u/DefendtheRadish

Source: Bilibili ：@bili_19547018715

BFV’s Pacific update was, in my opinion, the final swan song of peak-era DICE.
Iwo Jima. Pacific Storm. Wake Island. The Solomon Islands.
When you look back at that period, it really feels like the end of an era.
From 2016 to 2019, DICE gave us Battlefield 1, Star Wars Battlefront II, Mirror’s Edge Catalyst, Battlefield V, and then the Pacific content for BFV. For me, that was DICE at its absolute peak.
And then, a huge amount of DICE’s core talent started leaving.
Ever since then, I feel like you can see the decline everywhere. Battlefield 2042 and Battlefield 6 just don’t have the same level of polish as BF1 and BFV — performance, visual quality, lighting, map design, UI, atmosphere, little details, pretty much everything.
And honestly, when I compare 2042 and 6 with BF1 and BFV, I struggle to find areas where the newer games represent a clear step forward. In quite a few areas, they actually feel like a step backward.
Obviously, that’s my personal opinion, but I think the loss of talent at DICE is a huge part of the story.
There’s also something almost ironic about what happened to EA.
In September 2025, EA agreed to be acquired by a consortium led by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, alongside Silver Lake and Affinity Partners, in a roughly $55 billion deal. The acquisition was completed in August 2026.
From the outside, the whole thing almost feels like:
“Here’s the mess. You guys deal with it now. I’m done. I’m going to enjoy the next chapter of my life.”
Again, that’s obviously my interpretation, not some inside information. But the timing and the direction of EA over the years make it hard not to look at it that way.
And this is why I think there is only one real way for Battlefield to truly regain what it lost:
Bring back the people who made DICE special in the first place.
The problem is that this is probably almost impossible.
A huge number of former DICE veterans went on to join or help build Embark Studios. Embark was founded in 2018 by industry veterans including Patrick Söderlund and Johan Andersson, and the studio has a strong connection to the old DICE talent pool.
Just look at their games.
Doesn’t THE FINALS feel like a spiritual successor to some of the ideas and technical ambition behind Mirror’s Edge Catalyst?
And doesn’t ARC Raiders remind you of some of the things that made Star Wars Battlefront II so impressive?
Maybe I’m biased, but it’s hard for me not to see the connection.
It feels like the talent didn’t disappear.
The talent just moved somewhere else.
And then there’s Tencent.
Back in August 2024, Nexon and Embark signed agreements with Tencent to bring localized versions of THE FINALS and ARC Raiders to China. Tencent would work with Embark and Nexon on localization, content, and features tailored to Chinese players.
THE FINALS eventually entered the Chinese market in 2025, while ARC Raiders started its first Chinese server test in 2026 and is still being developed for the Chinese market.
And this is the part that really makes me curious.
Tencent obviously knows how influential Battlefield 1, Star Wars Battlefront II, and Mirror’s Edge Catalyst were. They also know that a lot of the people behind those games eventually ended up at Embark.
So when you see Tencent working this closely with Embark on two major FPS titles, it’s hard not to wonder whether there is more going on than simple publishing and localization.
Maybe Tencent is also interested in learning from the technology, workflows, and development experience that these former DICE veterans bring to the table.
After all, Frostbite itself originated at DICE, and that technology became one of the defining pieces of the Battlefield identity.
That’s what makes the whole situation so strange to me.
The people who once made DICE great are still making ambitious, technically impressive games.
They’re just no longer making Battlefield.
And meanwhile, Battlefield is trying to recreate what it used to have without the same people who originally built that identity.
Maybe that’s why the series feels like it’s stuck in a loop.
Maybe Battlefield can still come back someday.
But at this point, I honestly wonder whether the original DICE era is simply something we’ll never get back.
Maybe this is just the fate of Battlefield.

I genuinely hope all Battlefield 6 Breakthrough maps are brought back from 24v24 to 32v32. Honestly, I am not even asking for 64v64 anymore — I just want 32v32 back. Because 24v24 really kills the war atmosphere. It makes the whole mode feel dull and small, almost like two villages getting into a brawl instead of a real battlefield.

Some people keep repeating the “player count should fit the map design” argument like it is some brilliant insight. But a lot of them clearly do not play Breakthrough regularly, so of course they do not care. For people who actually main Breakthrough, though, 24v24 is absolutely brutal.

A lot of new players come to Battlefield specifically for that chaotic, large-scale war feeling — fighting alongside a big group of teammates, pushing or defending together. Even if you are not doing much shooting, just resupplying ammo, dropping med packs, or firing a few symbolic shots with everyone else still feels great. That is part of what makes Battlefield Battlefield. But now 24v24 has made an already shrinking Breakthrough player base even worse.

At this point, if you want an all-human Breakthrough match, your only real option is the limited-time Operations mode. There's literally no other choice, because regular Breakthrough is literally nothing but AI vs AI now. You'd be lucky to get even 4 actual human players per match, and the rest are all bots.

Just remove all the AI bots already. Nobody wants to play a match where it's 4 real players carrying a bunch of braindead AI.

What frustrates me is seeing people argue over tiny, irrelevant details while the bigger issue gets ignored.

What I am asking for is actually the smallest possible change with the biggest possible payoff: bring all Breakthrough maps back to 32v32. And honestly, 64v64 would be even better, because bigger battles are more exciting, more immersive, and much more likely to attract both new players and returning Breakthrough veterans.

Those crying about it feeling too crowded — are you even actual Breakthrough mains? BF4 Rush, BF1 Operations, and BFV Breakthrough all worked perfectly fine at 32v32, so why the hell is BF6 suddenly "too crowded"?

BFV’s Underground was cramped as hell, yet it was still one of the most popular Breakthrough maps. Iwo Jima was even more beloved — arguably the peak of Battlefield’s Breakthrough experience.

Even if we were to accept that higher player counts feel too crowded, we should absolutely handle this on a map-by-map basis. Smaller maps like Hagental and Empire State are admittedly relatively tight (though honestly, even Empire State played perfectly fine at 32v32 Breakthrough on community servers right after launch last year—no major issues at all), and I'm totally agree with keeping those at 24v24.

But for medium-sized maps like Liberation Peak, Siege of Cairo, and New Sobek City? There's more than enough space as it is. Claiming those feel crowded is just straight-up nonsense at this point.

To the people crying about too much chaos: that is how Breakthrough has always been, and that is how it should be played. If you want something more tactical, go play Conquest or Rush.

Let's be real, everyone arguing against bringing back 32v32 Breakthrough literally never plays this mode. They just don't care as long as it doesn't mess with their Conquest, so all they do is sit there and stir up shit.

If you actually main Breakthrough, there's no way you wouldn't support bringing 32v32 back for all maps. I'm 100% certain of that.

And one more thing — last time, someone in the comments said I was ruining his favorite game. All I have to say is: fine, you win. To cater to your small minority and this so-called “24v24 fits the map design” idea — which you think is smart and rational — you’ve pushed the vast majority of actual Breakthrough players out of the game entirely.. So who is really ruining the game?

I will keep posting this every day until all Breakthrough maps are back to 32v32.

I genuinely hope all Battlefield 6 Breakthrough maps are brought back from 24v24 to 32v32. Honestly, I am not even asking for 64v64 anymore — I just want 32v32 back. Because 24v24 really kills the war atmosphere. It makes the whole mode feel dull and small, almost like two villages getting into a brawl instead of a real battlefield.

Some people keep repeating the “player count should fit the map design” argument like it is some brilliant insight. But a lot of them clearly do not play Breakthrough regularly, so of course they do not care. For people who actually main Breakthrough, though, 24v24 is absolutely brutal.

A lot of new players come to Battlefield specifically for that chaotic, large-scale war feeling — fighting alongside a big group of teammates, pushing or defending together. Even if you are not doing much shooting, just resupplying ammo, dropping med packs, or firing a few symbolic shots with everyone else still feels great. That is part of what makes Battlefield Battlefield. But now 24v24 has made an already shrinking Breakthrough player base even worse.

At this point, if you want an all-human Breakthrough match, your only real option is the limited-time Operations mode. There's literally no other choice, because regular Breakthrough is literally nothing but AI vs AI now. You'd be lucky to get even 4 actual human players per match, and the rest are all bots.

Just remove all the AI bots already. Nobody wants to play a match where it's 4 real players carrying a bunch of braindead AI.

What frustrates me is seeing people argue over tiny, irrelevant details while the bigger issue gets ignored.

