Battlefield 6 Open Beta – Everything We Like (And a Few Things We Didn’t)

by

The official open beta for Battlefield 6 has begun on consoles and PC, even for those who’ve managed to secure early access. Thankfully, getting early access isn’t too challenging. While it features just four modes, three maps, tutorials, and lacks major components like Portal and the new Escalation, it’s still a massive success with approximately 335,000 peak concurrent players on Steam-a record for the franchise on that platform. However, the question remains: is it enjoyable?

The brief takeaway is that yes, the beta offers a good time and gives a promising outlook for its release. It’s clear why Battlefield Labs has played a crucial role in development and why the open beta is being released two months early. There are still some areas that need enhancements beyond simple balance adjustments and bug repairs. Here’s our feedback on the open beta, highlighting three positive aspects and three areas for improvement.

What We Like: The Gunplay and Movement

Throughout the history of the Battlefield series, the gunplay has experienced highs and lows. Although it was criticized in Battlefield 2042, even Battlefield 5 faced criticism for its time-to-kill and balance adjustments. Fortunately, the overall gunplay and movement in Battlefield 6 seem to be well-received. For instance, the M433 and M4A1 guns offer unique experiences thanks to attachments that cater to various playstyles, such as prioritizing faster aim-down-sights speed over hip-fire accuracy (although you can choose a balance of both). The M87A1 shotgun is particularly powerful with its stopping power.

While the weapon balance is notably impressive, particularly in terms of assault rifles, there are areas that could use improvement. For instance, sniping isn’t as fluid as the series’ best moments, grenades seem to be launched too quickly, and the time-to-kill can be inconsistent. However, the fundamental movement, responsiveness, and overall weapon handling remain solid throughout.

What We Didn’t Like: Map Design

The beta provides three maps, but they may not leave a favorable initial impact regardless of whether you’re a seasoned fan or a novice player. Liberation Peak on Conquest could be renamed to Sniper’s Peak, though it isn’t necessarily the fault of the players. With its numerous visible lines of sight, it becomes the preferred choice, and even when playing as an Assault, carrying a DMR as a backup seems almost essential. Breakthrough is particularly challenging on this map, especially during attacks, as many snipers occupy the main approach and surrounding angles, making flanking nearly impossible.

As a gamer, I was initially taken aback by Iberian Offensive’s stunning visuals (the smoky skies and narrow streets were quite the sight), but soon found myself in a congested mess where spawn points didn’t seem to matter much. Whoever controlled the hill had the upper hand, which wasn’t great considering the significant drops in performance. I didn’t delve too deeply into Siege on Conquest, but Domination was somewhat fun. Unfortunately, the same can’t be said for Liberation Peak in this mode, as it feels claustrophobic with players attacking from every direction and not much time to breathe in between. It might be the map’s size, but I found myself dying, respawning, and then dying again in an endless loop, even on Conquest.

Perhaps the other five maps exhibit superior quality and scale compared to 2042’s launch, avoiding similar issues. However, what stands out most is that they seem quite ordinary. While the ambiance is accurately captured, there isn’t anything particularly unique about them, and in comparison to some, they may appear rather modest.

What We Like: Closed Weapons and Proper Classes

It seems like going back to the classic role-based system in Battlefield 6 is just what we needed after the rocky implementation of the Specialist system in Battlefield 2042. Having distinct roles such as Assault for close combat, Engineers for managing vehicles, Support for healing and Quick Revives, and Recon for sniping and marking targets makes perfect sense and it’s hard to believe that approach was abandoned before. But now that it’s back in Battlefield 6, it feels like a breath of fresh air.

In the new Battlefield 2042, DICE didn’t take the opportunity to assign specific weapon types to each class like they did in previous games. Instead, they introduced a Signature Weapon mechanic, where using a certain type of weapon for a particular class unlocks special perks (for instance, improved stability with sniper shots for the Recon class). While this is an interesting feature, it may not entirely deter players from using weapons outside their designated classes. On the positive side, DICE did introduce Closed Weapons, offering a game mode for those who prefer stricter weapon restrictions and a more traditional Battlefield experience as a result.

It currently takes patience to find Conquest Closed Weapons matches during the beta since the playlist often needs time to populate. However, as more players join the beta, this issue may improve. The true test will be at launch, particularly when it comes to Portal’s server browser functionality.

What We Didn’t Like: Vehicles

Despite the game’s impressive gunplay and character movement, I must admit that the vehicles leave something to be desired. It’s uncertain whether the tank has been intentionally weakened due to the Engineer’s new auto-repair feature, which heals the vehicle when inside it, but it definitely feels less formidable. Furthermore, the Engineers seem exceptionally effective at destroying tanks, as it appears that directional damage is no longer a factor. This raises questions about the purpose of tanks in this game.

In simpler terms, Helicopters are difficult to fly, and even though we might discover more about vehicles when we explore larger areas, there’s no denying that helicopter controls need immediate improvement before launch. The phrase “FUBAR” means broken or messed up, so it indicates that the helicopter controls are problematic.

What We Like: The Atmosphere

In their current state, the three maps require further refinement based on game mode, but one aspect is undeniably well-executed: DICE has masterfully crafted the ambiance. Entering Liberation Peak and listening to radio broadcasts reporting tanks while jets roared overhead and explosions reverberated, truly established the mood for the operation. Even in Iberian Offensive, there’s a palpable sense of being immersed in an ongoing battlefield, as structures collapse, tanks traverse city streets, and gunfire resonates.

It seems there’s been a bit of debate about whether Battlefield 6 truly captures the essence of the original Battlefield series, given all the design choices. Yet, if the aim was to create a realistic and grounded ambiance, then it appears that Battlefield 6 has achieved this goal successfully.

What We Didn’t Like: The UI

During the Iberian Offensive gameplay, there was an instance where I needed to reduce the game settings due to severe frame rate drops. This encounter led me to one of the most annoying issues in UI (User Interface) design – exiting a settings menu would always redirect me to a different tab. Although it may not seem terrible at first glance, repeatedly landing on the incorrect tab when attempting to adjust settings for better performance can be incredibly frustrating. The main menu’s UI layout is also peculiar as it devotes a substantial portion of the top section to promotions, making you scroll down to access the game modes. Adding attachments to weapons through modding involves selecting them first and then clicking on Customize.

Strangely, modifying and customizing with the shotgun isn’t straightforward; it involves selecting Modify and then adjusting settings. It’s peculiar that numerous settings and features aren’t clearly explained. However, this time there is a functional scoreboard, though it doesn’t show the number of revives. The rest seems to need substantial improvements for a more seamless user experience.

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.

Read More

2025-08-11 19:47