Homefront Review

Post by Dan @ 04:19pm 18/03/11 | 32 Comments

Kaos Studio's Homefront landed on shelves (and Steam) nationwide yesterday for PC, Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, representing THQ's bid to win a piece of the first person shooter scene currently dominated by Call of Duty and Battlefield. Well accustomed to the world of multiplayer first person shooters, AusGamers reviewer Nachos has been putting this one through its paces and unfortunately things don't look so good.

It's disappointing news given that the various preview sessions we've been privy too showed tremendous potential and we genuinely wanted to see a new worthy contender give the genre stalwarts a good kick in the pants, but it looks as though for all that Homefront manages to do well, it falls short on too much else.

Read AusGamers very in-depth review for the complete low-down from the perspective of a seasoned PC gamer.

homefront review

Buy now from Green Man Gaming Only GBP£8.99!

(compare all prices)

Latest Comments

Link

Pirroh
Posted 04:24pm 18/3/11

5.8? Ouch.

Link

Bah
Posted 04:24pm 18/3/11

I kind of had a feeling this would get a low score, it always bugs me that games get glowing previews for months leading up to the release of the game, then bam its a pile of s***.

How does ausgamers justify the previews it was giving it, did you not see this coming when looking at the game earlier, did the devs really bamboozle you, or is it just the unwritten rule of previews that you never diss a game no matter how bad it looks?

Link

Enska
Posted 04:25pm 18/3/11

Yeah my bro picked this one up and took it back to EB this morning as it was f*****g terrible.

Link

ravn0s
Posted 04:30pm 18/3/11

from reviews ive read you should only buy if you want to play mp since sp is s*** and only last 4-5hrs.

Link

Dan
Posted 04:38pm 18/3/11

How does ausgamers justify the previews it was giving it, did you not see this coming when looking at the game earlier

Honestly, the multitude of previews we were screened were all very impressive and left us all cautiously optimistic after each showing. But of course they're always going to show you what they think are the strongest sections of the game and never tell you something like it only being 5 hours long. You also have to give the benefit of the doubt that most bugs you encounter during a preview screening are going to be rectified by launch day.

Link

greazy
Posted 04:46pm 18/3/11

I kind of had a feeling this would get a low score, it always bugs me that games get glowing previews for months leading up to the release of the game, then bam its a pile of s***.

How does ausgamers justify the previews it was giving it, did you not see this coming when looking at the game earlier, did the devs really bamboozle you, or is it just the unwritten rule of previews that you never diss a game no matter how bad it looks?

Probably steve/trog/dan are better qualified to answer this than me but I remember reading one of the Penny Arcade guys explaining it this way: when you're previewing the game you're told that there are known bugs that will be fixed or the graphics are being improved but the version you have isn't the latest etc etc. So in other words you're went to look past a lot of the problems because the game is still in production. Also sometimes all you get to play is a well made 2 minute demo (which realistically shouldn't allow you to right a whole preview on the game).

I think it would be better if when previewing the game you assume is the finished product and you list all the problems.

Link

Enska
Posted 04:53pm 18/3/11

That would probably mean the end of previews.
I can't see a dev wanting them to happen if that was the way previews were to be looked at.

Link

Ickus
Posted 04:58pm 18/3/11

Bah.. I was hoping this was going to be worth play :( ... back to DA2 and eve for me.

Link

maRtz
Posted 04:58pm 18/3/11

from reviews ive read you should only buy if you want to play mp since sp is s*** and only last 4-5hrs.

make that 3hrs

Link

Mordecai
Posted 05:06pm 18/3/11

I heard you can beat it in 2.

Link

nachosjustice
Posted 05:50pm 18/3/11

I've also heard you can beat it in two hours, but I imagine you'd be doing quite the speed run to achieve that.

I also previewed the game (as I mentioned in the review) and was pretty optimistic based on what I'd seen (only played multi, though).

Link

DeadlyButters
Posted 05:53pm 18/3/11

somehow i just knew that this game would be a disappointment.

Link

Bah
Posted 05:54pm 18/3/11

That would probably mean the end of previews.

Well what use are previews if it is just going to be "journalists" paraphrasing the content in trailers which i can watch myself?

Honestly, the multitude of previews we were screened were all very impressive

Fair enough.

Link

Enska
Posted 05:56pm 18/3/11

I wasn't for or against them, I'm just saying that they obviously wouldn't be keen on previewing a game if it was to be prematurely reviewed.

Link

Bah
Posted 06:04pm 18/3/11

Well as it stands now they are "prematurely reviewed", it's just that the review scores are 9+.
There has to be some middle ground, maybe it's confirmation bias but it seemed like homefront was getting a huge amount of positive preview coverage on ausgamers, without anything negative at all being said.
I can accept dans explanation because i didn't see what he saw and (AG isnt plastered with homefront banners so i have no reason to doubt what he says), but then there may be a case for thinking about what they aren't showing you in their previews.

Link

Steve Farrelly
Posted 06:12pm 18/3/11

The problem here is covering the games industry, regardless, is still relatively in the hands of deva and publishers - they have the keys to the house; they're the estate agents, so to speak, and so show us the house at times on on terms that are suitable to their end-game. When we buy it and move in, we learn the neighborhood is dangerous or noisy or full of crackwhores.

The thing is, all the positive stuff Nate wrote in his review is the stuff we saw; I also brought up concerns about the games in my previews, or pointed out that the verdict was still out on certain areas we hadn't yet seen.

