I loved BF3 and BF4, but Battlefield 6 has me worried

I’m not sure if I would be considered a true Battlefield fan, given the variety of titles and my mixed reviews across the franchise. However, I call myself that because I clocked up thousands of hours in Battlefield 3 and Battlefield 4, and consider both among my favourite all-time titles (BF3 being higher on the list). So you can expect that I’m a little optimistic when it comes to what is being called “Battlefield 6”. But hopeful may be a better term.

I’m worried about it too. We’ll dive into the standout points below, yet I don’t make a habit of being concerned by the development of titles, even ones I’m looking forward to trying out. And while I’ll certainly reserve judgment until I’ve played the next BF game once released, it’s not just my own enjoyment that I’m pensive about. I’ve not enjoyed some BF titles that much at all (hello again, Battlefield: Hardline), but there is, of course, more than my enjoyment at stake. 

As far as we know, the Battlefield 6 release date looks likely for the end of March 2026. And we‘ve seen a few things about it, through both leaked information from closed playtests and reports of lines of code that provide clues. So, for example, it’s good that it appears the new title will feature a hefty 52 weapons across eight classifications from launch. 

Key to what the rumours suggest is EA seemingly committing to a free-to-play Battle Royale mode, which would be core to its overarching plan for attracting a lot of players (more on that shortly). Joining that Battle Royale mode is a rumoured ‘Gauntlet Mode’, for single, duo, trio, and squad matchmaking, for objective-based battles. That’s also interesting, especially if it’s also a free jump-in and play option, which would make sense.

While the next Battlefield game is believed to be inspired by BF3 and BF4 (the concept art has suggested as much for some time), the classic Campaign and massive multiplayer modes should also return. If all of this sounds great, then I hear you and I’m with you in hope. 

So is EA, because with everything that seems to be going into the new title, EA seems big on expectations. Very big. A report by Ars Technica’s Samuel Axon highlights, among other things, that the number of players targeted by EA for the Battlefield 6 launch and “over a set period of time that included post-launch” is 100 million. 

That is a huge number, and if you’re wondering where that would put it in regards to other titles, an EA employee speaking to Axon stated that Battlefield 1 hit “ maybe 30 million plus” players, and no other BF title has matched those numbers.  

So why am I worried? Those guns. It may seem trivial to some, but when Battlefield Labs posted about “a balance between defined roles and player choice”, my hope for weapons locked to classes was quietly extinguished. Honestly, I didn’t play 2042, but I know this was a point of contention, and I understand it. 

Signature guns, traits, gadgets, and a ‘training system’ are a compromise, but the overall idea of unlocked weapons still leaves a bitter taste because picking up, say, a marksman rifle as a medic …why? Sure, BF4 offered some class-agnostic weapons (carbines, shotguns) while reserving specialist weapons to classes. But for me, BF is improved by picking a team with specific class weapons and gadgets that will impact the on-field battle. Being able to pick any weapon just minimises that.

While a BR or Gauntlet mode makes sense with more access to weapons, the weapon access decision feels like a lowest-common-denominator approach. And that probably is what it is; rather than appealing specifically to historic Battlefield fans or potential Battlefield fans who may prefer getting tactical and learning why their picks are right (or wrong). There’s more here, too, since a subsequent July 11 Battlefield Labs class update has highlighted rechargeable ‘level 3’ class abilities, which feels fairly COD-like, for better or worse. 

But why opt for mass appeal approaches like unlocked guns and special abilities anyway? Oh, the 100 million player target. I’m not a BF gatekeeper, and I want as many people to play the games they want to play as much as possible. However, there are risks to shaking a franchise from key points of its appeal, even if I’m still looking forward to jumping in and trying it out (and hoping I’m wrong).

Moving away from BF’s unique tactical team composition core isn’t even my biggest concern. Samuel Axon’s Ars Technica report laid bare other greater issues. Notably, he was told “that Single-player in itself is massively late”, with it reportedly not passing the Spring 2025 Alpha (code) target. The information here is that a newly formed Ridgeline Games studio, working on the single-player campaign, was “shuttered” after two years of work, with the campaign moved out to Criterion, DICE, and Motive, who essentially had to start “from scratch”. 

With the expected deadlines seemingly not shifting to account for the immeasurable disruption this would undoubtedly cause, it’s hard to know how anyone working in those studios feels. A basic human concern here is that everyone suffers. Sure, fans and gamers, but individual game developers in those studios, with what may be increasingly hectic schedules, have to deliver a mode for such a highly anticipated game. A game that is due in around eight months and has a huge player target attached to it.

Let’s hit the possible outcomes of my concerns one by one, then. So there are no class-locked weapons. Some (at least the most vocal) BF fans don’t like this idea because it feels more like Call of Duty or Fortnite, and that may be surpassable for me if the game is enjoyable overall across its modes and the ‘training’ system is compelling. 

If it’s not, perhaps the next Battlefield fails to feel like Battlefield. It can still be a great overall release if new features meld with the feel of classic BF3 and BF4 multiplayer joy. But it may no longer be the unique or typical BF (like 3 or 4) that fans love.

Then what happens if the game doesn’t get 100 million players? A good question for EA. If it loses long-time franchise fans and fails to attract enough new ones, it’s hard to see what routes will be taken. Assuming the game is successful enough to soldier on despite disappointment with the results, monetisation efforts may be ramped up to recoup costs.

Ultimately, though, I just don’t want the next Battlefield to fail and be written off. Surely, if that did happen, any calls for future releases would be weakened, and…could the franchise go away for good? I’d hope not, and this is an extreme hypothetical, but not all titles or series can go forever. But can any title be too big to fail? I’m not sure.

What is the potential outcome of the delayed single-player campaign, then? Well, as with Battlefield 2042, Battlefield 6 could, in theory, be delayed if that decision was felt to be correct. Alternatively, it may be that the title could be released with a launch-day patch to add any missing or lacking code that is made available for pre-installation or on hard copies.

The worst-case scenario here would be that the title is somehow launched without part or all of the single-player campaign, which is available at a later date. That’s a big slice of speculation on my end and feels like an option that isn’t one any publisher would willingly opt for, even if other modes hold the potentially more enticing content for EA’s player targets. 

None of my worry or concern can predict or impact the success of the next Battlefield game. But I am concerned about the title. I’d love an enjoyable game that hits the right notes in nostalgic fun with a new twist, and I’d love for new fans of the franchise to emerge (albeit, begrudgingly, my preferred class system absent). Yet there are bigger things at play for the next BF release.

Can Battlefield 6 really achieve the popularity that’s reportedly been set as the goal for it, and how smooth or on time will the launch be? Those are things we will see. But what we may not know or hear about is the work going on behind the scenes, and it is clear that developing big titles comes with pressure and deadlines. So while I hope the next Battlefield is a success, I certainly hope that those working on it are respected for their efforts.