Top
550°

Homefront 2 is 'phenomenal', will be '5X the game' the original was - Bilson

Crytek UK doing a 'phenomenal' job with Homefront 2, reckons ex-THQ boss.

Read Full Story >>
videogamer.com
The story is too old to be commented.
hiredhelp2383d ago

give activision somert to worry about i hope. better engine cryengine better devs crytek.

BlmThug2383d ago

5X more crap than the original

TheGameFoxJTV2383d ago

the first one was fun though.

guitarded772383d ago

Homefront had an excellent plot with N Korea as the bad guy. But it had very poor execution. The visuals were horrid, and there were no "oh damn" moments. The best part of the game was reading the newspaper clippings for the overall story. I wanted to play a game based on the newspaper clippings I was reading. When they say 5x the game, I hope they mean 5x better and not 5x longer. The plot has so much to offer, I hope they can make something special, because the first was mediocre.

morganfell2383d ago

Yeah because North Korea invading and over running the US was so believable. Originally it was China and they chickened out on implications of going that route. Same with the Red Dawn remake. So much for being true to your art.

You walked around shorter than anyone else in the game. Couldn't open any doors by yourself, and the game was one monster closet after another. Oh, look, you just tripped and AI spawn marker.

I haven't traded a lot of games in, not ever. But this and Ghost Recon Future Soldier both went into the bargain bin.

Eyeco2383d ago

I never actually played Homefront 1 because i thought it looked kinda generic, but i might pay it a visit, from what i saw it had this really interesting concept.

I remember seeing a part of the game when a kids parents are shot in front of him, the kid then starts to cry, i dunno why but that seriously disturbed me.

gaden_malak2383d ago

Most stories aren't believable...that's why they are stories.

Insomnia_842383d ago (Edited 2383d ago )

Homefront multiplayer was very good!! When I was at work, I just wanted to get back home asap to play online. Not many games do that. I'm sure HM2 will be awesome! MW3 copied a couple of things from HM's MP.

SnakeCQC2382d ago

its better than all the propaganda mw games and even bf3 were

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 2382d ago
Crazyglues2383d ago (Edited 2383d ago )

@ TheGameFoxJTV

yeah I'll give you that, it was fun -the multi-player but the single player was a joke, graphics were hideous...

-but let's just hope Crytek can really make Homefront 2 a top contender to dethrone COD's title as the king of FPS

.____........___...____
.____||......||.......____||
||.........___||.......____||

Andreas-Sword2383d ago

I think, Homefront 2 will be 10 times better than Homefront 1.

showtimefolks2383d ago

so the story will be 16-20hrs long? 5 times better than a 4 hr story

also its not like HF didn't sell well it sold 3 million within its launch window, i am not sure why but THQ thinks this is their COD.

i like THQ and hopefully HF2 will deliver more sales wise for them

andibandit2382d ago

Well at least Crytek is behind it this time.

I remember reading the 360 forums for this game and ROFL'ing at some of the posts.
The PS3 forum was even worse and in the end sad.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2382d ago
Myst2383d ago

The multiplayer for the first was pretty fun (if you were able to play). If they could just improve on it a lot and stick to what they say then I think it will be phenomenal. No need for another fiasco where level resets and being unable to play for at least the first month after it released and even after to happen again.

coolbeans2383d ago

I now anticipate my user review score to be a 28.5/10 for this sequel, Crytek.

:P

Trenta272383d ago

Homefront was terrible. I hope the next one will be better.

Laxman2383d ago

I disagree; Homefront was a good game. Sure, it wasnt great, but it was different, actually had an awesome story/concept, gunplay was fluent and sounded awesome, and the online Multiplayer actually dared to be different - it had very unique features and an individual spin on the genre.

It paid for being different with poor reception from the CoD fanboys and failed to make up good enough sales to save the studio. Im glad THQ realised the IP was actually good and kept going with it.

Trenta272383d ago

The story had a good idea, but it failed completely in doing anything good with it. All it really was was a good concept. Gunplay was alright, but nothing great. As you can see, the Homefront online community is pretty much dead. It was a weak attempt at a CoD and Battlefield combination.

THQ held onto it because they aren't doing so hot. It takes time and money to come up with a new idea so they stuck with what they had.

vortis2383d ago

I'm not a CoD fanboy but I avoided this game like the plague because it looked like a generic CoD clone.

The gunplay looked generic, the levels looked uninspired and the AI looked like the typical mofos we've been facing off against the last half-decade (dumb spawn-tripper bots.)

Instead of getting Homefront I got Metro 2033 instead because it actually looked different. Having someone PR-spin the sequel as 5x better/bigger than the first game doesn't do squat for people like me.

Hopefully they can actually deliver an experience that seems like it's more than just a slightly altered CoD-spinoff.

Dlacy13g2383d ago

I would disagree with the "terrible" assessment. I think Homefront was a decent shooter. It had a very good story that was horribly directed and fleshed out further bogged down by bad voiceacting. Single player at the end of the day was a let down for sure but it wasnt "terrible" just well short of what most were expecting.

Gameplay wise I think the mechanics and ideas were all very sound on the MP side. The main thing that seemed to really hold Homefront back was its absolutely generic visuals. In a land of COD's, Killzones and Crysis games at the time this needed to better visually. I know people say graphics dont make a game but in this case I think graphics did break the this game from being a more successful debut.

vortis2383d ago

I don't think you mean graphics but visual aesthetic.

For instance, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. has crappy graphics but an awesome, atmospheric aesthetic. It FEELS different and looks different from other games based on the presentation.

What I keep seeing in this thread are people who seemed to be disappointed with its unappealing visual look. So I don't think it was just that the graphics are bad, it sounds like a lot of gamers just felt it didn't hold any atmospheric or visual weight to its presentation.

ieatbabies2383d ago (Edited 2383d ago )

Is the author from the future? We should all hop into his Delorean and take a ride.

RioKing2383d ago

Wow, seriously...just wow. The "author" is not making any claim, he's just quoting what the Ex-THQ Boss said about the game. And trust me, if anyone has the credibility to make such a statement...it's him.

vortis2383d ago

And if Bobby Kotick said next year's CoD will be 10x better than Modern Warfare 4, I'm sure he's a trustworthy source for that kind of claim, too, eh?

RioKing2383d ago

I'm sure if Kotick was the EX-BOSS of Activision he'd talk shit on cod.