Rumor: Battlefield 6 to Feature 128 Players, Battle Royale, and Will Be on PS4/Xbox One

The latest rumor points to Battlefield 6 having 128-player matches, will feature battle royale, and appear on last-gen consoles with less destruction.

The story is too old to be commented.
37d ago
Blade9237d ago (Edited 37d ago )

Yes they are but I understand this at least. You think EA is going to pass up a 100 million user base of last gen consoles with a blockbuster franchise? Nope.

Powerhug37d ago

Now imagine that 100 million user base collectively throwing a temper tantrum because they don't have a next gen console and they can't play BF6. Everybody would be crucifying EA for not making it for last gen. Whatever EA do, people will bitch and moan.

RememberThe35737d ago

Ima go off for a sec: Publishers are ballooning their own budgets by not embracing advanced AI and procedural technology. I've watched too many damn GDC presentations to be simpathetic to the cost of development. BF5 was a mess and BF6 needs to be on a level PS4 and Xbone just can't handle. If their doing a BF3 where the real game is on PC and PS5/SX and the last gen games are just knock offs, then don't even bother with the last gen at all. We've seen how great games can sell for YEARS and we've seen how subpar BS gets called out and trashed. That's now what I expect; BF6 on last gen getting called out and trashed.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 37d ago
Notellin38d ago

At least they can't play on the 128 players servers I guess. But this is a hard pass for me.

37d ago
CrimsonWing6938d ago

Get used to it. Good ol’ Jimmy Ryan at Sony has plans for cross-gen for quite some time.

RememberThe35738d ago (Edited 38d ago )

I think that goes further up than Jim. I think it was the CFO of Sony corp who talked about the need to cater to the PS4 audience. I'm not even sure Jim likes the cross gen idea. And who knows maybe with how well the PS5 is selling they won't feel the need to push PS4 versions of big game quite as much. We'll see.

CrimsonWing6938d ago


I’m confused, what’s Jim Ryan’s position at Sony? I’m pretty sure the “higher ups” put this guy in charge so they don’t have to oversee the entire PlayStation division.

As a CEO the very definition states they’re responsible for making major corporate decisions, managing the overall operations and resources of a company, acting as the main point of communication between the board of directors (the board) and corporate.

The CFO literally only handles the finances of the company.

The CEO is responsible for overseeing all departments. The CFO reports to the CEO and maintains the financial health of the company. Jim Ryan being the CEO makes the decisions.

I think you responded to another post I said about Jim Ryan but this is a guy who isn’t giving us full backwards compatibility because he doesn’t see the value of playing old games because he said, and i quote, “ I was at a Gran Turismo event recently where they had PS1, PS2, PS3 and PS4 games, and the PS1 and the PS2 games, they looked ancient, like why would anybody play this?”

He has double backed on promises like focusing primarily on next-gen titles only to tell us cross-gen will be a thing happening on the PS5 for 2 years. He also will not be allowing for new IPs due to the risk involved.

I’m just not impressed with him. Maybe it’s too early to judge but he already comes off as a slick corporate guy who doesn’t have his finger on the pulse of gamers, but rather how do we profit more. Sure, great for shareholders, but we’ve all seen where corporate greed goes in this industry and it gets pretty disgusting.

OB1Biker37d ago

You guys are really digging at anything to blame Jim Ryan.
What next? Ubisoft? Climate change?

neomahi37d ago

That's because nobody can get their hands on a PS5, still, but PS5 Pro is on its way. At one time, consoles were ahead of their PC counterparts. Once Nvidia lost their bid to AMD and PlayStation and Xbox became the same thing, just with different services, Nvidia remained committed to staying as far ahead of consoles as possible, hence PS4 and PS5 already behind at launch. Sony, like Nintendo, have learned from this that they'll always be behind so you have to find ways to create longevity. PS3 was the most impressive, though it was a powerhouse at launch, but a 10 year lifecycle that included 3D gaming, then PlayStation Move while PS4 had VR.

RememberThe35737d ago

@Crimson Jim Ryan is the President and CEO of Sony Interactive Entertainment, a subsidiary of Sony Corporation who's CEO is Kenichiro Yoshida.

Sony Corp. owns SIE.

Google is super cool, give it shot some time.

CrimsonWing6937d ago (Edited 37d ago )


He’s the CEO of Sony Interactive Entertainment which is a subsidiary of a larger corporation that deals with television, film, and technology? Gee, you mean to tell me Sony isn’t just vidya games? Kind of like how I said Corporate put him in charge of the PlayStation division and allows him to make executive decisions?