Link

Fixah
Posted 06:17pm 18/3/11

Not having read the review, I saw a couple of gameplay videos of this, and while i thought the concept of seeing America invaded is interesting, original and refreshing, the gameplay itself looked uninspiring and clunky. Oh well, maybe next time.

Link

Dan
Posted 06:29pm 18/3/11

I can accept dans explanation because i didn't see what he saw and (AG isnt plastered with homefront banners so i have no reason to doubt what he says), but then there may be a case for thinking about what they aren't showing you in their previews.

Oh there absolutely is a case for that (thinking what they aren't showing you), but as I said, you really need to give the benefit of the doubt that what they aren't showing you is going to be up to the same standard as what they are.

If you have to speculate about something, it's only fair to the developers of the game to be cautiously positive about it and not baselessly negative just for the sake of it.

The developer's track record can also have bearing on that. If it's someone that keeps pumping out s*** hot games, like Valve or blizzard, you can excercise a little less caution, or if it's something like the next Call of Duty, you can say things like: "well they still haven't told us what server model they're going to be using for the game, so if they still don't have dedicated servers again most of this praise of the gameplay will be for nought". But in the case of Kaos, they're a reasonbly unproven studio with only Frontlines (which wasn't a bad first effort) as a point of reference.

On the other hand, the Digital Extremes team (who worked exclusively on the PC aspects of the game) have proven themselves capable before and were headed by Frank DeLise of Desert Combat fame, so we had some point of reference to expect something good.

My advice for anyone reading previews is to just try and keep that in mind. That publishers are usually showing us the best parts of the game they've created so far (and fair enough), so unless they're super-duper eager, final judgement on buy or not by, should really be kept until a decent array of reviews come out.

Anyway, enough about previews. I'd genuinely like to hear about other's experiences with the game over the coming weeks. Especially in regards to the longer-term multiplayer functionality.

Link

Eorl
Posted 06:27pm 18/3/11

So it's Duty Calls extended version?

Link

Sanguinicus
Posted 08:08pm 18/3/11

I *HATE* being led on only to learn a game is f*****g balls. Is this even worth my time now?

Link

WetWired
Posted 08:23pm 18/3/11

wow, I didn't really pay attention to this one but I thought the premise sounded interesting and it could be a decent SP fare that I might pick up when it's a bit cheaper...but from that it sounds like SP isn't even the main focus, what a waste of time, sounds like either the SP or MP was tacked on, just do one or the other ffs, stop wasting your and our time trying to excel at both.

Link

yamahabandit
Posted 08:31pm 18/3/11

If you like COD games buy this because it is.....CODFront.....nuff said....

If you like or play Bad Company 2 and where hoping for a diversion as I was while waiting for BF3, you'll find the single player is entertaining, but the multiplayer is just MW2/ BlackOps reskinned with some new vehicles but essentially identical gameplay.

Graphics nice.. are you serious... its just a console port pure & simple. Graphics are at best 2008 standard. Character models lack realism, weapon sounds are average. Surround sound doesnt work. Server browser is buggy, connection issues seem to be fixed as of todays patch, but after 4 hrs of multi (I keep trying it thinking I may like it) its just COD. Right down to the in-game interface & scoring screens with class choosing & weapon selection/ upgrade paths. The respawn mechanic is so lame, maps are narrow.

Im really glad this game was gifted to me & I didnt have to pay for it, because I would be raging right now.

Back to waiting for BF3.

Link

MARLINBLADE
Posted 10:36pm 18/3/11

Even tho it's a COD "clone" i still bought it because it's "not" COD and to hell with IW i'd rather waste my money on this "clone" than have them partake in any of my hard earned... Boycott of Black ops complete... i hope they take notice now lol

Hey i actually really enjoy the MP, but man graphics are so 2005...

Link

IVY_MiKe
Posted 10:55pm 18/3/11

Excellent Review is excellent... I only wish I'd read this BEFORE my bro generously gifted me a copy via Steam (paying full price for two copies...)

His wallet is... 'where the ~~WAR~~ CASUALTY is'

Link

nachosjustice
Posted 11:01pm 18/3/11

@ yamahabandit - I don't think the graphics were that bad. Multi was noticeably blander than single player, but it wasn't overly terrible; not going to win any awards for its visuals (as I said in the review), but certainly not the worst thing I've seen.

Link

DeadlyDav0
Posted 11:28pm 18/3/11

Well explained review IMO. Thanks.

Link

Enska
Posted 01:04am 19/3/11

Marlinblade, Infinity Ward didn't make black ops, Treyarch did.

Link

kirkoswald
Posted 01:49pm 19/3/11

lol a wooden fence can stop your tank...... FAIL

Link

MARLINBLADE
Posted 07:10am 21/3/11

Enska, fair call my bad, but you get where i'm going with my comment tho... COD franchise as a whole can lick my balls till they start supporting the PC community

Link

Running_With_Scissors
Posted 09:48am 22/3/11

I just cancelled my order

Link

fryzeegunner
Posted 03:00pm 28/3/11

Got mine finally. It's Unplayable, the game crashes on launch of the .exe or launch through steam. Cool game bro.

Link

Sc00bs
Posted 03:23pm 28/3/11

this feels exactly like cod :/ is that the new model for fps games these days? get a cod game and copy the f*** out of every aspect of it ....

Commenting has been locked for this item.

32 Comments

Show

Features

Reviews

ASUS ROG Rapture GT6 WiFi 6 Mesh System

User:
Pass: