Back in March the much hyped and already highly succesful Homefront released for Xbox, PS3 and PC (reviewed). The game is set some 16 years in the future, and after North Korea have suprisingly managed to take over most of the free world without a single Nuke having been dropped, they are now turning their attention to North America.
Like with Killzone 3 which I recently reviewed, there is so much untapped potential with the story which is compounded by lazy character development. In places some effort has been put into conveying the emotional impact that war has on civilian life, but in most cases it feels amatuerish and thoughtless, more going for the shock factor than any real substance. This is especially true near the begining of the game where you see soldiers murder the parents of an onlooking young son. In a movie you would expect this scene to pack a real punch, but unfortunetly developer Kaos didn't manage anything of the sort here. Given how ambitious and potentially intersting this story could have been, it is staggering how pedestrian the entire 4 hour experience is.
You play as someone, I can't quite remember his name. Something happens to you at the start of the game, and subsequently you are rescued by a local resistance group who seem to know who you are. It really staggers me how little I can remember from my time in Homefront, and that has to reflect on how unremarkable the whole experience is.
It doesn't get any better when you turn your attention to the gameplay either. The guns lack any sort of weight or feel, and are ridiculously accurate. I expected to feel like I was scrounging around for whatever ammunition I could find, but you are constantly presented with oppurtunities to refil. This in it self is a shame because if the game had limited your aresenal more it would have been much more succesful in making the player feel like they really are on the very edge of survival, fighting for their life.
Gunfights are scripted to all buggery, with the mission variety taken right out of Call of Duties textbook. Frustratingly every battle features infinetly respawning enemies which will keep doing just that until you trigger some event of which allows you to move up or do something else. Please developers, can we havbe more games like Crysis where you actually put some thought into the battles rather than just throw hundreds of enemies at us?
During the campaign you reach a resistance stronghold of sorts. It is essentially a community that some survivors have set up where they can live peacefully without being detected by the Koreans. This is on the face of it pretty interesting because it subtely shows the strength of the human spirit in all its glory. Imagine what it would be like to set up a community where kids can play outside happily where only a few kilometers away occupation is in full swing.
It also serves another purpose. It essentially acts as a base that the resistance use to prepare for attacks and retreat to afterwards. How dumb are these resistance guys? If you don't want to be detected, what would you do? Run repeated organised large scale attacks very near (within a few kilometers) of your safe zone? I hope not, and if these guys had half a brain they would have realised that this course of action is going to get everyone killed. That is ofcourse what happens in the end, with the entire community shot and burned down. The discovery of this would have been a high impact moment, except that they brought it on themselves by being so obviously stupid.
That's all I want to say of the campaign really except to quickly mention the ending. This is essentially how it goes: Capture anti-air guns, call in airstrike, credits roll. Pathetic!
The multiplayer is not something I've played a great deal of but only because it is for my money just as lackluster as the campaign. Kaos have basically incorporated the core elements of Call of Duty (namely Team Deathmatch and quick deaths) and Battlefield (Large maps and vehicles) into one big unsatisfying mess.
The core mechanics and game modes are actually quite strong, it is simply the level design that brings it down. The maps lack any sort of direction which from my time made me feel like I was taking a walk in a quite country town when all of a sudden some guy with a gun would appear. After a short fire fight, it would return to the normal average country town. When games like Bad Comapany 2 (which Kaos have obviously taken inspiration from) and even Medal of Honor do such an awesome job of making you feel like small parts in a much larger war, its hard to fathom the complete lack of atmosphere in Homefront's multiplayer.
The game can't even redeem itself when it comes to graphics. Put simply they are archaic. On PC they barely match Call of Duty on consoles and are trounced by Crysis 2 on consoles in all areas except resolution and post processing. Environments are bare of any sort of details what so ever unless than are in the playable zone, and even then... I'm not expecting them to push the limits of what is though possible, but I would like them to even try and contend with some of the more visually impressive games. Homefront is a prime example of why Crytek were right to delay DX11 support for Crysis 2. Homefront afterall supports DX11, yet looks worse on highest settings than Crysis 2 on lowest settings with DX9.
I've complained a lot throughout this review, and for good reason. Homefront dissapoints in every area, gameplay, story, graphics, multiplayer, sound. Perhaps the only thing it does right is the loading times, which on PC are super quick at around a few seconds if you need to reload a checkpoint after dying.
Jack writes: "Back in March 2011, the first-person action shooter Homefront arrived on the Xbox 360 from THQ, along with a storm of publicity which included a really cool live-action trailer"
Deep Silver and Humble Bundle are currently offering the first Homefront game for free. This offer will last for the next 48 hours, so be sure to visit its Humble Bundle page in order to acquire your free copy.
get it! the single player is excellent and intense and the MP is pretty fun, too.
Ehh, PS4 needs these deals too, or consoles in general we always get discounts rarely free stuff that's REALLY free (games with gold / psplus isn't free)
Yeah its nice, Just sign up and add them to your steam. even f you dont own a gaming PC, you might one day.
OX writes: "The first-person perspective enhances your immersion in games, letting you experience your character's adventures from right behind their simulated eyeballs. Unfortunately, it also means seeing through the eyes of your character when they get set on fire, whacked in the groin, or surgery. This would be a lot less traumatic seen from across the room, videogame, seriously. Consider the most harrowing moments we've had to endure in first person, if you dare."
Good Read. Good Review. I myself haven't played Homefront myself due to my hatred of military shooters, however, I have heard mixed reviews. Among the criticisms was the campaign, being apparently one of the worst this gen. Among the positives was the story, written by the fantastic John Millius, and the mutliplayer. However, after watching multiplayer videos, I see hardly any differences from the companies last outing Frontlines: Fuel of War (of which the multiplayer aspect wasn't half-bad), this of course being before the milking of the genre. However, if its just the same multiplayer but with a different approach to points and less players, I can see why that too would recieve critisism.
"Varied mission design which takes most of its material straight out of the CoD universe."
"Recycled mission design makes most of the game feel like a highlight reel from recent FPS games"
"Ups
Quick loading times
Decent variety throughout the campaign"
So are the missions varied or recycled?