Yea Google is super cool.

My apologies though, maybe I made an assumption here. What do you think a CEO does and what decisions can they make in a company?

RememberThe35737d ago

Laying the sarcasm on thick eh? Jim Ryan has bosses, don't give me lip cause you didn't know what you were talking about. I mentioned the possibility his bosses and he had conversations about how SIE was approaching the launch of PS5 and that might have changed over time and the approach may be a directive front the top not necessarily from Ryan himself. You responded with a bunch of BS about how you know what CEOs are and apparently that means you know how Sony executives interact (you don't).

In January of last year Ryan made a comment about how WWS was shifting away from PS4 into full PS5 development. That changed by the time the PS5 launched. Obviously it's possible conversations were had and changes were made. It's not a stretch to think his bosses were apart of those conversations or that there may have been a directive from the top. Especially since we didn't hear anything from SIE about it only hearing this was their approach through who I believe was the CFO of Sony Corp talking to investors.

It's equally possible he was full of shit and was just trying to take some shine from MS after they announced their games would be BC. But anything is possible, coulda been a bit of both.

You're entire response to me what that he didn't have bosses, now you're saying his bosses don't tell him to do things. Come on bro.

CrimsonWing6937d ago (Edited 37d ago )


I don’t know if you read my comments or what. So yea, I’ll give you lip seeing as how I said, “ As a CEO the very definition states they’re responsible for making major corporate decisions, managing the overall operations and resources of a company, acting as the main point of communication between the board of directors (the board) and corporate.”

I figured you’d understand corporate as being above him. What I also assumed you knew is him being a CEO gives him executive power over decision making. Corporate isn’t micromanaging every division. That’s why they appoint CEOs. I work in corporate so yea I’m kind of familiar how the hierarchy works.

I even asked you what a CEO does, which I’ll ask again, Does he not have the authority to make a decision like this without corporate. I’ll give you a hint, it’s a Yes.

He is making the decisions. If he screws up, yea he has higher ups that can fire him and appoint a new CEO.

Your whole argument is that corporate made the decision and he just acts on their decision. Then You mentioned a comment about the CFO.

My reply was simply that you have a CEO that has executive decision making for major corporate decisions, managing the overall operations and resources of a company, acting as the main point of communication between the board of directors (the board) and corporate.

The CFO doesn’t have that kind of power since they’re solely responsible for the company’s finance.

My other point was you have a guy who has on more than one occasion made comments that you don’t want to hear from someone running the PlayStation division such as not understanding the appeal of backwards compatibility and a longer focus on cross-gen games, 2 more years to be exact.

So yea, I don’t know why you’re getting your panties in a bunch. I asked you what a CEO does and I explained why I don’t think he’s the greatest person to be the president and CEO of Sony Interactive.

Not laying the sarcasm thick, btw. More like a light spread.

RememberThe35736d ago

I never made an argument. I said I think someone above him pushed him in a different direction. That's not an argument, that's a comment; a different thought about something neither of us know anyhkng about. There's nothing here to even argue about. You entire premise is the the title CEO makes him entirely independent and my premise it that he reports to his bosses and that they can push him in certain direction when they choose to. These aren't arguments they're both equally possible with both of our narrow perspectives.

You could be totally correct that he's acting completely independently but everything I've read about the structure of Sony says the the heads of the subsidiaries work closely with corporate, that comes from the reorganization the happened under Hirai. Sonys subsidiaries act as extension of the main corporate body. Sony used to run each of it's subsidiaries as independent businesses but when the economy tanked in 2008 they reorganized the whole company and it took years. I believe that's when they shifted their focus from manufacturing to entertainment as their TV, cellphone, and PC divisions were hemorrhaging money but their movies, music and games were printing it. From what I remember reading at the time Hirai was promoted from SCE (now SIE) to execute this reorganization. It was to bring all of Sonys management under one roof, essentially. So from my perspective Sony Crops upper management has a hand in everything the company is doing. I don't think they're micro managing but I also don't think saying, "Hey Jim, we know you love this new PS5 and we love how confident you all are in your product but you now how this pandemic has shut a ton of economies down and we're sort of flying blind? Let's just keep on making PS4 versions of our games that sell 20 million units on that platform. Let's keep that revenue stream for now and we'll talk later!" is micro, sounds more macro-managing. But maybe that's just me 🤷‍♂️

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 36d ago
Pandamobile38d ago

Most multiplatform games will support last gen of consoles until 2023-2024. Probably even beyond that in some cases.

37d ago
Rocketisleague37d ago

So glad I didn't buy a next gen console yet. By the time they're truly next gen they're will be a second more powerful model

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 36d ago
seanpitt2339d ago (Edited 39d ago )

This is not good news it will have to be paired back so much to actually run on the original Xbox one and’s to be expected EA are way to greedy to let all last gen player base be lost revenue.. even if it scarifies there game which it inevitably will do on weak ass hardware...

darthv7239d ago

Think of it like MAG. And that ran on the PS3 so all it has to do is be equal to or better than that and it will run fine on even base hardware.

blacktiger39d ago

no he's talking about uniqe engine that last gen will have hard time running, which means cut down lot of features on the next gen to make it work on previous gen.

Fluke_Skywalker38d ago

MAG was so ahead of it's time, if it came out now everyone would be all over it. 256 players!

frostypants38d ago

MAG was graphically bleh though.

badz14938d ago


you do know that MAG was for the PS3, right? the graphics was fine back in the day. just compare it to the original COD4 graphics and you'll see they are very comparable.

anubusgold37d ago

mag everyone just clustered in one spot sniping at each other it was so weird of a game lol. Unreal 2004 had some 100 man servers and it was great fun back in the day Horde mode first appeared there first it was called Invasion mode back then.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 37d ago
shepherdzeMan38d ago

Ur joking right , EA probably makes the most optimized games

Sophisticated_Chap38d ago

When millions of people have lost their jobs around the world due to covid, I'd hardly call it greedy. Many people simply can't afford or cannot justify the expenditure on a device that just plays video games at this point in time.

Vegamyster38d ago

People loved BF4 which had a last gen version, it was very limited compared to the PC/PS4/Xone versions but if this rumor is true it would probably be a similar situation.

ActualWhiteMan37d ago

pared back*


Stay in school.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 37d ago
Silly gameAr39d ago

So, MAG dressed up as Battlefield MP and with battle royal gameplay?

WeAreLegion38d ago

And that's only half of MAG's player limit. I miss those matches.

Smok9138d ago

I remember thinking, Wow this is the direction shooters is doing, and we haven’t seen a game like MAG since. Should’ve soaked it in more.

37d ago
Rocketisleague37d ago

Mag was great, I was a pilot in it. Tough game:'(

Rocketisleague37d ago

Where does mag come into it? I liked mag but, well it's hardly the first shooter with a high player count

-Foxtrot39d ago

Why last gen? I get you want as much money as possible but when you have developers whinge about "hitting the limits" of what last gen consoles could do at the time only for them to continue supporting them with new games a year after launch (it'll be next Holiday for this title lets be honest) then it just makes it come across they weren't that desperate for more power then they let on

RememberThe35738d ago

Why not mobile at this point? Just water everything down, who has standards anymore?

QSPR38d ago

Rumors are that the PS4 and Xbox One version is been develop by another company. dice are working on the next gen version only.

CrimsonWing6938d ago (Edited 38d ago )

I think it’s more for the install base. Yea I’m with you on a corporate move to sell more, but when you think about it they hit both generations of consoles in a single release and for a game like this you want as much people playing as possible.

excaliburps38d ago

That's exactlyt it: $$$. There's too much $$$ left on the table for devs and pubs to NOT release it on last-gen consoles. I do hope we move on from this soon though, since Cyberpunk has proven that PS4/XB1 are so dated that games are being held back.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 38d ago
Yi-Long38d ago

They seem to think we want it all to be bigger, but that means maps become too big, you become over-reliant on vehicles, and your impact and importance in each match becomes smaller, to the point of insignificance.

I really wish Battlefield would just go back to its roots and JUST focused on Conquest, on medium-big maps (5 flags), with 24 vs 24, or 32 vs 32 players.

CorndogBurglar38d ago (Edited 38d ago )

Conquest is all I ever play in Battlefield anyway. Thats what I consider BF. I don't care that other modes are there though.

But I would definitely be okay with Conquest, with different sized matches. 24-32 players on a small map with limited vehicles, like jeeps and buggies only. Some with no vehicles at all. 64 player maps with tanks and planes. 128 player maps with everything.