You know your new game isn't very good when your stock price tanks 21% the day it's released due to bad reviews

User Rating: 5 | Homefront X360
At the outset, I'm going to say that I was really excited about this game. I looked forward to it, I watched all the trailers, looked at all the gameplay pictures and read all the preview hype. It seemed to me like the next killer series in first-person gaming. But after playing through the campaign in one sitting and trying my hand at what is easily the most frustrating multiplayer I've played in the past five or so years, it has become apparent to me that I was lied to, and so were a lot of other people.

The game's setup is very intriguing. An empowered North Korea rises up in the international community due to sheer luck and taking advantage of a worsening geopolitical climate. They wind up invading a weakened United States, and you play as a resistance fighter on a mission to... I dunno... stop them or something. It's never really all that clear WHY the fight moves from Colorado to Lake Tahoe to Sausalito, CA.

The gameplay is competent, as long as you're playing the single player. The weapons feel okay, but they all kind of run together. The difference between a light machine gun and an M4 assault rifle feel slight in your hand. They all shoot similarly and feel similar, but they seem to cause different amounts of damage and vary in accuracy. The game looks pretty good too, with the suburban levels taking the cake in the graphics department. My favorite part of the game was the rebel hideout in the suburbs. It was very believable.

Unfortunately, the game ends at the EXACT FREAKING MOMENT any other FPS story would just be heating up. Basically, you're getting half a single-player campaign. I beat the game in one sitting and sat in disbelief when the credits rolled. I was shocked and really angry. I did like the fact that the last mission takes place on the Marin County side of the Golden Gate Bridge, because I live in Marin and it was cool seeing some familiar places that were quite faithfully recreated, but that's pretty much it.

The multiplayer is absolute garbage. I'm not some COD fanboy or Battlefield maniac or Halo snob. I like FPS multiplayer, and I think it's cool when different franchises make their own little tweaks to the formula. It keeps things fresh. This game takes every single multiplayer convention from every major franchise and mashes it all up into a couple of game types and shoves it down your throat. Basically, every match at some point winds up with one team getting spawn-killed by vehicles, tactical rocket strikes, and camping snipers. If you like dying over and over again and not really understanding why, or pumping bullet after bullet into someone without scoring a kill, and then falling down dead after they return a single shot, then this game might be for you. Unfortunately, if you have a pulse and active brain waves, this game's multiplayer is frustrating and shallow, and offers so little in the way of situational awareness, I felt myself never understanding why I died, who killed me, what tactics they were using, or any important information that COD's kill-cam offers. In short, I've played maybe 5 hours of the multiplayer in this game, and I hated it so much, I'm thinking about blowing the dust off COD:Black Ops to try playing that again.

Yes. This game is so bad, it's making me consider playing a different game that I have grown tired of.

This game was a serious waste of money. If I could go back in time, I would tell myself to spend sixty dollars on literally ANYTHING else. I'm baffled this game made it past the testers, the production staff, and even the press. We were excited about this? I'm never buying a game on launch day again. Perhaps that lesson alone was worth the sixty bucks.

Discussion

0 comments