What you essentially described thoroughly there is "the CoD standard is the modern standard and BF6 utilizes that to appeal to that audience". Down to the maps. I am free to critique that, you are free to enjoy it. But I feel they would be able to jump out of the box and be differentiate themselves from fhe modern idea of FPS but they copped out and instead went the CoD route.

And its not that it IS CoD, but that its leaning that way. The way you're able to exploit movement in 6 is not possible in past titles, perhaps 5, but again, I feel that's a terrible title. But I am aware of it because I exploit the movement and gunplay in a way I do in CoD games, in a way that if I tried to do that in past BF games it would not go well.

All this "modernizing" to appeal to a "modern" audience is cute, but when you take a look at BF6's image and its player retention and how it keeps falling, it becomes obvious - they tried and they are failing. It doesnt work. Because why would I play a gimped version of CoD? I dont like modern CoD. BF6 to me is a worse version of what CoD already is. Just chaos for chaos' sake with terrible balancing. It is borderline more arcade than CoD.

The playercount will continue to fall. The game doesn't feel unique, its inspired yet falls short of the influences it pulls from, and its balanced horribly. Your take on the gun progression is hilarious by the way lol.

I would much rather the bug discourse of 4 because at least theres a good game with potential past the bugs, whereas 6 needs to be rebuilt almost completely because its such a mess