I think I disagreed with you in a previous post (I believe it was you), but after having played Wardogs, I have to say you are right. Not sure why I didn't notice compared to older BFs, I guess my memory is not so good.
In Wardogs, I can tell where fighting is taking place hundreds of meters away. It's directional, clear, but still does not overtake closer sounds. I can tell when a faraway base is getting mortared, if a tank is firing, and direct myself accordingly despite being further away than the length of an average BF6 map. The sound evolves depending on whether there are obstructions or not, loud cracks changing into muffled bangs. Suppressors are considerably more useful: it's not so much about the volume (although it's that too), but it makes localisation considerably more diffuse. But then that is also a game where I can tell where a sniper is from sound alone, down to whether they're in a building or not...
I'm not sure if it's related, but of note, BF6 is the first BF game that does not handle its sound interface directly on PC, and instead hands this down to the OS. Technically, that's just the interface, but it is the only change I can see that would explain how the sound got so bad (I somehow doubt they decided to code it up from the ground up from previous titles).
Glad you went and tested it yourself. Wardogs is exactly the proof — far-field can have direction, terrain interaction, and weight without stepping on near-field clarity. That's all I've been saying. The OS audio layer thing is interesting but I think the bigger issue is engine-side priority culling (Threat Bus), not just the output interface. Either way, glad we're on the same page now.
