Battlefield 6 is said to have the best destruction in the history of shooters, but the test showed: EA promises a lot but can only partially deliver.
Battlefield 6 introduced its multiplayer on July 31 and emphasizes that in the latest installment of the shooter series, they are putting a large focus on map destructibility again. In the trailer and in various clips, something is constantly blowing up, houses are collapsing, and time and again it is said that destruction is one of the core features of the game.
The product manager of Battlefield told me in an interview that she is sure it is the best destruction in the history of Battlefield. Overall, she is impressed by the performance of the development team and has not seen anything like it in a shooter.
Well, I have tested Battlefield 6 for a few hours and I am a bit skeptical about whether the destruction is really as fundamental and epic as it has been portrayed so far.
A lot of hype that exaggerates a bit
The destruction in Battlefield 6 is definitely better than in Battlefield 2042 – I want to make that very clear right from the start. Perhaps it is even the best destruction in the history of Battlefield, but it’s much tighter than the trailer suggests.
There are certain corners in the game that crumble just as impressively as in the trailer. On the map Empire State, for example, a house completely collapsed. That looked cool.
However, on the same map, I stood at 2-3 corners where I shot a wall with a rocket launcher, and nothing happened. While it is usually clear whether a wall is destructible, it still led to disappointment for me. In the reveal, it was still said that you could create new paths with explosives and for example create an escape route if you are cornered.
And so I find myself in a room about 3 square meters in size with only one door, enemies outside on the street, and I can’t get out because my C4 only leaves black soot on the wall behind. I quickly realized that not every wall, not every ceiling, and certainly not every building is destructible.
I realized that I cannot create a spontaneous escape route everywhere.
The destruction is fine as it is, but is portrayed too well
If the destruction on all maps of Battlefield 6 is implemented like on the ones I have already played, then I am completely satisfied. It is sufficient. There is the possibility of using wall explosions tactically, and still enough cover remains so that the maps do not become completely unplayable.
I am not a big fan of all buildings on a map being completely dismantled over the course of a match, and I serve as cannon fodder for tanks and helicopters as an infantryman. Because only certain walls, roofs, ceilings, floors, and buildings are destructible in Battlefield 6, the map balancing remains good throughout the round.
The only problem I have with the destruction is this exaggerated portrayal in marketing. Yes, it’s cool, but in The Finals we can destroy much more. In Rainbow Six: Siege, it’s one of the most important tactical tools. And we were already able to completely destroy smaller houses in Battlefield 4 and V and dismantle the skyscraper in Shanghai.
The destruction in Battlefield 6 is not so outstanding and everything-surpassing that I am sitting here with my jaw dropped.
If EA is not careful, this intense pushing of destruction will backfire. They have managed to generate a strong hype, but such hype is always playing with fire – and if expectations are not met, you get burned. Another point of concern for the shooter is a setting that PC players have to enable in the BIOS to launch the game: If you want to play Battlefield 6 on PC, you need to make an important setting, otherwise the game won’t start.
