Homefront Dev Will Make Sequel's Campaign Longer if Fans Want It

[Logan Westbrook]

Homefront Dev Will Make Sequel's Campaign Longer if Fans Want It

The focus was on Homefront's multiplayer, admits Kaos Studios' general manager.

Homefront developer Kaos Studios says that it if enough fans complain about the length of the game's single player campaign, it will make sure that it was longer in the sequel. Kaos' general manager David Votypka said there had to be a balance between single and multiplayer, but that it was a balance that could be tweaked.

The short length of the Homefront's single player mode has been noted by a number of reviewers, and Votypka admitted that Kaos' focus was on the game's multiplayer, which was where the bulk of the games replayability would come from. He said that the studio would look to add a few more hours to the sequel, but that at the same time, it didn't want the multiplayer to suffer, so it had to be careful about how it allocated its resources. The most important thing, in Votypka's mind anyway, was not the exact length of the single player game, but that players had enjoyed it and felt that it had been enough.

It seems that it's hard to gauge whether Homefront's campaign really is too short, or whether people just expected more of it. Kaos pulled in Hollywood screenwriters, former CIA agents, and novelists to consult on the game, and with so much emphasis based on its premise and timeline, it's a little strange that the game spends so little time telling us its story. Nevertheless, if people really do feel strongly about it, they'll make their dissatisfaction clear.

Source: CVG [http://www.computerandvideogames.com/293803/homefront-2-campaign-will-be-longer-if-fans-complain-kaos/?cid=OTC-RSS&attr=CVG-News-RSS]


Permalink

 

[ZaxqZombie]

is there a way to tell them we like it? CAUSE I WANT ONE!!!!

 

[joeman098]

im so tired of the focus on multi player

 

[Natdaprat]

This is a shame. I thought homefront could have a meaningful story in a good setting, yet it failed. At least we still have Battlefield 3's story to be hopeful about.

 

[Trogdor1138]

I say that if people expected more from it, then it IS too short. The way this game was marketed I was expecting an involved campaign and to get invested in the characters. Sadly this was not the case. Unless the sequel has a zombie mode, I don't see how it will sell any better.

Pretty much this, I normally don't judge a game on the length like this, but I was hoping for Homefront to be twice as long, if not longer. Multiplayer is irrelevant to me personally, I was interested because it sounded like it could break some ground and deliver a great vision if handled right. I'm still looking forward to playing it, but I was never too fussed over it in the first place.

 

[TilMorrow]

I think it would be obvious that people wanted a longer campaign and I'm wondering how they plan on sequeling up the game. I thought

Spoiler

the golden gate bridge was captured, rebels cheered and rainbows were falling from the sky at the end of the game

.

 

[qbanknight]

Crime shame that probably no one will play the damn game thanks to the poor marketing and poor word of mouth

 

[The Cheezy One]

Homefront: London! You promised [http://www.computerandvideogames.com/252765/news/homefront-london-planned-by-thq/]!

 

[kane.malakos]

This is a shame. I thought homefront could have a meaningful story in a good setting, yet it failed. At least we still have Battlefield 3's story to be hopeful about.

I wouldn't get your hopes too high. The single player mode looks pretty good but the Battlefield series has always been more about multiplayer. Battlefield 2 didn't even have a single player campaign.

 

[Baresark]

I have an even better idea. Rather than sinking all the money and development time into a sequel we won't get because your studio is moving to Montreal, you should take the time and current assets and expand the campaign with DLC.... wait for it.... But make the first one free! If you can add another 3 hours onto the campaign for the current cost of the game with current assets, then people will buy the game. And if you release this within the next 4-6 months (before the price drops), then you can sell more copies at full price. Then, when your game is a success and gamers everywhere love you to death because you fixed a problem with your game (something some companies can't bring themselves to do), create more expansions. Multiplayer maps, perhaps further extended campaign ad-ons. The sky is literally the limit.

At the same time, you don't need to worry about trying to update the multiplayer. You can keep what you have now, and still pull what you need to pull with some hard work. And I know hard work is a dirty word for some companies, but really, what is your job worth?

Also, while your working on that, you can squash some of the few deficiencies with the multiplayer that aren't core problems.

Or, at very least, release the development kit before you die so the community can fix your game.

Edit: Also, I can immediately see where you could expand the content to.... like the other side of the Golden Gate Bridge. Why does it end there? Isn't there... I don't know.... a whole city on the other side of that bridge or something? A city that is more than likely occupied by enemy forces?

Edit2: How can you say the multiplayer was your focus when the whole ad campaign was about trying to convince people about the validity of your game plot. I'm calling SHENANIGANS and CHICANERY.

 

[Wolfram23]

Then maybe they shouldn't charge the full $60 for it, huh? Christ, gaming is in desperate need of competitive pricing. Their "pact" to sell new games at $60 (in NA) is borderline monopoly or something.

 

[googleback]

Homefront: London! You promised [http://www.computerandvideogames.com/252765/news/homefront-london-planned-by-thq/]!

they say its "global"? say WHAT? are the Koreans invading EVERYONE? IS NOBODY SAFE!?

 

[TitanAtlas]

Something should teach Kaos Studios how to make a game in the first place.

For starters the ending was not that good... patriotic, yes, but good, no...

This reminds me of that review in wich people finished the game in 5 hours, and the studio director got really scared and stated that those people were "professionals" FPS "gamers".

Im a avarage gamer, and i finished the game in 3 hours... i even left the game on while i took my pauses (to eat, or go to the bathroom), and still... 3 hours... guess that if those guys that took 5 hours were "pros", then i guess im a gaming god....

wich i aint...

 

[googleback]

This is a shame. I thought homefront could have a meaningful story in a good setting, yet it failed. At least we still have Battlefield 3's story to be hopeful about.

I wouldn't get your hopes too high. The single player mode looks pretty good but the Battlefield series has always been more about multiplayer. Battlefield 2 didn't even have a single player campaign.

I think Medal of honor had a pretty good campaign, but far too short, if they make something longer and with more of a plot then it should turn our very well! but i'm not going to get my hopes up.

 

[GeorgW]

3 problems.
1: Everybody has already complained, it's too short!
2: Length isn't everything, it has to be good as well!
3: Who says you're getting a sequel?

 

[Wicky_42]

Kaos pulled in Hollywood screenwriters, former CIA agents, and novelists to consult on the game, and with so much emphasis based on its premise and timeline, it's a little strange that the game spends so little time telling us its story.

That's what I thought when it came out. Might have bought it if they'd actually gone to town with the single player, but they just played 'follow the leader' with the market's big name and went with a generic multiplayer with a couple of new gimmicks. That a good games does not make.

 

[Dired]

But isn't the most important thing about multiplayer having a lot of, well, players? If you have a small install base, the quality of your multiplayer won't matter. So it sounds like they relied on hype and controversy to move a lot of boxes to create a platform for the part they actually cared about - multiplayer, yet now are shocked, shocked that people are upset that that hype was overblown and caused the lousy reviews it's garnered.

These are professionals?