Detailed Feedback on Game Mechanics in Battlefield 6 Beta

Hi BF Studios/EA Team,

First off, thank you for providing us the opportunity to play the Battlefield 6 Beta and for inviting community feedback. Having spent some time in the game development space, I can appreciate the amount of work that goes into building these games and want to provide constructive feedback and detailed notes from both a technical point of view and long-time player perspective.

These suggestions for the most part do not cover features but instead focus on core gameplay issues and issues related to netcode. This post would be much longer if I had to include issues I found outside of these core issues however I'm convinced that if these issues are addressed then most of the others will go away. If your core gameplay is fun and accessible then people don't really care about the fluff. People tend to complain about the fluff because they can feel something is off and often look for it in obvious features or missing features.

For context, I am a software engineer by qualification and trade and currently work as a program manager. I’ve played almost every major Battlefield release, including:

Battlefield 1942
Battlefield Vietnam
Battlefield 2
Battlefield 2: Modern Combat
Battlefield 2142
Battlefield: Bad Company
Battlefield Heroes
Battlefield 1943
Battlefield: Bad Company 2
Battlefield Play4Free
Battlefield 3
Battlefield 4
Battlefield Hardline
Battlefield 1

In my opinion, Battlefield: Bad Company 2 offered the most enjoyable and accessible gameplay of the entire series while Battlefield 2 and Battlefield 3 were, ideologically, the closest to what I believe the Battlefield series represents. It is from this background, mindset and long-term perspective that I provide the following feedback.

1. Hit Detection, Flinch Mechanics & Rubberbanding

The “flinch lock” mechanic (where controls and camera are heavily impacted after being hit) feels more severe than in past Battlefield titles. This amplifies first-shot advantage significantly, especially at close range, resulting in a frustrating “cascade effect” where players struggle to meaningfully fight back after the initial hit.
Recoil is elevated and persistent, making weapon control during bursts inconsistent, especially combined with shrunk hitboxes.
The rapid “tik” hit confirmation sounds emphasize the overwhelming nature of close-range fights where TTK feels absurdly fast (often under half a second after the first bullet connects).
Rubberbanding, while less frequent than in BF3, still occurs occasionally due to client-side hit detection. This can cause players to be pulled out of cover, shot behind cover, or experience “bullet curving,” creating discrepancies between players’ perceived realities and server truth.
All of these things when combined into a single interaction can often leave players feeling either confused as to what just happened or annoyed/enraged as they feel cheated.

2. Time-to-Kill and Weapon Feel

Elevated recoil combined with fast TTK and tiny hitboxes makes guns feel inconsistent and “deinty,” lacking the satisfying impact expected from their caliber (e.g., a 7.62 sniper rifle feeling more like a .22).
At longer ranges, the high TTK coupled with shrunken hitboxes diminishes weapon lethality and reduces the satisfaction of landing shots and even killing opposing players.
Vehicles and their destructive capabilities feel “weak” or “cosmetic” — destruction visuals don’t align with their actual tactical impact. For example, shooting the side of a small building with a large-caliber tank round may cause spectacular damage to the building and surrounding environment but fails to disrupt or damage the enemy occupants effectively, who then easily scatter out of the building and make easy work of the tank since there are seven of them. In reality that should have been an easy seven kills.

3. Environmental Destruction

Destruction looks impressive with debris flying everywhere and walls crumbling, creating a spectacle, but its impact on players is minimal or inconsistent at best.
Enemies standing near explosions or behind destroyed structures often take little to no damage, breaking immersion and tactical depth.
This disconnect between visual destruction and gameplay consequences reduces strategic use of explosives and environmental damage.
For comparison, Bad Company 2’s destruction was simpler but far more meaningful, with explosions causing real damage, knocking enemies out of cover, or ejecting them through walls — leading to emergent and satisfying gameplay moments.

4. Audio Feedback and Observations

Audio cues for environmental observations feel unreliable and often lack consistency. Pressing Q to make an observation does not always trigger clear or lasting audio callouts (e.g., “enemy over there,” “grenade incoming”).
Hit markers for observations disappear almost immediately, reducing their usefulness in real-time situational awareness.
This results in a UI that feels lacking of critical informational & feedback despite being subjectively bloated compared to previous titles. As an example I am still not sure if I auto spot enemies by simply looking at them or if pressing Q actually triggers it.
Other missing indicators, if I request a medic (not that it’s really needed anymore since you regen health) or request ammo, show indicators above the heads of those classes and likewise show medics and support players that I need assistance from them.
In comparison, Bad Company 2 featured reliable and distinct audio and visual cues that players could depend on, greatly aiding tactical decisions and squad coordination.

Summary & Suggestions

Reconsider the severity and duration of flinch/input lock to reduce frustrating first-shot snowball effects and improve counterplay, particularly at close range.
Tune recoil to feel more consistent and impactful without being punishingly difficult to control mid-burst.
Address rubberbanding issues stemming from client-side hit detection to minimize discrepancies between player experiences and ensure fairer outcomes.
Improve the alignment of destruction visuals with meaningful player and vehicle damage, restoring tactical depth and immersion.
Enhance audio and visual feedback for observations, ensuring callouts are reliable, audible, and informative to better support squad play and situational awareness.

Overall, the Beta feels like it’s pursuing a visceral, cinematic experience but at the expense of mechanical fairness and player agency. Balancing these aspects will greatly improve competitive integrity and immersion.

A fundamental question the development team needs to ask themselves and I feel they haven’t in a long time is when you look at a 64 player scoreboard at the end of a match and you divide the scoreboard into 4 sections (the top 8 players, the top 16 players, the top 32 players and all 64 players). Who are you focused on most when building the game?

If your focus is on the top 8 players and you build a game with mechanics focused on the best of the best then they are going to have a good time while the rest are going to have diminishing enjoyment as you go down the list. Eventually six months later that will be your player base.

On the flip-side if you take all 64 players on the scoreboard into consideration and build a game with mechanics that cater to the entire player base, then even the bottom 50% can have an enjoyable time resulting in a much larger player retention six months in without effecting the top 50%. As the saying goes, when the tide comes in, all boats rise.

I am going to leave it here for now. I hope this feedback proves to be useful. Thanks again for all your hard work and for considering this detailed feedback. I look forward to seeing how Battlefield 6 evolves.

Take Care