This topic is locked from further discussion.
I just finished it and the game was a very generous 5 hours ( I mean generous) and it was terrible. Graphics felt like gen 1 xbox 360 at best and the story was nothing special at all. I was so excited for this game and now I am just disappointed. I can't believe I wasted my money. I hope the Multi at least is half decent when people are on the servers. Save your money. ehacalaI'm sure that's not 100% true, but even if it is close, I can't say I expected anything to the contrary.
For the life of me I cant see how anyone could get suckered into buying this game. It looked like crap from the get go
Ouch. I dont understand the meeting where all game developers decided that a 5 hour long campaign would be the new standard for gaming. I was hoping for this game to at least be a decent length. Multiplayer on the other hand looks to me like: "Oh, another Console online FPS"
Well at least I can save my money on something like...Gobstoppers, or Motor Oil. Maybe some q-tips and a pack of Oscar Meyer Bologna.
they're probably hoping the multi will save it like cod, but they don't have cod's track record and installed fanbaseAJC3317lol I doubt anyone thought as much. The problem is publishers are afraid to release a FPS without multiplayer these days, the general idea seems to be that people will pass on a game because it doesn't have MP. Now while I'm sure there are few facepalm worthy people out there, who will say they wont buy a game because it lacks MP, even though they had no intention to stop playing Halo and play said games MP. I don't think its enough to justify the fear, that a MP-less game is being sent to die. Personally I would have liked to see this game take the Bioshock approach, focus solely on a single player experience. It didn't sell that well, but I give THQ credit for supporting a game like Metro 2033.
Yeah, this is a good example of a mediocre FPS shooter. It's just an FPS that can't compete with the others.For the life of me I cant see how anyone could get suckered into buying this game. It looked like crap from the get go
netswisha16
For the life of me I cant see how anyone could get suckered into buying this game. It looked like crap from the get go
netswisha16
Watched a few videos on youtube, have to say it's probably as bad as Haze.
Most games have 5 hour SP why should this one be different? Most people are buying it for the multiplayer anyway just like with the Call of duty gameswretch0101Ahh, the level 1 with the voice of reason. If this was COD MW3 you'd all be stoked to hear it had a five hour story. But no, a game is different therefore it sucks. My gosh. This is why activision gets away with 3 maps for $15. They have no competition cause gamers ignore everythin that doesn't have COD on the box. I can't believe people are saying this game is generic when it clearly is different than whats been put out by EA and Activision.
[QUOTE="wretch0101"]Most games have 5 hour SP why should this one be different? Most people are buying it for the multiplayer anyway just like with the Call of duty gamesfirefox59Ahh, the level 1 with the voice of reason. If this was COD MW3 you'd all be stoked to hear it had a five hour story. But no, a game is different therefore it sucks. My gosh. This is why activision gets away with 3 maps for $15. They have no competition cause gamers ignore everythin that doesn't have COD on the box. I can't believe people are saying this game is generic when it clearly is different than whats been put out by EA and Activision.
Start a post... I dare ya. Your not going to change the face of the earth on call of duty
HF looked like it had promise but the more I read about it more it gets pushed into the 'not buying' pile. Too many most awesome games out there this year that I just don't want to waste my time with this. :(
Not suprized it looked like they took that level from modern warefare 2 and made a whole game out of it.
Ahh, the level 1 with the voice of reason. If this was COD MW3 you'd all be stoked to hear it had a five hour story. But no, a game is different therefore it sucks. My gosh. This is why activision gets away with 3 maps for $15. They have no competition cause gamers ignore everythin that doesn't have COD on the box. I can't believe people are saying this game is generic when it clearly is different than whats been put out by EA and Activision.[QUOTE="firefox59"][QUOTE="wretch0101"]Most games have 5 hour SP why should this one be different? Most people are buying it for the multiplayer anyway just like with the Call of duty gamesxgiantnomadx
Start a post... I dare ya. Your not going to change the face of the earth on call of duty
I....wuh?.....Huh?i love how everyone is hating on the 5 hrs... lol SADLY isn't every shooter now days 5hrs lol. wish devs would fix this but w/e as long as MP is good and tide me over month-few months i'm happyk2theswissI wasn't as upset about the 5 hours as I was with the quality of that 5 hours. I agree multiplayer may save this game (I highly doubt given the quality of the SP and the shear opportunity that has been lost in making a game based o this story - Red Dawn). The story really wasn't a story as there were no character development and I didn't care about the guy you play. Such a wasted opportunity for a GREAT 5 hours. Sadly I am now left hoping the quality has been put into the MP, but given the effort displayed on SP I wouldn't hold my breath. So in summary I am not overly sad about the duration (although this felt a VERY quick 5 hrs). The opportunity lost on this game that has been touted as a 'story driven' FPS is lacking the 'story'. That said it is a FPS so they get half marks ;o)
While I personally thought the game looked interesting, after reading all this feedback I'm not as keen on buying it. I have it on pre-order :shock:
Played it through Sper. Loved it. One thing I felt absolutely needed to be done was the Music had to be completely turned off. They did a fantastic job on creating a different alternate America but the music kills the atmosphere. I would rather have several hours of excellent gameplay then a time waster with some action thrown in here and there.
As far as Multiplayer, look on youtube @ HomeFront 18-2. Tell me that doesn't look dope. Can't wait to be back on dedicated servers and away from p2p playing. Hit detection is off the charts, map design looks incredible, BP system look sweet. I am really surprised this game is getting so much negative attention in here.
the only reason i was interested in this game was for the story because the multiplayer looked pretty average
the way they have been advertising the game has been all centered around the story, so i was expecting something pretty special from the singleplayer, something pretty long and heavily focused around the story instead of a more action orientated game like most FPS are,
guess i was totally wrong, oh well, just one more game that i dont have to bother buying till it hits the bargain bin
I have the game on pre-order and I'm still looking forward to playing it, even with all the negative comments. The fact that the single player is 5 hours doesn't really bother me. It's pretty much the same for all FPS's (as many others have already said). Call of Duty, Battlefield Bad Company, Medal of Honor and so on, are all relatively short single player experiences. However I feel that it doesn't matter whether the single player campaign takes 5 hours or 50 hours to complete, as long as its a enjoyable and worthwhile experience the amount of time it takes to finish is irrelevant. Fingers crossed it makes the most of its 5 hour play time with an interesting story, characters and enviroment.
And yet, here's another opinion...Me and my friends picked this up at midnight release (to be honest, we are just desperate for something to tide us over till Battlefield 3), and I have to say I am pleased. I'm only 2 missions into the campaign, and 16 levels into the multiplayer, and I have to say it hasn't been bad overall.
Controls are good, they are you basic call of duty controls in every way pretty much, but the movement and aiming feels somehow much heavier, but that's not bad, it gives this feeling like your actually aiming a weighty gun, and the shooting itself is still controllable, with just a little flavor of realistic kickback (nothing like Bad Company 2 though). Other than that like mentioned, animations are pretty smooth and fluid, and the graphics are definitely acceptable.
The single-player is definitely scripted and linear (i.e. in the vein of Black ops with its 5/5) but with a nice quirk, which is environment. It has a very real and immersive back-story, and that transfers well over to the actual environments themselves. While I would have liked to see some Bad Company 2 ****destruction (it really should be a standard by now), this game is solid in what it does. It tells a decent story, nothing too new if you watched Red Dawn(which you should) but its fun. Also little human touches are nice, like the effect on the children etc. But overall, a little bit too much on the set pieces like said in the review.
The multiplayer is however a very fun and engaging experience. My friends and I troubled to describe our feelings about it easily, but to make things simple (and violate copyright laws) this game really does feel and play out like a Call of Battlefield: Company ops 2. You have the fast paced game-play of Call of Duty, mixed with the strategic necessity of Battlefield. While it doesn't shine like a +5 Shiny Chrome Beast in either aspect, it does blend them nicely, and gives an equal meaning to each of the two. Like mentioned the shining aspect of the multiplayer is definitely the battle-points, the in-game currency that really adds a beautiful variety and flow to the often chaotic battles you'll have in this game. Everything from the enemy spotting UAV (which can actually easily turn the tables of a battle, more people need to use these things ASAP), to punishing predator air-strikes, to god-hand tanks and helicopters, really brings its own flavor and usefulness into a battle. Never does it feel like I've wasted battle-points on something. While maybe not as effective as we'd wished, the land based gun UV (christened the WALL-E by my comrades) definitely captures a silly little part of my heart. Other than that, the ability to switch tactics on the fly, i.e. the ability to call in a flying drone when enemies camp rooftops, or the ability to whip out a rocket launcher when you just have to lay down the hammer of Thor on Happy Gilmore and his tank, just make combat damn fun. Alternatively, you don't really get the feeling like you have no options, there is always something a little bit of thinking and some battle-points can come up with to deal with the current situation (Can't say as much for some matches in CoD).
Overall, great fun. Definitely not for some however, but if you are of the desire to finally break free of the silly limitations of the CoD series, by all means, give this one a try, it may just help influence you to make the right decision when it comes to which military shooter to buy towards the end of the year. (*cough* Battlefield 3 *cough*) By all means the review is good and a 3/5 isn't an undeserved score, just don't let that little numerical difference completely dissuade you from the game, it has great potential.
For the life of me I cant see how anyone could get suckered into buying this game. It looked like crap from the get go
netswisha16
Agreed, especially since the developer also made Frontlines which was god aweful.
For the life of me I cant see how anyone could get suckered into buying this game. It looked like crap from the get go
netswisha16
I agree wholeheartedly and support this statement 110%! The same people that call out Black Ops for being a broken bad game buy this garbage, LOL!
I think what people are hating is the idea of America getting taken over by Korea, Russia or whom ever. OR they're obsessed with COD and don't want their friends leaving Black Opts for any game. .wretch0101its much more about fanboyism than the us getting invaded
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment