My biggest problem with the SP storyline is not that it's goofy and unrealistic. It's that they're trying so damn hard to sell it as being realistic. Modern Warfare 2 was parody, so it gets a pass. Red Dawn cared more about the people than global explanations. Bad Company 2's single player was irredeemable trash, but for completely different reasons. If you've seen the adds where they get a Hillary Clinton ringer to make political announcements, reference real world events, and use various live-action shots and footage, it seems like they're trying too hard. Like they saw people whining over MW2 and thought that if they focused a ton of effort on world-building, they could somehow surpass Infinity Ward. I think they should have totally glossed over the details, kept the feeling of some guy, not really aware of the world outside his country, and then, BOOM, devastation and invasion. And as you go through the campaign, you learn about the events leading up to the war. I would go so far as to say they should have kept everything a mystery. Let people speculate about another Russian invasion Red Dawn knock-off, but wake them up when they find out the truth for themselves.SpiderJerusalem said:
Hands-On: Homefront Multiplayer
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
Homefront's campaign had me interested from the beginning (so many interesting games in 2011!), but the multiplayer has caught my attention more so than BFBC2 and CODBO did in previews
Battle Commander seems like a good way to get the team to actually work together to kill the better/best player on the other team (same focus)...or it'll just mean funneling everyone to that player like hamsters into a shredder
Battle Commander seems like a good way to get the team to actually work together to kill the better/best player on the other team (same focus)...or it'll just mean funneling everyone to that player like hamsters into a shredder
I can not wait for this but, I think that similar ideas have been instituted better in other games.
My main worry is that you will reach a wall. You will play, play, play and then you gain the final, fatal star. If you are good enough to get to 5 stars, you are good. When you get 5 stars, the whole team will come after you. This reminds me of an event in Tabula Rasa where you could kill General British. It was well enough intentioned but, what happened was awful. Everyone came. It became impossible to differentiate anything the screen was so filled with avatars, all hoping to get the killing blow. Due to the relatively small player count but, it could be a major pain to be a 5 star. All of the sense of being good would be replaced with a feeling of "Gee, I should be adequate so I do not get the whole team on my ass" This may come to be untrue, I may be just not getting something but this has me worried. Also, I think that Section 8 handled this very well. They had both teams going after missions. If team A was being trounced, the game would try to even the odds by having team A spawn a Commando and ask the rest of Team A help him. Team B would get a message saying that a Commando had spawned and to go and kill it. This would create points of contention and dynamically change the power, allowing the skill of one player to significantly help one player. Also, you would earn money but, everything that you purchased needed to be dropped in but none of your team mates could use them. This meant that you could not get a battle suite in the middle of a battle. You needed to get to safety so your cargo would not be destroyed before you could use it. I am worrying that someone will purchase a jet and blam, everyone is dead. I worry that someone would be able to dominate the other team. It might be that all this comes to nil and it might be that my two concerns cancel themselves out. Over all, I am stocked for this game.
My main worry is that you will reach a wall. You will play, play, play and then you gain the final, fatal star. If you are good enough to get to 5 stars, you are good. When you get 5 stars, the whole team will come after you. This reminds me of an event in Tabula Rasa where you could kill General British. It was well enough intentioned but, what happened was awful. Everyone came. It became impossible to differentiate anything the screen was so filled with avatars, all hoping to get the killing blow. Due to the relatively small player count but, it could be a major pain to be a 5 star. All of the sense of being good would be replaced with a feeling of "Gee, I should be adequate so I do not get the whole team on my ass" This may come to be untrue, I may be just not getting something but this has me worried. Also, I think that Section 8 handled this very well. They had both teams going after missions. If team A was being trounced, the game would try to even the odds by having team A spawn a Commando and ask the rest of Team A help him. Team B would get a message saying that a Commando had spawned and to go and kill it. This would create points of contention and dynamically change the power, allowing the skill of one player to significantly help one player. Also, you would earn money but, everything that you purchased needed to be dropped in but none of your team mates could use them. This meant that you could not get a battle suite in the middle of a battle. You needed to get to safety so your cargo would not be destroyed before you could use it. I am worrying that someone will purchase a jet and blam, everyone is dead. I worry that someone would be able to dominate the other team. It might be that all this comes to nil and it might be that my two concerns cancel themselves out. Over all, I am stocked for this game.
The BP systems sounds similar to Medal of Honor to me where you get in-game points that can be redeemed as offensive or defensive team actions (drones, flak vests, better ammunition, airstrikes, etc).
I really like the team aspect of Battlfield Bad Company MP, as well as the large scale. So Homefront definitely looks interesting suddenly.
I really like the team aspect of Battlfield Bad Company MP, as well as the large scale. So Homefront definitely looks interesting suddenly.
While I'm more excited about the single player, this BP and BC system sounds really interesting. I might just have to spend more time on multiplayer than I thought.
Haha, I very much looking forward to this title. But I need to disagree on the "plausible" setup. It begins very implausibly with South Korea joining North Korea, it would never happen that way. If anything, North Korea would allow itself to be annexed by South Korea, a much more free and economically sound society.Ralen-Sharr said:
The game looks to be awesome though.
At least they aren't picking on the russians this time.John Funk said:
From what I can tell, they took Battlefields game play, mixed it with Black ops's CoD points, Counterstrikes Spending system, and Assassin's Creed's wanted mode. This might just be ingenious.
Well, then either the advertising people didn't get the memo, or they're backpedaling in response to disapproval of their marketing strategy.SpiderJerusalem said:
I've been over this extensively in other threads, but basically, if you take Modern Warfare 2 seriously, you've been trolled. The references to Red Dawn, the utter implausibility of the game, and the stuff going on behind the scenes leads me to believe that they were basically trying to make one big joke. I like to think they facepalmed epically when it was revealed to be the best selling game to date.lolwat?
I'm sorry, did you watch the trailer for Red Dawn [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vu-nJ1zpwPQ]? I fail to see the BS military strategies ham-fistedly delivered as real news, the political underpinnings, etc. etc. I see them focusing on people and their struggle. What you get from the Homefront trailers are all the former, and none of the latter. I have to depend on dramatized Escapist articles for that. If you watch the Homefront trailer [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5yyWZ2Z6Ps], they simultaneously make huge leaps, such as the uniting of North and South Korea, or rising oil prices and the demise of the US economy, but then they try to present it as real and visceral. It's just poorly done.
Now, to your point that I know what the game is about. True, I don't know the exact contents of the game, and I'm sure the single player campaign will have its share of emotion and depth, but they're not selling it very well, or even moderately well. The selling point of this game should be "A Red Dawn you can play and experience, rather than just watch" but from the trailer, their trying to sell it as "This could happen, really happen! Don't you see how real this is?! Doesn't that intrigue you?"