{"id":1296492,"date":"2026-04-04T05:21:39","date_gmt":"2026-04-04T05:21:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ixXyzDdpyDtMWJuFPqBCU4"},"modified":"2026-04-04T05:21:39","modified_gmt":"2026-04-04T05:21:39","slug":"amid-sweeping-changes-its-refreshing-to-see-that-the-battlefield-6-beta-was-an-actual-playtest-and-not-a-glorified-demo","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/arcader.org\/news\/amid-sweeping-changes-its-refreshing-to-see-that-the-battlefield-6-beta-was-an-actual-playtest-and-not-a-glorified-demo\/","title":{"rendered":"Amid sweeping changes, it’s refreshing to see that the Battlefield 6 beta was an actual playtest, and not a glorified demo"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
Rory Norris, Guides Writer<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

\"PC<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>

(Image credit: Future)<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Last week I was: <\/strong>playing way too much of the Battlefield 6 open beta.<\/p>\n

This week I’ve been:<\/strong> slogging my way through the Road to Battlefield event in Battlefield 2042, remembering why it’s my least favourite game in the series.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

The most significant difference between most playtests I’ve been part of is often simply a matter of content. Rather than iterating on core features, some betas often feel more like a demo designed to sell pre-orders versus actual playtests for unfinished games, with the primary goal of improvement. None of this is helped by these so-called betas often running a mere month or two before release, as was the case with the likes of Battlefield 2042 and Call of Duty: Black Ops 6.<\/p>\n

That’s why I was pleasantly surprised when Battlefield Studios recently released a fairly large blog<\/a> about its learnings from the Battlefield 6<\/a> beta, going into what’s being changed over the next few weeks, and it’s a lot of meaningful tweaks<\/a> to the core gameplay that prove it wasn’t just a marketing stunt for a change\u2014despite it also scheduled just two months before launch.<\/p>\n

The equivalent beta feedback blog for Battlefield 2042<\/a>, for example, focused on very specific or technical improvements, like “increased the number of tanks that you\u2019ll experience on Orbital”, “less funky behaviours with [elevator] doors”, a grenade indicator, and shortening (or removing) some vehicle exit and entry animations\u2014though there was also a slight tweak to movement, as has been the case with BF6. Fixing buggy elevators is all well and good, but it’s ignoring the elephant in the room that most players had (and still have) with BF2042.<\/p>\n

Of course, there are your usual balance changes that even the more demo-like betas achieve: the overpowered M87A1 shotgun has been nerfed, and the “super bullets”<\/a> bug is being investigated. However, we’re also seeing quite significant tweaks to weapon control, including “a general pass on recoil and tap-fire characteristics” as well as “changes to encourage more controlled tap-firing and burst-firing”. These directly respond (and hopefully resolve) much of the concern about weapon feel during the beta, and potentially even my worry about overtuned attachments<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\n