What Players Want to See in the New Battlefield

Yesterday, EA revealed the first gameplay footage of the upcoming Battlefield. "Revealed" might be a bit of an overstatement, considering we got less than 10 seconds of chaotically spliced scenes. While there's not much to analyze yet, the debut of the new Battlefield is a perfect opportunity to compile the key features fans have been longing for over the years.
A Modern Setting
Across social media and Battlefield forums, one sentiment rings louder than most: the best entries in the series revolved around modern warfare, utilizing contemporary technology and tactics. Naturally, many believe the new game should follow the same path.
What's wrong with other eras? While Battlefield 1, set during World War I, is beloved by many, a significant portion of the player base feels that such an old theater of war limits the variety of vehicles and weapons. This is especially true when striving for historical accuracy without venturing into steampunk or dieselpunk territory. A similar, though less critical, sentiment applies to World War II settings. However, after Battlefield V, the community lost faith in DICE and EA's ability to respectfully recreate this tragic conflict—controversial visual customizations of soldiers sparked widespread backlash.
As for future warfare, even in the near-future setting of Battlefield 2042, players were put off by the inclusion of various futuristic gadgets, which added unnecessary complexity to the gameplay.
In short, many Battlefield fans believe that virtual warfare using today's technology strikes the perfect balance for gameplay. It offers a sweet spot between simplicity and variety. Judging by the first glimpses of the new game, DICE seems to agree—the next installment clearly leans toward a modern setting.
Which setting is best for the Battlefield series?
No More Experiments with Classes
One of the biggest issues—if not the biggest issue—with Battlefield 2042 at launch was the introduction of the specialist system, which replaced the traditional classes from previous games. Players were given operators with unique names, abilities, or gadgets, much like hero shooters such as Overwatch or Apex Legends. The rest of the loadout, however, was fully customizable. This led to a noticeable shortage of medics, as fewer players carried health kits, which were previously tied to the medic class.
Teamplay became less tactical due to the loss of clear role synergy. Squad members no longer had specialized functions but did a bit of everything, creating more chaos than freedom.
Over time, the specialist system was refined. Abilities were better balanced, and operators were eventually divided into classes. However, the developers allowed players to choose any weapon regardless of class, a decision that still doesn't sit well with fans of fixed roles.
In general, Battlefield fans were so burned by this system that many hope DICE never revisits it. Ideally, they'd scrap it entirely and revert to the classic class system from Battlefield 3 or Battlefield 4.
64 Players Instead of 128
At first glance, a game about large-scale warfare might seem better with more players, not fewer. However, a significant portion of the Battlefield community turned against BF2042 precisely because of its 128-player matches. Series veterans believe these matches came at the cost of key gameplay elements.
In BF2042, maps became too open and sparse in terms of buildings and cover. The franchise's hallmark feature—destructible environments—was significantly scaled back to optimize for 128 players. Even the graphics quality took a hit for performance reasons.
Finally, players complain that 128-player sessions leave little room for coordinated teamwork. Everyone rushes in different directions, you're getting shot from all sides, and vehicles dominate the battlefield unchecked. The chaos is more frustrating than fun. Most players aren't eager to experience this again in the next game.
Proper Testing
Fans were also disappointed that the Battlefield 2042 beta test, held just a month before release, had virtually no impact on the final product. It was conducted so close to launch that developers had no time to address player feedback. Questionable game design choices remained, and worse, dozens of serious bugs went unfixed. This kind of oversight can't happen again.
The good news is that EA seems to have learned from this mistake. The new Battlefield gameplay was unveiled as part of the Battlefield Labs announcement—a closed testing program for the upcoming game. The first test is set to take place in the near future, well ahead of the project's release. The developers promise to take feedback seriously.
***
Overall, fans' wishes are pretty straightforward: "Let DICE make a new game following the example of Battlefield 3 or 4, and ignore everything from BF2042." That sounds doable, and we'd like to believe EA shares the same goal, fully aware of the risks if another Battlefield flops.
What do you think? Do you believe EA and DICE can turn things around? Share your thoughts in the comments.
Are you looking forward to the next Battlefield?
-
Next Battlefield Gameplay Revealed
-
Former Battlefield developers invite gamers to try their new shooter ARC Raiders for free on Steam
-
Insider: Battlefield 6 Devs Aim to Avoid Battlefield 2042's Fate — New Game Sets Testing Record
-
New Image Revealed for Next Battlefield
-
Sony is reportedly developing a new «original AAA game», with a Call of Duty veteran rumored to be involved.