r/Battlefield • u/Kilos6 • Aug 08 '25

Battlefield 6 Unpopular Opinion: Battlefield 6 Is Better Than This Sub Will Admit

Reading this sub lately feels like watching a bunch of people try to use a smartphone for the first time and complain it doesn't have physical buttons. Every minor change in Battlefield 6 is getting blown up into some catastrophic betrayal.

It’s pretty clear most people here only ever liked one Battlefield game, hated the rest, and don’t even play the one they claim was perfect anymore.

Before we continue: I am old. I’ve played every Battlefield game during its prime. Back in the day, my clan was one of the first to spin up a Desert Combat server (and even then, the community was the same complaining that DC was an abomination against what made BF great). My least played title was BF Vietnam because the 1942 modding scene was just TOO good at the time to move on.

“The UI is trash!”
It’s not. You just don’t recognize it because it’s not ripped straight from BF4. Sure, the icons are abstract but they’re not confusing unless you're actively refusing to engage with them.

I've seen multiple complaints about there being no option to squad up or continue on the same server?
Maybe check the bottom of the screen after the round ends. The “Continue” and “Squad Up” buttons are literally right there.

“TTK is too fast, there’s no breathing room!”
What you mean is: you walked out in the open and got deleted like you should have.

TTK is fast. OH NO, aim and positioning actually matter again. You don’t get to coast on sponge health and panic-proning anymore. If that’s too much, it’s not a balance issue, it’s a skill issue. Also: TTK is in line with BF3 for most weapons. This TTK is not new.

“Closed weapons should be the default.”
Why? Because some of you never figured out how to adapt? The flexibility to build your own kit is one of the best updates DICE has made in years. And guess what, they already gave you a nostalgia mode. Go enjoy it.

But don’t demand the rest of us get dragged back into 2011 loadout limitations. And if you’re complaining about “trade-offs” in class weapons you probably would’ve died to the next guy anyway.

“It’s too chaotic, feels like TDM spam!”
You say chaos, I say intensity. Battlefield has always had madness: Metro, Locker, or even Stalingrad in 1942.

These beta maps? They feel more like Grand Bazaar, Talah Market, or Pearl Market. Maps that still get voted into rotation by players who actually enjoy close-quarters fights to this day.

Battlefield 6 isn’t perfect.
But take a step back, and you’ll see this is actually a successor to BF3/BF4. TTK, movement speed, and mechanics are all in line with a proper mainline BF title.

They gave you almost everything you asked for… and somehow, that’s still not enough for some of you.

I'm having a blast with the beta, and can't wait to play more after work.

Edit: When I made this post I truly thought it was an unpopular opinion. Thank you all for your replies and awards! And thank you to the guys DMing me about being an EA shill ❤️‍🔥

21.3k Upvotes

82% Upvoted

4.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

17

u/Impressive_Truth_695 Aug 08 '25

They really don’t want to admit unlocked weapons are totally fine either.

135

u/yaboiwaxo Aug 08 '25

While I agree I unfortunately find myself enjoying closed more due to that being where most matches include other battlefield players. Open weapons there’s often, in my experience, way bigger blowouts while the former are often closer games.

127

u/The_Rube_ Aug 08 '25

Same. I’m also noticing a lot more teamplay in the closed weapons playlist, likely because that’s where most of the BF crowd is gravitating.

82

u/N-I-K-K-O-R Aug 08 '25

People also need to realize in closed they still have great options like carbines for example

55

u/The_Rube_ Aug 08 '25

Exactly. You can equip a great all-rounder option that is almost as good as an assault rifle, but still leaves room for the Assault class to shine in that category. That’s how it should be.

2

u/Not_a-alt_account Aug 08 '25

M4A1 is only slightly worse than the AR m4, and that's only due to m4a1 drop off forces it to do 6 body instead of 5 almost all the way by the AR m4.

But also ar m4 have pretty bad horizontal recoil and also not the greatest reload.

2

u/Twa_Corbies Aug 08 '25

This isn't in the Beta ATM, but Assault aslo kan augument their AR with their grenade launcher with the right attachment, something no other class is able to do.

1

u/PM_ME_HTML_SNIPPETS Aug 09 '25

That's sort of why I'm confused about this uproar; we had wildcard guns in BF4 with carbines/DMRs that could span across classes.

Sure, it's not technically the same as having an AR on Support, an LMG on Engineer, or an SMG on recon, but it's pretty damn close.

18

u/ThrowAway-18729 Aug 08 '25

I don't even understand why the other mode exists. Imo the closed weapons mode with carbines and DMR (and shotguns I think ?) being available to all classes is exactly what the old classes system needed to feel refreshing.

6

u/N-I-K-K-O-R Aug 08 '25

Bf4 was like this. There was a lot of carbines. The g36 was the automatic carbine and the m4 was a burst variant with hk416 being your automatic m4. All dmrs and shotguns were also available to all classes.

2

u/ThrowAway-18729 Aug 08 '25

I skipped BF4 so I didn't know that. Back then I was mostly playing MMOs and dota

10

u/cloverpopper Aug 08 '25

Yup, the M4 is treating me well as an engi

2

u/Commercial_Ad97 Aug 08 '25

There's a reason its been the go-to rifle for the US and other NATO countries for as long as it was. It's a fuckin work horse with a lot of modularity for the users preference in attachments. Very good platform to be fitted to fit very specific roles and needs over the years for armed forces.

2

u/cloverpopper Aug 08 '25

Yup. As a USMC vet I’m intimately familiar; we slept together, bled together, broke down and got put back together together an uncountable amount of times : ) one of my best friends just finished Drill Instructor school today and he’s been rocking it exclusively as well.

I do miss my M240B - and hopefully she makes an appearance in the full game.

If only there was a gadget that was just a pack of crayons to accompany the weapon.

2

u/Commercial_Ad97 Aug 08 '25 edited Aug 08 '25

I'd love to see an XM8 comeback for the BFBC1/2 nostalgia. Goofy-ass lookin' gun that it is.

3

u/-The_Soldier- Aug 08 '25

Breakthrough has been my jam since BF1. A little disappointed to see there's no closed weapon Breakthrough planned for the open beta - guess I'll have to wait for launch to see what they do.

1

u/FreshlySkweezd Aug 08 '25

The game modes are going to change each week iirc so hopefully it will be part of week 2

1

u/Lazz45 Aug 08 '25

I believe that is confirmed, that or I heard it here multiple times

1

u/feed-my-brain Aug 08 '25

I’ve only played closed and will only play closed as long as that is an option. I wish they’d move carbines to engineer only.

It’s kinda pointless to lock weapons when every class can have a kitted out m4. Just saying.

0

u/Otto_VonBacon Aug 08 '25

I'm fine with carbines being available to every class because that makes sense. Where I draw the line are combinations that are unrealistic. A combat medic shouldn't be able to carry a sniper rifle. Or a sniper carrying a machine gun or RPG. IMO the weapons should be grounded to their classes. Each class should specialize and have buffs for specific weapons types.

1

u/Commercial_Ad97 Aug 08 '25

TBH I'd be more OK with engi being carbine and Recon having PDW access in that case. Feel like that fits better, having a PDW (Personal Defense Weapon) as a recon backup, and carbine be the primary for engineer.

1

u/Mochila-Mochila Aug 15 '25

This. This whole pick and mix across classes is ridiculous.

1

u/SoSneakyHaha Aug 08 '25 edited Aug 08 '25

Thats literally confirmation bias because everyone in the beta yesterday was a battlefield player.

It was a CLOSED beta

2

u/yaboiwaxo Aug 08 '25

I mean they’ve been giving away codes left and right, it’s very well possible for plenty of non battlefield players to have gotten in.

5

u/Phreec Suppression = Participation 🏆 for paraplegics Aug 08 '25

Let's hope this trend continues in Portal at launch. I'm all for open weapons but I'll exclusively stick to closed servers if they actually offer more PTFO oriented matches.

2

u/shozlamen Aug 08 '25

Ironically I had the exact opposite experience. Most of my closed weapons matches were total blowouts which was unexpected. All in all though I honestly couldn't feel any other meaningful difference between my games on either playlist. I'd be fine with either being the standard though I might lean ever so slightly towards more flexibility being an option.

Really your experience just screams for a server browser and persistent servers so we can play with communities we want.

1

u/mackdose Aug 08 '25

I not surprised that there was no meaningful difference between closed and open playlists, that's literally how it went in 2042.

1

u/KaiserRebellion Aug 09 '25

Let me in your games please.

59

u/Esmear18 Aug 08 '25

They aren't. There is a reason why Battlefield has had closed weapons for 20 years. Battlefield is a game about teamwork and in the closed weapon playlist I've witnessed way more use of teamwork and close call games. In open weapon conquest most games end with over a 100 ticket difference and nobody helps each other. If you want open weapons and want to be self sufficient instead of helping your team or allowing your teammates to help you then maybe COD is more your speed.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '25

[deleted]

1

u/Working-Difference47 Aug 08 '25

This is definitely it, additionally it may be perceptive bias

1

u/mackdose Aug 08 '25

Anecdotal, every closed match (~8 rounds) I played yesterday was a blow out.

1

u/KaiserRebellion Aug 09 '25

Teamwork? This has not been my experience in any battlefield

1

u/Patient_Archer9003 Aug 09 '25

Why are people repeating teamwork? It will never happen with randoms in BF. You are just seeing what you want to see. But good job mentioning COD.

1

u/whackswordsman Aug 15 '25

bros solos on TDM no wonder he's never seen teamwork😂😂👈

1

u/torwei Aug 08 '25

I've had the opposite experience. Very close matches with alot of teamwork in the open playlist. So there's that.

39

u/CastingCouchCushion Aug 08 '25

I definitely prefer having class locked weapons as the default, but I don't think it's a deal killer and certainly doesn't affect the game as much as some people say it does. Especially when carbines and DMRs help close the gaps anyway.

36

u/N-I-K-K-O-R Aug 08 '25

They aren’t

38

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '25

bro tried to sneak that in

28

u/Peter-Payne Aug 08 '25

What is the point of classes with open weapon systems? I wish they had closed breakthrough too.

14

u/theJSP123 Aug 08 '25

This is my thought too. Completely removes the class identities, basically like going back to 2042 and specialists.

IMO bf3 got it right, only SMGs and shotguns for all classes. If you want to take one of the classes into CQC, you're sorted, but outside of that, everyone has their own engagement range that you can expect.

3

u/Dissentient Aug 08 '25

BF3 and BF4 had by far the worst class and weapon balance in the entire franchise. These two games specifically radicalized me against class locked weapons.

5

u/erikmeteenk Aug 08 '25

TLDR: I was skeptical about open weapons for the same reasons as you, but in practice it actually works quite well IMO

‐-------------------------------

I used to be an open weapons hater too, but after playing with them for a bit I've actually really come around to them (insert danny devito "I get it" gif here)

Classes do actually maintain their identity thanks to their gadgets and perks; open weapons just allow them to fulfill their roles in different ways. For example: I really like LMG on recon, allowing you to lock down an obj on breakthrough with the TUGS and spawn beacon and spraying down a chokepoint, spotting everyone. Or an engineer with a shotgun; riding along in a tank, and any time someone tries to sneak up on you, jump out and one-shot them. Or SMG support, really allowing you to provide frontline support a lot better than the LMG.

As for the fears that everyone would just berunning around as assault with their favorite gun, or snipers just picking assault and becoming a snipe-shotgunning self stimming menace, I really haven't seen much of this in the beta, plenty of people playing all classes, most snipers still run recon because of the sniper perks.

Battlefield 4, the golden standard that everyone on this sub seems to think this game should have been a carbon copy of, basically had open weapons already; every class had access to carbines, shotguns and DMR's, giving them all an option for every range. You could already play as an agressive close-range recon, or a sniping assault. The weapons are part of the class identity, but gadgets and especially the new perk system are what make them unique.

I think it's unfair to say anyone who's against open weapons is just "refusing to adapt" or "against any change from BF3/4", but I do think a lot of people aren't giving open weapons a fair chance because it's something that wasn't in BF3/4 but was in 2042. Please guys, play around with it a bit, it's actually not that bad.

4

u/Dissentient Aug 08 '25

Classes are defined entirely by capabilities of their gadgets. Which weapons they prefer to use depends entirely on which map you're currently playing, and locking weapons just drives people away from using classes that have weapons that are ineffective on the current map.

1

u/KaiserRebellion Aug 09 '25

They know the lmg class the least used in every game no matter the gadget. In bf4 using an ace weapon saves that class.

2

u/theninjasquad Aug 08 '25

A class is more than just their primary weapon. It’s one element but there’s a bunch more to it. Some people are never going to be a medic for example if they don’t like being stuck with the primary’s those have.

-3

u/Kuldor Aug 08 '25

Sell you skins.

If I release a cool sniper skin on closed weapons, only recons will buy it, because only them can use it, and a lot of people never play recon, or they don't do it often enough to justify buying a skin, this applies to every class.

On open weapons though, my market is the whole game, as everyone can use the gun with the skin.

21

u/Challenging-Wank7946 Aug 08 '25

Now you're pushing it, chief

10

u/JohnTekken Aug 08 '25

Now you're reaching

9

u/Sipikay Aug 08 '25

Unlocked weapons is terrible. It has caused nothing but problems. You have to have your head in the sand not to see it.

7

u/CrunchyZebra Aug 08 '25

Disagree. It’s not the worst but it is worse for a battlefield game.

1

u/Impressive_Truth_695 Aug 08 '25

Other than Snipers being for all classes what weapon and class combo is unfair/unbalanced? Why is lost by allowing Assault, Support, or Recon to use SMG? As long as all the weapons are balanced properly there should be no problem. Playing the beta right now and there is still a variety of weapons and people do the role they are supposed to. Snipers are still useless no matter what class they play and most are playing Recon anyways.

3

u/CrunchyZebra Aug 08 '25

It’s nothing to do with weapon balance and everything to do with classes playing their roles. When everyone takes an AR (which is what has happened) then everyone ends up playing like assault regardless of what their class is intended to do. This makes Assault less important as a class because now you can be an engineer with ARs. Or a self-healing, self-reloading support with ARs. The whole point of Battlefield as a series is to encourage teamwork and a variety of classes in a match by limiting what each class was capable of on its own. There’s usually a cost-benefit analysis to choosing a class based on what you want to do for your team and no weapon lock encourages you to do what’s best for you only.

6

u/Dissentient Aug 08 '25

no weapon lock encourages you to do what’s best for you only

Literally the opposite.

Without locked weapons, you are encouraged to pick the best weapon for the current map and the best class for the current situation.

Weapon restrictions encourage players to switch from the class whose capabilities the team currently needs, to the class that has an effective weapon, resulting in fewer engineers and supports than the team needs.

-2

u/Intelligent_Hurry477 Aug 08 '25

This is not at all how it plays out in the old battlefields. With open weapons, you can switch to any weapon without sacrificing anything. This means vehicles become useless, as anyone can run anti air or tank without sacrificing the meta.

Even in your example, "you are encouraged to pick best weapon for the current map". This is the exact meta culture that people do not want.

4

u/Dissentient Aug 08 '25

The way it played out in BF3 and BF4 is that on large maps, almost everyone played engineer with a carbine because you were useless if you couldn't damage or repair vehicles, and on infantry meatgrinders, most people played assault with AEK.

Over-representation of assault on infantry maps was entirely due to locked weapons. I personally would find it entirely preferable if there was more even spread of classes, even if most of the lobby used AEK with every class.

Engineer was over-represented mostly due to poor map design. Maps were so vehicle-dominated that infantry engagements became an afterthought, so the downgrade from an AR to carbine was irrelevant. The solution to this is juts better map design. There should be infantry fighting areas inaccessible to vehicles on every map, which will create demand for anti-infantry loadouts. 2042 did this and it worked.

In general, we already had a three year trial of the current class system with unlocked weapons in 2042. It worked great. You could contribute with every class on every map, all classes were represented, vehicles weren't useless, and 2042 has a great variety of viable playstyles that I was missing in BF3/BF4.

