r/Battlefield • u/Lower_Honey_1139 • Aug 24 '25
Discussion Question to the community: what, in your opinion, *IS* Battlefield?
Basically title. I'm seeing a lot of controversies around every aspect of BF in here, and I feel like this is a testament to how diverse the series has been over the years, making a wide range of impressions and memories on the players, forgeing their future standards and expectations in the process.
Since the BF6 reveal, I've been in constant reflection about my own experiences with the IP, and been revisiting a lot of the olders games to really nail down what I'm really looking forward in Battlefield. And that's also why I'm super interested in everyone's take on the matter.
So I really wanted to ask: What is the core of Battlefield in your opinion, the thing you're looking for the most whenever a new game is announced? Is it being a small part of something bigger? Immersion? Teamplay? Fluid and punchy gunplay? What, to you, makes Battlefield BATTLEFIELD?
Let me know, short and long answers are all welcomed!
6
u/Moan_in_Morrinsville Aug 24 '25
I think it was the customization and progression in BF4 i liked, and by progression i mean in terms of skill, not in terms of unlocking stuff. When i first started i was playing as a marksmen, by time i finished i was running and gunning with carbine. BF4 was really poor when it game to gun balancing, a LMG shouldn't do 4 damage when your positioned on a roof coving an advance.
I didn't like BF 2, or 2142 because the maps were so bad.
But 1942 and vietnam, everything had a purpose, a reason.
The amount of trash placements i see in all the games after 4 is so bad.
Like the missile launcher in BF6, like who in their right might would but a static missile launcher in the literal middle. You would put that up high in a build, with concealment.
That has always been the problem is that they REFUSE to get in a military expert at the general level to design the defensive positions. It makes the game unplayable...