What I am asking for is actually the smallest possible change with the biggest possible payoff: bring all Breakthrough maps back to 32v32. And honestly, 64v64 would be even better, because bigger battles are more exciting, more immersive, and much more likely to attract both new players and returning Breakthrough veterans.

Those crying about it feeling too crowded — are you even actual Breakthrough mains? BF4 Rush, BF1 Operations, and BFV Breakthrough all worked perfectly fine at 32v32, so why the hell is BF6 suddenly "too crowded"?

BFV’s Underground was cramped as hell, yet it was still one of the most popular Breakthrough maps. Iwo Jima was even more beloved — arguably the peak of Battlefield’s Breakthrough experience.

Even if we were to accept that higher player counts feel too crowded, we should absolutely handle this on a map-by-map basis. Smaller maps like Hagental and Empire State are admittedly relatively tight (though honestly, even Empire State played perfectly fine at 32v32 Breakthrough on community servers right after launch last year—no major issues at all), and I'm totally agree with keeping those at 24v24.

But for medium-sized maps like Liberation Peak, Siege of Cairo, and New Sobek City? There's more than enough space as it is. Claiming those feel crowded is just straight-up nonsense at this point.

To the people crying about too much chaos: that is how Breakthrough has always been, and that is how it should be played. If you want something more tactical, go play Conquest or Rush.

Let's be real, everyone arguing against bringing back 32v32 Breakthrough literally never plays the mode. They just don't care as long as it doesn't mess with their Conquest, so all they do is sit there and stir up shit.

If you actually main Breakthrough, there's no way you wouldn't support bringing 32v32 back for all maps. I'm 100% certain of that.

And one more thing — last time, someone in the comments said I was ruining his favorite game. All I have to say is: fine, you win. To cater to your small minority and this so-called “24v24 fits the map design” idea — which you think is smart and rational — you’ve pushed the vast majority of actual Breakthrough players out of the game entirely.. So who is really ruining the game?

I will keep posting this every day until all Breakthrough maps are back to 32v32.

I genuinely hope all Battlefield 6 Breakthrough maps can be brought back from 24v24 to 32v32. Honestly, I am not even asking for 64v64 anymore — I just want 32v32 back. Because 24v24 really kills the war atmosphere. It makes the whole mode feel dull and small, almost like two villages getting into a brawl instead of a real battlefield.

Some people keep repeating the “player count should fit the map design” argument like it is some brilliant insight. But a lot of them clearly do not play Breakthrough regularly, so of course they do not care. For people who actually main Breakthrough, though, 24v24 is absolutely brutal.

A lot of new players come to Battlefield specifically for that chaotic, large-scale war feeling — fighting alongside a big group of teammates, pushing or defending together. Even if you are not doing much shooting , just resupplying ammo, dropping med packs, or firing a few symbolic shots with everyone else still feels great. That is part of what makes Battlefield Battlefield. But now 24v24 has made an already shrinking Breakthrough player base even worse.

At this point, if you want to play Breakthrough, your only real option is the limited-time Operations mode, there is no choice, because if you want a fully human Breakthrough-style experience, that 's the only place left to go. Regular Breakthrough is often just AI vs AI — maybe only 4 real players, while the rest are bots. How is that any different from playing a single-player game?

And seriously, is changing Breakthrough back to 32v32 really that difficult? For the devs, it feels like nothing more than clicking a few settings and adjusting some parameters.

What frustrates me is seeing people argue over tiny, irrelevant details while the bigger issue gets ignored.

What I am asking for is actually the smallest possible change with the biggest possible payoff:

bring all Breakthrough maps back to 32v32.

And honestly, 64v64 would be even better, because bigger battles are more exciting, more immersive, and much more likely to attract both new players and returning Breakthrough veterans.

Those complaining it feels too crowded — are you even Breakthrough mains? BF4 Rush, BF1 Operations, and BFV Breakthrough were all 32v32. So why is BF6 suddenly “too crowded”****?

BFV’s Underground was cramped as hell, yet it was still one of the most popular Breakthrough maps. Iwo Jima was even more beloved — arguably the peak of Battlefield’s Breakthrough experience.

Most maps are easily big enough already. Look at liberation peak.

To the people crying about too much chaos: Thats how breakthrough has always been and should be played like.

If you want something tactical, you can go enjoy playing Conquest or Rush

I will keep posting this every day until all Breakthrough maps are back to 32v32.