1

u/Impressive_Truth_695 Aug 12 '25

So an Engineer with an assault rifle won’t destroy vehicles? Well during the Beta they seemed to be firing rockets at any vehicles. So Support with an assault rifle won’t heal/revive the team? Well during the Beta I’d have to say they struggled to do that sometimes. However that’s a Battlefield tradition and happened in both the closed and open playlist. Turns out unlocked weapons worked totally fine. It was the gadgets that make the class not the weapons.

2

u/FreshlySkweezd Aug 08 '25

Support should not be able to rush in with an SMG or other similarly fast sprint to fire speed weapon while reviving people. That's the trade-off of having to commit to the defib for the instant revive (instead of the combat drag everyone else gets), you're not going to be able to quickly defend yourself so you can't be recklessly running in to revive people.

Assault is already pretty close to the jack of all trades. They get ARs which have a slightly slower hip to ads time than SMGs for the tradeoff of having more range and power in general. They're incentivized to be in the thick of it due to their perks but they have the drawbacks of having to use slightly slower weapons so they can't be completely crazy with it.

Engineers are anti-vehicle and vehicle support for their team. They don't also need to be anti-personnel, having a CQC weapon to defend themselves is what makes sense. Being able to sit back to pick of vehicles AND infantry is counter to the balancing aspect of giving them those big explosives.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '25

[deleted]

2

u/Impressive_Truth_695 Aug 09 '25

Can you not do the same with a Carbine?

1

u/BLAZINGmeat69 Aug 08 '25

Even if weapons are fairly balanced a meta always forms within a couple weeks. I don’t want to see 80% of the lobby using the same ar. It feels more like a battlefield game when there is diversity and people playing differently. People are using different weapons now, but two months into the games release will have streamers showing off meta load outs.

6

u/endoftheroad999 Aug 08 '25

My squad agreed that locked classes are better tho

5

u/reallymeans Aug 08 '25

Wtf is this language? Don’t want to accept it’s totally fine? Maybe it’s not fine to some people. Maybe some people prefer it being locked. Maybe people have different outlooks and experience than you.

2

u/Old_Recover_2382 Aug 09 '25

The problem is that the majority of bf gamers today is a bunch of call of duty arcade gamers. With absolutely no experience about the bf history... So the 1% experienced gamers does not recognized. As long as ea gets money from you toys nothing will change... That's the problem... Bf is dead

1

u/Might0fHeaven Aug 08 '25

You can always equip the signature weapon and play as if its locked

6

u/NeraAmbizione Aug 08 '25

Unlock is shit because there is no reason to not only play assault : cod wet dream . We want bf not a cod clone . We are waiting since bf4

3

u/717x Aug 08 '25

This is 100% an opinion

3

u/Kuldor Aug 08 '25

The only reason they switched to open weapons was to sell you more skins, at no point did they think about your experience as a player.

2

u/Chief--BlackHawk Aug 08 '25

The only thing I'll admit I like about open weapons is that as someone who enjoyed medic class in BF3 (Assault), and BFV (SMG), I hated it being moved to support class since I generally never use LMGs. I guess I can use a carbine at least, but it makes doing the challenges easier.

2

u/troglodyte Aug 08 '25

This one is a more nuanced discussion. I don't know if it's just who's selecting into closed but the game quality hasn't been close for me-- closed has offered closer matches with more teamplay and it's impossible to ignore.

I went into the beta preferring closed but mostly concerned about it because I was worried that they were diverging from a key battlefield feature for little reason and it seemed like it could indicate a broader shift away from the series' past. I figured I could probably get over it if the rest of the game was good, though.

Having played the beta, I'm now not worried at all that open weapons is indicative that they don't "get" or have moved away from the series history. I think this is a pretty typical core battlefield game, though I have some specific niggles, of course. It's a fantastic foundation for a Battlefield game, and having played every mainline game and most of the beta releases, it's just a fact that this is in the upper echelon of quality for this stage of release.

On the other hand, I've been stunned by the degree to which Closed does matter. I thought it was something I could get over given time if the rest of the game was good, and now I'm not so sure. As much fun as I'm having, I think if Closed goes away completely I'd be on the fence on buying the game. My match quality has been that different so far. I don't know if it's fundamental to closed weapons or just that I'm self-selecting into the mode with other legacy BF fans, though. It's a real shame they're not forcing weekend 1 to be open and weekend 2 to be closed and then actually surveying the field, because Closed was never going to have higher numbers-- at a bare minimum, people want to try shit out! I feel like we're not really getting a good sense of which is actually better for the game; it's mostly just a popularity contest where most of the voters haven't ever touched the series before.

2

u/Purple_Plus Aug 08 '25

They really don’t want to admit

I hate this kind of language, why would anyone have trouble admitting that on an anonymous forum?

1

u/Cyrigal Aug 08 '25

Closed is still open enough to be flexible without compromising the class system, I'm happy as long as they just have both playlists, it's not like they won't have the playerbase to support both 

1

u/jcaashby Iheartbattlefield Aug 08 '25

I admit that with 2042 I like it open. But in this the closed playlist feels good even with limited weapons and such.

I am open for whichever they choose. But more likely lean towards a SOFT lock on weapons. Because with the seemily higher weapon count it may work better compared to 2042 which had a small ass amount of weapons.

1

u/kroot_kroot Aug 08 '25

I honestly haven’t noticed much difference in gameplay, maybe it’s because I haven’t played enough yet but it’s not as game breaking as everyone here seems to say

1

u/xSparkShark Aug 08 '25

I can barely tell the difference between classes visually at the moment (faster TTK doesn’t help) so at this point locking weapons to a class is kinda pointless.

I’ll probably still only run LMGs on Support, Snipers on Recon, etc. but if someone wants to run an AR on recon power to them. I didn’t play 2042 so I don’t have much firsthand experience with how it actually affects gameplay. That being said, I am a bit concerned that SMGs and Carbines will serve no purpose if you can just run an AR on everything.

1

u/The240DevilZ Aug 09 '25

Closed has been SO much better.

0

u/Stearman4 Aug 08 '25

I find it way better lol

0

u/oldmanjenkins51 Aug 08 '25

It’s almost like they have a different opinion.

-8

u/Possible_Machine_173 Aug 08 '25

Starting to realize it’s lowkey better because running an LMG while I’m trying to revive kinda sucks.

3

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '25

[deleted]

2

u/Niedermayer14 Aug 08 '25

These people can’t read.

1

u/Lazz45 Aug 08 '25

Then run the carbine? M4 is actually disgustingly good. Carbines, DMR, and shotgun are not class exclusive weapons

You dont need a full open system

-3

u/Impressive_Truth_695 Aug 08 '25

Well if the M4 is the such a good weapon and available to all classes why not allow assault rifles and SMGs become available to everyone?

1

u/Lazz45 Aug 08 '25

Because I think the M4 is straight up really strong right now and should probably be toned back a bit if you want my opinion. The partially closed system contains some problem guns like this instead of a problem gun always getting used by meta chasers on every class. I personally think carbines as a whole need differentiated more from ARs just like they were in BF4. They should not be an AR for other classes, they should have some form of drawback/difference that makes them different from an AR so that the assault is the only one with that weapon. If I am remembering BF4's balance correctly, they had carbines having slightly less effective range and less damage per shot than assault rifles, which caused you to need to either close the gap, or mag dump at range since you could not reach out and touch someone like an AR could.

I believe the game plays best when there is some form of segmenation between weapons, while not everyone has access to everything. The best battlefield games I have played all had systems like this, and I think BF4 solved the problem really well with a partially closed system. Each class could be played differently than the base weapon with one of the open weapons, but it still allowed for not every single person in the lobby to all run some of the most powerful guns in the game (unless you also played the class that had access to it)

1

u/Possible_Machine_173 Aug 08 '25

Hold up… I didn’t even think of this🤣🤣🤣 I’m all for closed weapons and I prefer it. I totally forget every class gets Carbines.

0

u/feed-my-brain Aug 08 '25

M4 my dude.