Battlefield 6 - Reviews Thread

who in the name of God play CoD or BF for the campaign in 2025 ?

Excuse Me Reaction GIF by Laff
 
The multiplayer seems like it will be a great hit.

At the same time, I'm baffled by the hate I keep seeing online for BF2042. I've been playing BF2042 for years and I still love it. Don't understand why it's so underrated. Had some hilarious TDM and Breakthrough games these past few days.

Probably getting BF6, but I thought it would hit 90 metacritic tbh. I also think 70 euros is insane.
 
The multiplayer seems like it will be a great hit.

At the same time, I'm baffled by the hate I keep seeing online for BF2042. I've been playing BF2042 for years and I still love it. Don't understand why it's so underrated. Had some hilarious TDM and Breakthrough games these past few days.

Probably getting BF6, but I thought it would hit 90 metacritic tbh. I also think 70 euros is insane.
The last 90 multiplayer game was overwatch in like 9 years ago...
 
The last 90 multiplayer game was overwatch in like 9 years ago...
Well, considering the hype and positive buzz I thought BF6 would've hit that score.

I guess the mediocre singleplayer campaign messed that up for them.

Maybe Arc Raider's will get that 90 metacritic.
 
People playing COD and BF6 campaigns?

Who in the world plays these campaigns?

Avoid The Office GIF
I mean, hindsight is 20/20 of course. But they (EA and their devs) were hyping up that they made dedicated studios/teams for BF6 for the single player and that they didn't want to deliver what they were criticized in the past for (paraphrasing).

People were hoping for BC2 again.

Instead, we got the same derivative crap, just flashier pixels. Because they know people will say, "who buys this for the single player?"

We will never get a BC2 again. Which had both an awesome single player in co-op as well as an awesome multiplayer.

dogs reaction s GIF
 
Last edited:
84 are harsh reviews? What? Some of the comments here acting like 84 is a bad score lol
For a top-tier multiplayer, it kind of is compared to its contemporaries. The elite multiplayer titles are in the 90s range, and this is honestly the best multiplayer I have played this generation, besides Helldivers 2 easily, and they went over and beyond in adding very powerful tools for user-based content in the portal, adding longevity and variety. I'm basically trying to understand what the barometer and criteria are that make Battlefield fall short. In terms of tech/presentation and interactivity, I cant think of any multiplayer shooters that are on its level. How are they judging this compared to Gaas/battle royale titles, and that would make a very interesting discussion for e.g if this was graded lower for not following the battleroyale/gaas train.
 
I mean, hindsight is 20/20 of course. But they (EA and their devs) were hyping up that they made dedicated studios/teams for BF6 for the single player and that they didn't want to deliver what they were criticized in the past for (paraphrasing).

People were hoping for BC2 again.

Instead, we got the same derivative crap, just flashier pixels. Because they know people will say, "who buys this for the single player?"

We will never get a BC2 again. Which had both an awesome single player in co-op as well as an awesome multiplayer.

dogs reaction s GIF
BC2 was good but honestly I was hoping for just a better looking BF4.
 
For a top-tier multiplayer, it kind of is compared to its contemporaries. The elite multiplayer titles are in the 90s range, and this is honestly the best multiplayer I have played this generation, besides Helldivers 2 easily, and they went over and beyond in adding very powerful tools for user-based content in the portal, adding longevity and variety. I'm basically trying to understand what the barometer and criteria are that make Battlefield fall short. In terms of tech/presentation and interactivity, I cant think of any multiplayer shooters that are on its level. How are they judging this compared to Gaas/battle royale titles, and that would make a very interesting discussion for e.g if this was graded lower for not following the battleroyale/gaas train.

Which shooters review this well amongst "critics"? I feel like these people can't even properly play the games anyway.

Counter Strike and Quake for example are 10/10 FPS games so BF6 being 8/10 is actually very good
 
So the trend looks like this...

Open Beta 1: "Battlefield is back baby!!"

Open Beta 2: "There may be a few niggles."

Reviews: 83 OpenCritic

WE ARE HERE

December 2025: Vomit & mass exodus???


circle-of-life-simba.gif
 
Last edited:
I'm very disappointed to learn that the campaign isn't good. Call me a casual BF player but I enjoy a good campaign and this is the first next gen BF campaign, so could've been if nothing else a tech showcase for the consoles. That's why BF3, BF4 and BF1 were exciting they put real effort into those I thought, not to mention I'm feeling BF multiplayer fatigue this year more than others. A good campain would've meant a day 1 purchase.

Good to hear multiplayer is good tho ill no doubt buy it eventually.
 
The theme for battlefield campaigns have been bad reviews but solid nonetheless, there's always issues with dialogue, but Dice tries. Throw in a tank battle, have a cool buddy like "Tombstone" yell at you during a battle, campaign never really mattered, bad company had a good campaign with chunks of good gameplay.
 
This really does look like the BF game I've been waiting on for years now. BF1 and BF5 were/are both excellent, but that grungy, gritty, modern day environment is what I've been desperately wanting. The campaign reviews are something I'm ignoring, as I'll be playing it myself to experience what it has to offer, rather than putting any stock in video game outlet reviews.

This literally is what I'll be doing this weekend, play BF6 lol.
 
Your renting it? You'd never buy these games just for the campaigns unless i they where Titanfall 2 standard, which lets face it not much is.

Disappointing for sure though especially as they had Motive on it for the duration. Can't be that hard they are alway just simple affairs with set pieces.
 
People are really hoping this would do a better job at being a CoD killer than xDefiant
Anicdotal but at least 3 of my COD only group are getting this. They usually don't play anything else.

If they can stick the onboarding process for those types of players then I think this has a chance to really put a decent dent in COD at the very least.
 
Last edited:
Yep.


Thanks for saving me day 1 money EA. You did try to hype people up like they were going to get another BC2 single player or the like, and not the typical throwaway you claimed you wanted to get away from.
Might be an unpopular opinion, but there has NEVER been a good BF campaign. They suck or are mediocre.
 
Might be an unpopular opinion, but there has NEVER been a good BF campaign. They suck or are mediocre.

BF3 and 4 campaigns were decent and had moments that were incredible from a technical perspective and they pretty much set graphical bars for their respective times.

Even to this day the jet mission in BF3 looks unreal



This is a 14 year old game....
 
Last edited:
I've never enjoyed the single player campaigns in any COD or BF game. Except for maybe the first couple of COD games, they have purely multiplayer games in the end for me. Paying 70 bucks for some short ass linear campaign? I don't get it (that goes for cod or bf).
 
It's a shame that once again the campaign is bad. I've played through the entire campaigns for BC2, BF3 and BF4. All of them are way behind pretty much every COD campaign. BF3 might be better than COD: WW2 (which I couldn't finish - so boring) and COD: MW3 (remake); maybe COD: MW (remake) and Ghosts as well. But none of them come close to the best COD campaigns.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom