In a recent interview, Christian Buhl, technical director of ComicBook, shared insights about the preparation at Battlefield Studios ahead of the grand release of the anticipated shooter game, Battlefield 6. With high anticipation building around this year’s biggest title, fans can hardly contain their excitement for the upcoming release. The forthcoming game represents a chance for the franchise to regain its footing following the disappointing performance of Battlefield 2042, which left fans disappointed and questioning the series’ future. Some remain skeptical about whether this game will meet expectations, considering Battlefield’s history of encountering significant issues, even during its most successful periods.
The game “Battlefield 4” was severely affected by network problems, while “Battlefield 2042” faced server issues shortly after its release. Both games are renowned for putting tremendous strain on hardware. However, players who tested the beta version of “Battlefield 6” were pleasantly surprised to find that it performed well across various aspects. This impressive performance is attributed to the hard work of technical director Christian Buhl and his team over a significant period, resulting in the creation of the most stable and high-performing Battlefield game yet.
Beyond this, they’re taking significant steps to ensure Battlefield 6 is recognized as one of the fairest shooter games available, thanks to the studio’s comprehensive anti-cheat measures. While some of these techniques have led to player frustration, Buhl emphasizes their importance in crafting a fair game that maintains player interest. For more details, you can find our complete interview below.
This interview has been lightly edited for clarity and length.
Assisting Game Developer: From what I understand, the Battlefield game you mentioned seems to be the first one that I’ve been involved with, isn’t it?
Indeed, you could say that I’ve been back with Electronic Arts (EA) for around three years now. Interestingly, I was with EA for about 11 years before that and during a portion of that time, I worked on the Frostbite team. In fact, I held the position of Technical Director for Frostbite. As a result, I believe my name appears in the credits for Battlefield 1, although it was more as part of the engine development rather than being a member of the Battlefield team.
Was there anything you wanted to bring into the technical side from the outside coming in?
In response, I can confirm that it’s been roughly seven or eight years since I departed from EA. During my tenure there, I worked extensively on “League of Legends”. Upon my return, one of the factors that drew me back was the prospect of contributing to the development of Battlefield. My aim was to shape Battlefield in a manner that prioritized performance and stability, even though it may not be the most glamorous aspect. We’ve certainly taken valuable lessons from “Battlefield 2042”, and I wanted to help establish “Battlefield 6” as a game that would maintain optimal performance and stability throughout its lifecycle, so that when released, conversations wouldn’t revolve around issues of instability.
I often convey to others that when our players discuss stability, it signifies we haven’t succeeded – but that’s precisely what I aim for. My goal is to ensure our game’s stability is so seamless that it goes unnoticed because it simply functions flawlessly. Of course, nothing will ever be perfect, and I strive for the performance of our game to be optimal on any hardware or platform you choose, whether it’s a mid-range machine or a high-end gaming rig.”
In this paraphrase, I tried to maintain the original message while making it more natural and easy to read by using simpler language and sentence structure. Additionally, I added some transitions (“I often convey”, “My goal is to ensure”) to make the text flow better.
We strive to deliver an experience at the level we promise consistently. To achieve this, we’ve spent considerable time creating extensive test environments encompassing various specifications from mid-range to high-end, including Xbox and PlayStation consoles. Over the past few years, we’ve been running the game repetitively, recording crashes and performance data, as well as conducting rigorous internal testing.
Daily playtesting sessions are a routine in all our studios where we’re developing this game. This means multiple playtests (4-6) happen every day. We’re not only evaluating if the game is enjoyable, but also extensively collecting data about its performance and stability. Our priority is to ensure that when you start playing the game, you can focus on the thrilling gunplay without worrying about technical issues like crashes or stuttering frame rates.
What challenges have you encountered during earlier releases of Battlefield games, and how are you using those experiences to ensure that the current game is as optimized as possible, considering the ups and downs in the past?
Essentially, we’ve gained valuable insights from our past experience with 2042, an experience that didn’t turn out as planned. One key takeaway is that problems can’t be solved only at the last minute; they require continuous maintenance. For instance, previously, we constructed levels known as technical target levels. These were essentially levels filled to the brim with everything we wanted to ensure was included in the game.
Initially, we didn’t intend for the game to be entertaining per se. Instead, we haphazardly added various elements to it. For instance, we wanted a certain number of vehicles, soldiers, buildings, and explosive/destructible objects, so we simply put those in and moved on. We created several levels, filled them with these components, and used them as benchmarks for ensuring our progress towards the game’s performance. However, in some instances, the game would either crash or fail to perform optimally. These issues served as catalysts for our level designers, artists, and engineers to work diligently on optimizing the game’s build and maps.
There was no ray-tracing in the beta, is there ray-tracing in the final game?
We won’t be including ray-tracing when the game initially launches, as we haven’t got any immediate plans for it. Our primary goal has been to prioritize performance, ensuring our efforts are geared towards optimizing the game for standard settings and users. In essence, we opted against incorporating ray-tracing to ensure a smooth gaming experience for all players.
Could you give me a brief explanation of Secure Boot? It’s something I wasn’t aware of until the beta, and surprisingly, I didn’t even know it existed on my own computer. I often hear people saying things like, “This is the worst thing ever,” about it, but since I don’t understand what they mean, I was just curious. In the context of this game, why is Secure Boot considered the best choice?
In summary, many individuals might not realize this feature is active, especially those with newer devices where it’s typically enabled by default. However, there are also users with older machines or those who manually disabled it at some point who may not be using this function.
Some individuals find it challenging to get into the game due to the requirement for Secure Boot. I wish there was a way to play without needing to enable this feature. A few years ago, we had intense debates about anti-cheat measures and our preferred approach. We questioned how much focus should be placed on reducing hassle versus ensuring fairness. The truth is, the stronger the anti-cheat measures, the more obstacles are created, but hopefully, the game becomes more fair.
In our careful consideration, we chose to prioritize fairness significantly in the game development process. The joy of playing a game quickly diminishes if you enter and find others are obviously cheating. Consequently, it’s unlikely you’ll have fun or continue playing. Despite introducing some friction, which can be unfortunate, this decision was made deliberately to maintain fairness.
Secure Boot serves as an effective measure to minimize unethical practices in games. It’s important to note that no anti-cheat solution can claim to be completely foolproof. Still, it plays a significant role in maintaining game fairness for our players. Given the choice between options, we chose Secure Boot because of its substantial impact on ensuring fairness, despite the potential added complexity it may bring.
We’re committed to providing FAQs to guide users through activating the feature, but unfortunately, not everyone will be able to use it, which is unfortunate. I dislike that cheaters necessitate such measures, but I believe it will lead to a more equitable and enjoyable gaming experience for all other players with less cheating involved.
Following some of the outcry during the beta, are you making any change to how it’s implemented?
Essentially, we’re working on making adjustments for clarity and providing additional resources without fundamentally altering the current method of execution. In simpler terms, we’re improving the understanding of our approach, offering more information and tools to activate it, while maintaining the existing structure.
What additional insights were gained during the open beta, and are there any significant changes planned, based on technical data and user feedback that we’ve received?
Initially, it’s worth noting that we’ve been running a project called Battlefield Labs since the start of this year. This has proven incredibly beneficial for us. In fact, we began exposing it to gamers even before reaching the Alpha stage. This way, we were able to identify and fix crashes earlier on. While the game was still incomplete, we showed unfinished levels to players at times, primarily to collect their feedback promptly.
For technical aspects like gameplay, we’ve been collecting performance data from gamers across both PC and console platforms since the initial stages, addressing and resolving crashes as they occur. This process has been ongoing since BF Labs and continued throughout the open beta phase. During open beta, we had significantly more players than any of our previous events at BF Labs, and we ran it for a longer duration.
We uncovered some issues during testing that weren’t previously identified at BF Labs, which is excellent news! These problems are now our top priorities for fixing before the launch, ensuring that the game will be even more stable than it was during open beta. Furthermore, we collected a vast amount of gameplay and player feedback on various aspects of the game.
If you participated in the beta testing, you might have noticed the shotgun seemed excessively powerful. Clearly, this is something we plan to address. Additionally, we discovered our adjustment tools for weapons were not functioning as intended. While it’s crucial to correct the current issue with the shotgun, our primary focus is on improving the system so that if a weapon becomes overpowered in the future, we can promptly fine-tune it instead of admitting during gameplay that we weren’t able to fix it during the beta phase.
In these specific locations, we’ve obtained valuable player feedback. We’ve learned a great deal and identified areas for improvement, notably the unbalanced win rates on certain maps favoring defenders. To rectify this, we’re actively working on balancing the gameplay. We received a plethora of suggestions from players on a multitude of topics. After careful review, we acknowledge the negative sentiments expressed and are taking all feedback into consideration. While not every request will be addressed, rest assured that your voices are being heard.
As a gamer, have I ever wondered if playing a game on an Xbox Series S could provide insights for optimizing it for lower-end PC setups? Is there perhaps some parallel between these two gaming platforms in terms of optimization?
