Author: Game Infliction

Battlefield 6 Season 1 is here, and players have already turned their attention to one major issue: Blackwell Fields.

The California sun-soaked fields of EA and Battlefield Studios’ first new post-launch map are home to an army of oil pumpjacks, smoky hills, and an orange tint that blankets every scrap of metal and radio tower. It also happens to be what some believe is “hands down the worst map in the game” if not “the worst map in BF history.”

This week’s Season 1 launch was meant to be the first in a long line of exciting moments for Battlefield players. Instead, it’s kicked off seasonal updates on a sour note, as fans flock to criticize Blackwell Fields as a wasteland that suffers from a lack of cover for infantry and vehicles alike.

“I can’t count the amount of times I spawn on this map and instantly have direct vision of the enemies capturing points,” one dissatisfied Battlefield 6 player said. “You get shot at from every angle on this map, there’s never a break. People can just spawn and start shooting you straight away.”

“My playstyle is engineer class and I blow up armored vehicles, but I cant even get into cover in this map without getting shot from ALL sides,” another popular post explained. “The massive open areas makes it a sniper haven and every other class is just trashed.”

Despite its relatively large battles, Battlefield 6’s Conquest mode seems to suffer the most when it comes to Blackwell Fields, as players report facing enemy fire from as far away as enemy HQ spawn points. Pilots for air vehicles, specifically, report having a hard time on the new Season 1 map. Despite being considered one of the larger maps Battlefield 6 has to offer, opponents with the right hardware can still lock onto some jets before they’ve even taken off.

“This is fantastic,” one Reddit user jokes. “I was hoping for more maps where Helis are useless.”

“No no, they are perfect nice garage helicopters,” another user teases. “You keep them nice and clean in the hangar.

“It’s not helicopter season yet.”

These Blackwell Fields balance issues only add fuel to the fire that is the conversation surrounding map sizes in Battlefield 6, but many have expressed dissatisfaction with the map regardless of game mode. Even smaller objective-based game modes in downsized versions of Blackwell Fields still feature those orange visuals, leading to even more chaotic moments as bullets fly through dense environments obscured by smoke.

“I played a round of breakthrough which was decent and one of conquest which was a disaster,” one Steam user commented. “The visibility is already so bad in this game no matter what settings you use, the red/orange tint that this map have it’s a disaster.”

Although the stray comment praising Blackwell Fields and its cinematic feel can be found if you look hard enough, it seems most players online would trade atmosphere if it meant BF Studios would fix what they feel are one-sided battles and suffocating gun fights. Of course, it’s only been one day since Season 1 launched for Battlefield 6, so opinions could shift after they spend more time with the new map.

Me on Blackwell fields pic.twitter.com/03GkOb6pAd

— Lou (@louallen026) October 28, 2025

It’s unclear if Blackwell Fields will receive any changes, but EA and BF Studios have proven to be responsive when it comes to fan feedback so far. Even if Blackwell Fields continues to be a sore spot for the community, Season 1 will at least deliver a new, less orange map in the form of Eastwood come November 18.

Numerous updates, big and small, have arrived since Battlefield 6 launched for PC, PlayStation 5, and Xbox Series X and S October 10. Included in the list of past tweaks are toned down green highlights for a controversial skin, and reverted ticket sizes for Conquest.

As the team works to iron out the kinks in Battlefield 6 Season 1, they’ll also continue to deliver updates for Battlefield REDSEC and its battle royale mode. The standalone experience launched yesterday and is facing its own issues, as players have taken to the Steam reviews section to call for changes to its battle pass and queue options.

Meanwhile, check out our full list of all currently available Battlefield 6 multiplayer maps. Those looking to brush up on their online skills can also read our multiplayer tips and tricks guide.

Michael Cripe is a freelance writer with IGN. He’s best known for his work at sites like The Pitch, The Escapist, and OnlySP. Be sure to give him a follow on Bluesky (@mikecripe.bsky.social) and Twitter (@MikeCripe).

RuneScape developer Jagex is considering removing one of the game’s least popular, yet most pervasive, layers of microtransactions. But instead of just making the decision itself, it’s letting its entire playerbase vote on whether or not to ditch them entirely.

Oh, and the vote is definitely rigged. But it’s…rigged in the players’ favor?

Currently, the modern version of RuneScape (also known as RuneScape 3) features a number of different types of microtransactions, including a major feature called Treasure Hunter. Very basically, Treasure Hunter allows players to obtain keys in various ways, which are used to open treasure chests and receive items of varying rarity. Though it is possible to obtain small numbers of keys without spending money, far more are obtainable for players who spend money on the game. Over time, this has led to players complaining that Treasure Hunter is essentially a pay-to-win mechanic, since players can obtain items that give them large amounts of experience points through Treasure Hunter, effectively encouraging players to spend more to level up characters quickly.

There have been other issues with Treasure Hunter over the years as well, as well as its predecessor microtransaction “Squeal of Fortune”, but the ability to essentially pay to bypass gameplay is by far the most controversial. In fact, Jagex even experimented with removing the feature in part back in July, when it disabled microtransactions for a week. A follow-up survey run by the studio suggested that 65% of players felt positively or neutral about the change.

So today, Jagex sent out a press release stating that it was launching a community vote to “decide the future of RuneScape’s microtransactions.” The developer has launched a page on its website that allows players to vote to remove Treasure Hunter from the game entirely, simultaneously removing over 220 associated items, including the experience points boosting items that have caused issues in the past. Jagex says it will remove Treasure Hunter from the game if the poll receives over 100,000 votes.

“This vote is one of the most important moments in RuneScape’s history,” said Jagex CEO Jon Bellamy in a statement. “Starting right now, players will cast the deciding vote on the future direction of the game. Since Squeal of Fortune was introduced in 2012, and subsequently Treasure Hunter in 2014, our approach to monetisation has, over time, eroded some of the integrity at the heart of RuneScape.

“The most concerning elements of our MTX systems have been those that allowed players to bypass core gameplay, skipping over the depth, challenge, and sense of discovery that make RuneScape truly special. While these systems have helped fund the game, they’ve done so at a cost to something far greater: the integrity of our worlds. This vote is about correcting that, and taking a step toward designing experiences that are fair, rewarding, and built to last.”

It’s critical to point out though that Jagex’s poll really isn’t a poll at all. It’s a button players can press if they want to vote in favor of removing Treasure Hunter. There’s no option for players to vote “no”, Jagex will simply implement the change if 100,000 people total vote in favor. And the page itself makes it pretty dang clear that Jagex wants players to vote for this. Using language such as suggesting those who vote “yes” want to “see an integrity-led RuneScape powered by your own accomplishments” and the presence of multiple green “Vote Yes Now” buttons all down the page are, uh, not exactly subtle. Nor is the fact that Jagex seems pretty ready to implement this, as if it already knows what the result would be.

But while a clearly-rigged non-poll sounds bad, it’s also critical to note that players actually do seem to want this to happen. Over on the RuneScape subreddit, players are ecstatic. The top comment on the Jagex mod’s official post announcing the vote simply says “Holy based”, followed by “I can’t believe I lived to see this”, and many, many more comments along those lines. In fact, the positivity is overwhelming. While some players seem skeptical that they’ll meet the 100,000 vote requirement, others are confident, even suggesting the OSRS (Old School RuneScape) players might support the poll as well, just on principle. It seems as though they needn’t worry. At the time this piece was written, the poll had been up for just four hours, and had already reached 50,000 votes. For context, Jagex says on its website that there have been over 320,000,000 RuneScape accounts created over the years…though how many of those are active is a very different question (Old School RuneScape recently surpassed 240,000 players this past August).

Overall, this seems like a positive, long-needing, and welcome change for the RuneScape community. It’s just a little weird that it’s being framed as a poll, when the desired outcome for both players and developer is pretty obvious. There is a potential reading of this as simply a move for positive PR, specifically given that Jagex was acquired just last year, Bellamy was instated as a new CEO just this past March, and he’s already had a bad round of headlines over canceling annual in-game Pride events.

Players have until November 12 to vote if they would like to remove the microtransactions, and can continue voting beyond the 100,000 needed numbers to express support for the change. Removing Treasure Hunter won’t fully remove all microtransactions from the game, with cosmetics and bonus XP items with set caps to help curb exploits will remain.

Rebekah Valentine is a senior reporter for IGN. You can find her posting on BlueSky @duckvalentine.bsky.social. Got a story tip? Send it to rvalentine@ign.com.