Strong core gameplay continues to impress, but ongoing live service issues raise long-term concerns for Battlefield 6.
Right now, the overall feeling around Battlefield 6 feels mixed. On one hand, you are still excited to jump into new gameplay, new maps, and new weapons in Season 2. The game itself is still fun. The battles can still feel intense and cinematic, and the gunplay is great. But at the same time, when you actually look at what Season 2 is offering, it is hard not to feel underwhelmed.
You see two new maps, several new weapons, a few gadgets, and some vehicles spread across three months, and you start wondering if this is really enough. It’s not that the content is bad. It’s just that it feels small for the amount of time you are expected to wait. If this was a shorter season, it might feel reasonable. Over three months, it feels thin, if you ask me.
This leads to the bigger issue: Battlefield 6 is not really failing as a game. The foundation is strong. The core experience is solid. Where it struggles is as a live service. And that matters, because the game is clearly built around that model. It is meant to keep you coming back season after season.
One of the biggest problems is maps. In Battlefield, maps are everything. They are the reason you come back. You want new locations, new environments, and new places to experiment with vehicles, destruction, and large-scale battles. In older Battlefield games, getting multiple maps per season was normal. Now, getting two maps over three months feels slow.
When you think about it, this has been an issue for years in the Battlefield series.
Since the series shifted to a live service model with Battlefield 5, post-launch support has struggled to keep up. Battlefield 5, Battlefield 2042, and now Battlefield 6 have all faced similar criticism. Players keep asking for more meaningful content, especially maps, and the response keeps feeling limited.
What makes this more frustrating is that Battlefield 6 launched with strong momentum. There was hype. Early impressions were mostly positive. Sales were strong. EA even reported major financial success tied to the game. So from the outside, it looks like everything was set up for Battlefield 6 to succeed long-term.
You start wondering why more live service content was not prepared earlier. Ideally, a game like this should launch with multiple seasons already planned and partially built. That way, there is no long gap where players feel like they are waiting. Instead, it feels like each season is being built just in time, which leads to smaller updates.
There are several possible reasons for this. Maybe development tools make map creation slow. Maybe staffing is an issue. Maybe planning was not strong enough. Or maybe the game was pushed out earlier than it should have been to take advantage of marketing hype. Whatever the reason, the result is the same: players are not getting enough meaningful content fast enough.
Another major issue is the heavy reliance on limited-time content. Season 2 includes several temporary modes and modifiers that only last for a few weeks. These include things like gas effects, hallucination mechanics, night modes, and special rule sets.
That is the problem for Battlefield 6.
Limited-time content does not add long-term depth. It does not build the game’s foundation. You might enjoy it for a weekend, but it does not give you a reason to stay invested for months. When you look at the roadmap, a large portion of it is made up of things that will simply disappear.
In contrast, permanent additions matter. New maps stay. New weapons stay. New vehicles stay. These are the things that keep the game fresh over time. When you get a new helicopter, a new gadget, or a new rifle, you can use it across multiple modes and maps. That content becomes part of the game’s identity. Temporary modes do not.
For example, the first new map of the season, Contaminated, is a good addition. It is something players can return to years later. The same goes for the second map, Hagental Base, which focuses on close-quarters combat similar to classic Battlefield Metro-style maps. Even if it does not represent everything Battlefield stands for, it is still a permanent addition that expands the map pool.
On the other hand, many of the limited-time modes feel like filler. They take development time and resources, but they do not strengthen the game long-term. After a few weeks, they are gone, and we are left waiting for the next update.
This issue becomes especially frustrating with modes that could easily be permanent.
One major example is Operations. This mode is beloved by longtime fans because it adds narrative structure and connects multiple maps into a larger experience. Bringing it back should have been a major win. Instead, it is treated as a limited-time event. That feels like a missed opportunity.
You also start thinking about how live service could be handled better. If seasons are three months long, maybe they should include three maps instead of two. Maybe those maps should be connected through ongoing events that affect future seasons. Right now, Battlefield 6 does not do much with long-term consequences.
The battle royale side of the game is another weak point. Support has been minimal. Major updates have been rare. Season 2 of Battlefield 6 finally adds a new area and some changes, which is good, but it feels late and limited. For a free-to-play battle royale mode, this level of support is not enough to sustain a healthy player base.
Then there is the issue of progression, especially weapon progression. Unlocking attachments often requires massive amounts of grinding. For players with limited time, this is discouraging. If you can only play an hour or two a night; progressing one weapon can take months. In extreme cases, mastering a single gun could take most of a year.
This kind of system favors players who can play for hours every day. Everyone else feels left behind. Instead of feeling rewarded for their time, they feel punished for not playing enough. That makes it easier to quit and move on to something else.
Another long-running issue is server structure. Many longtime players want a proper server browser with persistent servers and better community tools. In older Battlefield games, servers were communities. You would recognize regular players. You would return to the same place. That created attachment to the game.
Today, matchmaking focuses more on quickplay and temporary servers.
While this is convenient for casual players who just want to jump in and play, it weakens the sense of community. Ideally, Battlefield should support both approaches. Quickplay should exist, but it should also connect properly to a server browser where players can see and join active servers.
Right now, official servers are not clearly displayed, and servers are not persistent in the same way they used to be. This makes it harder for communities to form and grow. It also shortens the lifespan of the game, especially in regions with smaller player bases.
To be fair, there are some positive signs. Developers have communicated plans to improve netcode, gunplay, and audio. These are important areas, and it is good to see them being addressed. The core gameplay still feels strong, and many players still enjoy simply jumping into matches and playing.
But these improvements do not fully solve the bigger live service problems. Content cadence, timegating, progression systems, and long-term planning are still major concerns. Without progress in these areas, it becomes harder to keep players invested.
Battlefield tends to attract an older crowd compared to some other shooters.
Many players are in their twenties, thirties, or older. They have jobs, families, and responsibilities. They do not have unlimited time to chase limited-time events. When content is heavily time-gated, it often pushes these players away instead of pulling them in.
This is why the current direction feels risky. Battlefield 6 has the potential to be great in the long term. The core gameplay proves that. The large-scale battles still work. The sandbox moments still happen. The foundation is there. But a strong foundation is not enough on its own. A live service game needs consistent growth.
What makes all of this harder to watch is that Battlefield 6 is not a bad game. It is not broken. It is not unplayable. In many ways, it is one of the stronger entries in recent years. That is why these issues stand out so much.
Battlefield 6 could still do well if future seasons focus more on permanent maps, meaningful modes, fairer progression, and stronger community systems. But if the current method keeps going, DICE could slowly lose a large chunk of their player base who are just tired of waiting.