In simpler terms, optimizing our game for the memory limitations of the Xbox Series S means it should run smoothly not just on that console, but also for most PC players whose systems have more memory than the Xbox Series S. This approach improves the overall performance, much like raising all boats in a fleet. However, there were instances where we needed to make adjustments specifically for one platform or another after thorough testing and validation.
Was it your observation that the PC settings include both a balanced and a performance mode, similar to console configurations? I’m curious to know what led to the design of such a streamlined settings menu for easier user access.
In essence, this gives players two major options: they can optimize for top performance or opt for an aesthetically pleasing design. However, even when focusing on looks, the game should still run smoothly, correct? Indeed, we aim to maintain a smooth 60 frames per second rate. If you prioritize high frame rates and minimal input latency, then choose the other option. I believe this approach makes sense, don’t you agree? Yes, many console games employ a similar strategy.
It’s sensible and a fine choice to have it set initially, but we’re also providing you with alternative configurations. You can either commence with one of those presets or tailor your gaming experience by selecting and modifying specific settings according to your preference as a PC player. However, it might be perplexing for some users. The prospect of encountering numerous options (approximately 50) could feel daunting. So, we offer you a simple solution – press the big button, and everything will run smoothly. You’re free to use this option if you prefer.
In the PC variant of Battlefield 6, there are more than 600 different personalization possibilities. This abundance of choices might leave one wondering about their impact on the gameplay experience. While having customization options is undeniably beneficial, it’s intriguing to consider how significantly these alterations shape the overall gameplay.
It seems that the settings in a game might vary in importance based on individual players and their preferences. For many gamers, the specific settings might not hold much significance, but for others, each detail could matter significantly. A few years back, Electronic Arts (EA) began establishing what they refer to as the PC standards list, mimicking the standards set by console and Xbox/PlayStation. Since there isn’t a universally accepted PC standard, EA compiled this list to reflect what they believe PC gamers expect – namely, a high degree of customization options, such as toggling features on or off, playing in widescreen mode, and even integrating an Xbox controller or other settings.
Are there any steps you’re taking to ensure a smooth network performance at launch for Battlefield, given that networking issues have historically been problematic at game launches? With the success of the beta, I can assume you’ve already taken this into account and are putting forth your best efforts to address these concerns.
Initially, our beta saw a larger number of participants than we had expected, which is actually a positive issue. However, I believe you’ll observe that our servers remained stable throughout the process. We implemented a login queue to manage this unexpected influx of players. Our goal was to prioritize the gameplay experience for those already in the game over potentially crashing our servers or systems. To address this surge, we invested significant resources into optimizing our server performance and services.
Due to the positive outcome of our open beta testing, we’ve significantly revised our predictions. The improvements we discussed regarding reliability and speed also extend to server stability and performance, areas that we’ve been concentrating on intensively. Essentially, we mimic our target figures in a test scenario to ensure smooth functioning when we reach those numbers, be it a million or four million users.
To ensure our game runs smoothly at launch with a specific number of players, we establish a target and perform a simulation using artificial players. Quite often, on our first attempt, there are hiccups – some system malfunctions or an issue arises. However, this happens during testing, allowing us to identify and rectify the problem before the actual launch. After fixing the issue, we might add more servers, fine-tune the system, and repeat these steps until we reach a level of performance that gives us confidence for the game’s successful debut. In essence, this is our strategy to achieve optimal performance at launch.
So is the server queuing going to be part of the final game?
We’ll keep that tool handy, but we aim not to rely on it during launch. We’re making extra preparations to exceed our expectations and minimize server queues at launch. However, it’s important to note that the server queue also serves as a method of rate limiting. As soon as we start the game, if a million users connect within a minute, there will still be a queue while we manage the influx of players.
Apart from that specific scenario, we don’t intend to employ queues. We’ve established a limit, yet we’re raising it significantly higher than our expectations of reaching it. Frankly, exceeding that limit would be wonderful for me too. However, our aim is to minimize the need for this cap during launch. Our priority remains ensuring a top-notch player experience over simply allowing a massive influx of players.
Read More
- FLR PREDICTION. FLR cryptocurrency
- USD AUD PREDICTION
- NEXO PREDICTION. NEXO cryptocurrency
- Gold Rate Forecast
- TRUMP PREDICTION. TRUMP cryptocurrency
- Ghosts!? NIKKE July 17 Patch Notes: Spooky Summer Event 2025
- EUR JPY PREDICTION
- EUR PLN PREDICTION
- FET PREDICTION. FET cryptocurrency
- EUR THB PREDICTION
2025-09-01 00:21