Battlefield 5 's reveal and lead up to release genuinely had a lot of hype surrounding the game, despite igniting an equal amount of controversy over its depiction of World War II . DICE's development team was rolling out an ambitious update schedule based around real-life events from 1940-1945. Each expansion would emphasize several milestone events that occurred chronologically throughout the war. Conceptually, it was a radical and positively received idea, one that'd be worth revisiting, but the main issue with Battlefield 5 was mounting stability issues and competition getting in the way of the game's ambit

What's more impressive is how, even with all these elements of choice and weapon customization, guns still fit right in with the staples of the Create-A-Class system. Even amongst all of the possibilities of unfair advantages with Gunsmith, the system was balanced surprisingly well with perk distribution in multiplayer. Duplicates like faster reloading perks were adjusted and changed, and some existing perks were routed into different tiers to compensate for new weapon perks and attachments. Gunsmith's comprehensive customization allowed greater variety, largely without sacrificing competitive balance in the process. There have been some egregious exceptions in Modern Warfare like the GRAU , but for the most part the game has aptly balanced guns and perks quite w

To make matters even more dire for the next Battlefield , Modern Warfare has a large map, large player count mode available, alongside one of the best battle royale games yet in Warzone . Battlefield 's claim to fame has always been the cinematic large map experience. While Modern Warfare may not be able to compete with the level of bombastic, intense scale and action that Battlefield brings to the table, it still has the core of Battlefield 's schtick as just another game mode in a much bigger package. Battlefield 5 did include a battle royale mode, but it was too little , too late. It did not innovate the formula, unlike Call of Duty: Warzone , which has evolved the battle royale format and taken it in new and exciting directi

One thing in particular that newer Battlefield titles seem to gloss over is the potential in functionally destructible environments . Sure, every Battlefield game since Bad Company has featured highly destructible environments, but never as functionally important as the first few iterations. Destruction quickly became a defining difference between Battlefield and Call of Duty , but future iterations have subdued the importance of destruction. Earlier titles like Battlefield 1942 and Battlefield 2 featured destruction in a limited form, only allowing for certain geometry (like bridges) to be destroyed while the rest of the landscape remained unchanged. With the advent of the Frostbite engine, Battlefield games were able to craft near-fully destructible environments for all geometry and not just certain obje

The most likely and most sensible next move for Battlefield is a modern setting . Players are clearly enjoying Modern Warfare 's take on current day weapons and locales, and it would be foolish for Battlefield 6 to focus in on yet another historical combat setting, especially since nothing could really top the scale and widespread interest for WWII. Futuristic settings have had their time for both Call of Duty and Battlefield , and it seems like popular interest has not yet cycled back around to that genre of shoo

A modern setting for Battlefield 6 is the most likely choice for a time period. World War 2 hype/interest died off pretty quickly after 2018, and Battlefield 5 already touched on WW2 so the franchise will likely be moving on to something new. Some of the most popular Battlefield games like Bad Company and Battlefield 2042 Guide 3/4 were also based on modern combat, so coming back to the 21st century would be a safe bet. Despite the trite comparison, it is worth noting that Call of Duty: Modern Warfare has seen great success in returning to one of that franchise's most popular time periods as w

Even if Battlefield 5 as a whole lost steam pretty quickly, Firestorm became twice as irrelevant regardless. While Firestorm did receive some initial praise critically, future updates didn't make any significant changes to the battle royale's balance or content. Generally the opinion of Battlefield fans was that they honestly just didn't want a battle royale from Battlefield 5 , and none of the loot or the mechanics helped sway that opinion. The worst was when Battlefield 5 updated the time-t0-kill across all multiplayer modes , which apparently was never properly implemented in Firestorm. With the increased health and rebalanced weapon stats for multiplayer, the changes spilled into Firestorm presumably without testing. Players nearly became impossible to kill with Firestorm's different health stats compared to regular multipla

Classes in Battlefield fit specific archetypes , designed to emphasize specific roles for players rather than allowing total class freedom. Engineers could sabotage and destroy enemy armor, medics support the rest of the squad, Recon are for the sniper-inclined, and Assault is the standard-fare class, each serving distinct roles in all skirmishes. Battlefield has always had the bones for emphasizing proper team composition, but it's never been very important for the success rate of matc