ComicBook recently spoke with the developers of *Battlefield 6* about the game’s multiplayer features, including the maps and weapons. While many excellent games have already launched this year, *Battlefield 6* is still one of the most anticipated titles, even though it was only revealed in late July. The game quickly gained a lot of attention by bringing the series back to a realistic, modern setting with impressive levels of destruction and massive battles. The open beta further increased excitement, giving players a chance to experience the new direction Battlefield Studios is taking with this installment.
I recently had the chance to play on Mirak Valley, the largest map in Battlefield 6, and a revamped version of Operation Firestorm. I was really struck by how massive the game feels. While the beta focused on smaller, more confined maps, these larger areas demonstrate that Battlefield 6 delivers the large-scale warfare that fans expect. I spoke with producer Jeremy Chubb and level design director Shashank Uchil about the game’s multiplayer, covering topics like dynamic map changes (‘levolution’), weapons, and map sizes. You can find a full recording of our conversation below.
This interview has been lightly edited for clarity and length.
How does the current reaction to the new Battlefield compare to how people felt about Battlefield 2042? Considering the initial response to 2042 was quite varied, how are you feeling about this launch compared to how you felt back in 2021?
As a gamer, I’ve been following this game’s development closely, and it’s cool how open the team has been. They showed it off really early, and even let players try out early versions. They were all about getting our feedback and seeing how we actually played, which is awesome. It feels like we’re really part of shaping the game!
We launched BF Labs to get more direct feedback, and while it was a tough learning curve, it proved incredibly valuable. We then followed that up with what we believe was our largest open beta ever, offering a lot of content – numerous maps and game modes. We didn’t do this for *Battlefield 2042*, so now we have a much better understanding of what players enjoy, what they don’t, and how they experience the game.
As a fan, I’m really encouraged by what I’m hearing about the launch! It sounds like the team has a solid understanding of how players are feeling about the game, which is great. More importantly, they seem super confident in the game’s performance and that they’ve squashed a lot of bugs. They’ve even tested it on a huge range of PCs through BF Labs – over a million different setups! – so they have a really good idea of what to expect when it finally goes live. It all just makes me feel a lot better about the launch!
Honestly, I’m feeling great about how things are going. Seeing the reaction to the reveal and the open beta was incredible – seriously overwhelming in the best way. We poured years of work and a ton of effort into this game, and to see people genuinely excited and saying “this is Battlefield!” is a huge boost for the whole team. It’s still a bit nerve-wracking, because Battlefield fans are super passionate and have strong opinions, which is awesome. We’re definitely listening to feedback and working on tweaks and improvements as we go, but overall, we’re really happy with where the game is right now.
I was really impressed with some of the things they did in 2042, like being able to quickly change weapon attachments and request vehicles. I’m wondering if the team ever thought about including any of those features in Battlefield 6, or if you preferred to start fresh with a completely new design?
We’re constantly looking at successful features from past games to improve the current one. For this particular game, we were especially inspired by *Battlefield 3* and *Battlefield 4*. Many people, including Cade, have told us those games represent a peak for the franchise, and they’re clearly remembered with a lot of fondness by our players.
We immediately started thinking about how to reimagine that concept with today’s technology, and it was a really exciting challenge. We quickly had a clear vision for the game. We’ve definitely taken inspiration from *Battlefield 2042* and our previous titles, but we believe fans of those games will enjoy this one. In fact, this game is directly inspired by some of the experiences found in those earlier titles.
I’m curious about how you decide how big to make a map. I’ve been discussing this with friends, and I feel that how packed with content a map is – its density – is more important than just its overall size. We saw a good example of this with the Cairo map. But what’s the process for figuring out the right size?
We discussed map size, but for me, size isn’t the most important thing. The player experience comes first. We start by deciding what kind of gameplay we want – a close-quarters combat map, a map for tanks, or one with jets. That decision then dictates the scale. For example, a close-quarters map can’t be too large, or it loses the feeling of being close and intense.
We design maps based on the kind of gameplay we want. For close-quarters combat (CQC), think of something like a city siege. If we want to include infantry and tanks, we make a mid-sized map. Adding jets means we need a much larger space. For example, a map like Mirak Valley is too big for CQC; it’s better suited for large-scale battles with jets, tanks, and the Conquest game mode. We don’t start by deciding on a map size-we focus on creating a specific player experience and then build the map to support that.
It’s interesting, Cade, the way you talk with your friends actually mirrors the discussions we have as a team. We all have strong opinions on this, but we focus on creating a well-rounded experience with a good mix of elements. We carefully consider how things change depending on the game mode, and it’s crucial that the game feels fresh and doesn’t become repetitive – there’s no single ‘right’ way to achieve that. Ultimately, we’d be unhappy if the game didn’t offer a wide range of experiences, including intense, close-combat scenarios. We aim for a little bit of everything.
How are we aiming to balance maps that focus on infantry combat versus larger-scale warfare? Are we planning for an equal number of each type – like ten close-quarters maps and ten large-scale maps – or will the final map selection simply be based on what feels right?
It’s a bit of a mix, really. Some of our larger maps have some fantastic areas for close-quarters combat. For example, Liberation Peak, which we showed in the open beta, has a great, fully destructible village right in the center that’s perfect for Domination. But it varies – even within a single map, it’s not always consistent between close-quarters and vehicle-focused gameplay. I think everyone experiences the maps a little differently.
I was curious about your history with the Battlefield series – what games you’ve played, which one you started with, and which is your favorite. Everyone has different preferences, of course. Some players enjoy the large-scale battles and features like Conquest, destruction, and flying jets. Others prefer to stay on the ground, focusing on tanks or playing as infantry.
What makes Battlefield special is how differently each player approaches the game. Our main goal is to deliver a fantastic Conquest experience – one that feels both personal and epic, but is always distinctive and features impactful, class-based combat. We believe this will appeal to all our players.
The Mirak Valley map has a crane that can be destroyed during a match, creating a bit of cover in the center. It’s not as large or impactful as the destructible skyscraper from the Siege of Shanghai map, though. Over time, we’ve seemed to move away from those big, dramatic, map-changing events – what some people called ‘levolution’. I’m wondering if players would like to see those kinds of events return, and if we might see similar features on future maps released after launch.
We’ve really focused on creating a dynamic and destructible environment in this game. The idea is that the environments change as you play, forcing you to adapt your tactics and creating exciting strategic possibilities. We want players to experiment with different ways to destroy things in various game modes. While we haven’t had features like ‘Levolution’ recently, we did include large-scale destruction, like exploding rockets, in the previous game.
We aimed for a more realistic and challenging gameplay experience, focusing on unpredictable situations and strategic thinking. This was a conscious decision, and something we really enjoy. We also included the crane – it’s always a popular feature – and we might explore larger-scale elements again in future installments.
During the preview event, our team collaborated to find a way to destroy the crane. We weren’t sure what initially caused it to activate, but I ended up launching a rocket directly at it, and it collapsed. It was a really fun experience! Thinking about the Siege of Shanghai, everyone remembers that moment, and even years later, it’s exciting to say I witnessed the crane fall. Those are the moments that really stand out.
We’re still discussing this, which is great. We really try to collaborate closely with the community to understand what they’re looking for and we’ve definitely heard that people enjoy it.
Wow, there were SO many guns in the early look at Battlefield 6! It felt a little overwhelming, honestly. I’m guessing they’ll lock most of them behind progression in the final game, but we had everything available to us during the demo. I was just curious – what was the thinking behind including such a huge arsenal, and how did the team decide which weapons to feature?
As someone who plays a ton of this game, I can definitely speak to what the team’s focused on. They’re really trying to give us a ton of different ways to play – everything from the maps themselves to the different classes and, especially, the weapons. Weapons are what we’re using constantly, so they spend a *lot* of time making sure they feel, look, and *sound* just right. They’re doing amazing work! But honestly, we players want even more variety. We’re always hungry for new things to discover and explore, and it feels like they’re constantly trying to keep up with our demand, which is awesome.
When designing our maps, we focus on creating detailed combat areas. We’ve put extra effort into the sniper experience compared to our previous game, but also included many tight spaces where SMGs and shotguns excel. We’ve built a lot of street and interior environments to offer different combat ranges and really highlight the strengths of various weapons. We always envisioned maps that would showcase what our weapons are capable of, and that guided our design process.
It’s fantastic to have Operation Firestorm back – it looks and plays just like we remembered! When you revisit a map like that, do you ever consider making any changes or improvements?
We did discuss this previously, and a key question was whether the game was inspired by Firestorm, or if it was a reimagining or remaster. We quickly decided we wanted to stay very faithful to the original game. Our approach was to stick closely to what players remember and deliver an experience that meets those expectations. What you see now reflects that commitment.
It’s tough to make changes to a map people already love, but we really want to improve it. The reaction to even a small preview at our LA event showed how excited fans are to have it back. It’s a classic, and we’re thrilled to be bringing it back with some new features. We’ve made the destruction much more dynamic and detailed, offering more ways to alter the environment. For example, the warehouse buildings in the center of the map are far more destructible than before, and we’ve added more objects and cover for strategic gameplay.
We’ve updated the map slightly, staying very true to its original layout and feel. We playtest the changes and ask ourselves if we’ve gone too far. Luckily, we have the original level designer from DICE involved. We show him the updated version and wait for his feedback. Often, he’s impressed and says that if he’d had the tools we have now when he first created the map, this is exactly what he would have built.
It’s kinda like we’re seeing the original vision for that map, the one the developers dreamed up. But honestly, they had to scale it back a lot because of the limitations of the PCs and consoles back then. We definitely feel the urge to tweak things, and we do a little, but we really want to honor the map as fans know and love it.
Honestly, I was pretty shocked to get another chance to play the game early! It’s unusual to have so many hands-on previews – first the reveal event, then the beta, and now this! I was curious if this was always the plan, or if they added more previews because people had some concerns about the maps after the initial reveal.
We’ve had a really strong foundation with this game from the beginning. For two or three years, we were able to play a very workable version of it for about two hours each day. That’s more progress early on than we’ve had with previous projects, and it’s been a huge benefit. Having a consistently playable build allowed us to iterate and improve much more effectively.
During our open beta, we discussed the challenges of the maps we initially chose. We started with some of the most difficult ones to create – dense, urban environments with close-quarters combat. For example, imagine 64 players battling in a tightly packed section of Cairo, with tanks and widespread building destruction, all powered by full physics and rendered with near-photorealistic visuals thanks to extensive photo scanning.
Testing was a significant challenge, and our main goal was to ensure the game ran consistently well – that was crucial for us, the developers, and especially for the players. We chose difficult maps to really push the limits, and the open beta was the result of that effort. It included a large amount of content, making it the biggest beta we’ve ever done with multiple game modes. We were eager to share it, but the beta was somewhat limited in its scope. It didn’t fully showcase the full range and size of the maps we plan to release with the final game.
The audience clearly responded positively, so we felt it was important to demonstrate that we had even more to offer. It wasn’t necessarily a planned strategy from the beginning; we simply wanted to showcase our excellent software and share our progress. Ultimately, it was a combination of both responding to the audience and wanting to highlight our work.
Have fans raised any points or asked questions that we haven’t had a chance to respond to yet?
Chubb: I want to say the shotgun. [laughs]
That’s a reasonable thing to say!
We realized after looking at player feedback that people were eager to experience the full game as we were developing it. We wished we could have shown everyone the complete package to get a better sense of whether we were on the right track. Giving players that early insight would have been valuable, and might have led to a different discussion. Ultimately, we’re all learning and evolving together – the development team and the player community – as we move forward.
We’re really excited for the game to launch on October 10th! We can’t wait for players to start experiencing it and help us make it even better. We’ve been analyzing feedback from the open beta, and we noticed a lower win rate for attackers in the Breakthrough mode than we saw in our own testing. We’d like to see this data across the entire game, so we can continue to refine and balance everything right up to launch and beyond.
If I could get feedback on one thing, I’d really like to know what people think about sector two of Siege of Cairo, specifically on October 10th. I’m hoping it feels balanced and provides a fair experience for both sides. We’re confident we can make adjustments if needed, so getting that initial feedback at the right time is key.
The new *Battlefield 6* game comes out on October 10th for Xbox Series X|S, PlayStation 5, and PC. What are your thoughts? Share them in the comments and join the discussion on the ComicBook Forum!
https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/battlefield-6-battle-royale-details-player-count-playtest/embed/#
Read More
- Gold Rate Forecast
- Strange Antiquities Launches September 17, 2025
- Earnest Evans Collection launches December 25 in Japan
- Attack on Titan Unveils New Project to Commemorate a Major Milestone
- Windows 11 Notepad will soon let you generate text using on-device AI models — no subscription required
- Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 Tipped to Take Off on PS5 This November
- Marvel’s AI Character Raises Alarming Questions
- Inside Robert Redford and Wife Sibylle Szaggars’ Love Story
- The Housemaid – TRAILER
- Did Tom Brady Violate Rules in Raiders’ Coaching Booth? NFL Says…
2025-09-22 04:44