield handles things a bit more traditionally.

See also  Avengers Endgame Scarlet Witch (& The 9 Other Most Powerful Characters)

Classes in Battlefield fit specific archetypes, designed to emphasize specific roles for players rather than allowing total class freedom. Engineers could sabotage and destroy enemy armor, medics support the rest of the squad, Recon are for the sniper-inclined, and Assault is the standard-fare class, each serving distinct roles in all skirmishes. Battlefield has always had the bones for emphasizing proper team composition, but it’s never been very important for the success rate of matches.

Reduce the Simulation Aspects

One thing recently that Battlefield games have started to stray away from was the nature of simulation. Call of Duty, no matter how close it’s gotten to realism, has always embodied what an arcade shooter experience is like. Modern Warfare made great strides towards realism, especially with its campaign, but it never truly gets there on purpose. Battlefield on the other hand took the gritty simulatory approach very seriously, as evidenced by Battlefield 3 and 4. But DICE did curb that notion with Battlefield 1 quite well, taking plenty of creative liberties in its portrayal of World War 1.

It’s a bit of an abstract concept, but Battlefield has consistently focused on a strictly historical/realistic perspective in its most recent iterations. That alone isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but it does make for a less creative or unique identity for Battlefield. At least in terms of gaming, it very quickly becomes just another game about the horrors of war, and less about people playing this game for entertainment. Future Battlefield games don’t need to necessarily go crazy and be super campy like Bad Company, but for lack of a better expression, Battlefield shouldn’t take itself too seriously. War is scary, but Battlefield should be fun first and foremost.

The next Battlefield game may have some stiff competition in the future, especially with Battlefield 5’s support ending this summer. There are a few key areas that DICE and EA could explore and change to bring the series back, hopefully bringing back a time where the “Call of Duty vs. Battlefield” arguments return. Until then, fans will have to see what’s in store for Battlefield 6 in the future.

Battlefield 6 is in development.

#battlefield-6-can-even-better-modern-warfare/” target=”_blank” rel=”noopener”>#battlefield-6-can-even-better-modern-warfare/

Movies -