THQ: Homefront Is Not a 71

[CharrHearted]

Maybe when you work on games with a storyline that wasn't written with the waste used from a monkies backside and then dappened onto a wall by a downsyndromic chimpanzee, I would give it a proper rating.

I don't pay 50 pounds for multiplayer THQ, no matter how bad you want it to be, I will only pay for your multiplayer crap if it costed on a scale of 1-20 pounds.


Edit: Homefront is... art? -insert laughed from father grigori-

 

[PrototypeC]

I certainly hope Bilson keeps his job, because THQ is all too happy to axe anyone who doesn't immediately give them monetary return; but beyond that I'm not sure this bothers me at all. 71 seems about right to me. Of course, I feel like every game ever made deserves harsher critics lest the industry become bloated and too easily satisfied (like it currently is).

 

[BoredDragon]

Ya its totally art. All 4 hours of stereotypes, easily predictable plot, and ripping off of Modern Warfare. I'm kidding of coarse about that last one, its not completely like MW. MW had an interesting story.

There's a name for people who dismiss other's opinions as being irrelevant its called:

a tool

 

[BoredDragon]

I certainly hope Bilson keeps his job, because THQ is all too happy to axe anyone who doesn't immediately give them monetary return; but beyond that I'm not sure this bothers me at all. 71 seems about right to me. Of course, I feel like every game ever made deserves harsher critics lest the industry become bloated and too easily satisfied (like it currently is).

Dude, the game was 4 hours long, packed was stereotypes, and the plot they were so proud of was laughably predictable. So don't worry, it actually deserves less than 71.

I was playing Crisis 2 about the same time as Homefront, so its mediocrity was even more obvious when compared to a legitimately fun game.

 

[BoredDragon]

I thought the most interesting character in that game was the Korean Sentry Towers

rofl why did we have to kill them? They were just doing their job D:

 

[Canid117]

THQ let me just say that you are not going to convince people that the game is good by saying "NO! YOU'RE WRONG! IT IS AN AMAZING WORK OF ART!"

 

[BoredDragon]

Another point about the originality; all the crap Korea put the poor americans through, and all those shocking scenes which were deliberately constructed to hit us with the shock&awe stick...

I learned about those things in fifth grade world history. I might even go so far as to say the whole game was -in order- taken from my history book section on the germans in world war 2.

ha, I knew I wasn't the only one who noticed

 

[klasbo]

"You can't apply math to art."

Clearly this must mean that 71 > 100.
Homefront must be the best game ever.

 

[BoredDragon]

Not worthy of note even by the abysmally low standards of video games.

What is this low standards of video games you speak of?

 

[WanderingFool]

I would give Homefront an 80, not great *cough*singleplayer*caugh*, but its still fun MP wise.

It wasn't until you nurfed the online play. Way to go in dumbing it down.

What did they do, exactly?

Probably easiest way to put it...
Prepatch - Like Call of Duty in hardcore mode
Postpatch - Like regular Call of Duty

Originally, people would die after a few bullets, but a lot of people complained. They nurfed the snipers (which were overpowered anyway), but they did something else that nurfed the rest of the guns. Not sure if it is lower damage or increased player health or what, but it isn't like it was prepatch.

Well, that explains why a supposed .50 sniper cant kill in one chest shot...

 

[PrototypeC]

Dude, the game was 4 hours long, packed was stereotypes, and the plot they were so proud of was laughably predictable. So don't worry, it actually deserves less than 71. I was playing Crisis 2 about the same time as Homefront, so its mediocrity was even more obvious when compared to a legitimately fun game.

I don't really care about Homefront. I was just trying to stay nice so people wouldn't hound me for my opinion, or this thread turn into cheap shots at the game. To be fair, I don't like Crysis 2 either.

<spoiler=If you like the game dont let anyone tell you otherwise to sabotage your fun but here's my opinion>No, I don't think the game is all that good, and they couldn't see Art with a telescope. They can say what they like about the message, but if they truly believe that North Korea is "terrifyingly close" to not only trying, but actually succeeding at invading the U.S., then they're reading too many Cold War-era novels and not watching enough World News. Somehow the common citizen or soldier in the U.S. is also a natural hero with a heart of gold.

Reality is terrifying enough without trying to convince me that everyone from North Korea hates me personally and that they love making piles of dead bodies.

 

[duchaked]

oookay...get over it THQ lol
and yes, Homefront has a pretty darn good story and premise that gets it in conversation (not THQ mind you, I actually forgot who made/published the game)

but as for the review score...based on the gameplay it IS just average. very average
like Call of Duty except some control issues (bumping into teammates/getting stuck on 'em) really got annoying
but the whole not being a super soldier and fighting as a resistance...that felt good, real good. even small stuff like remote controlling the Goliath (much to my surprise) and launching grenades at soldiers under the Golden Gate Bridge from a helicopter (after meeting up with actual US Soldiers...that was a thrilling sight until the choppas all got shot down) were delightfully fun

 

[Captain Pirate]

The campaign was laughably shite. But the thing was, it was dressed in a big boy's clothing.
If it was blatantly just very bad that would've been better than what it is; which is something desperately trying to be good and failing, yet still bigging itself up as good.

They got everyone talking about it, sure: One of my friends bought it, and we've all been borrowing it off him to see how awful the campaign is, because we can't do MP: Very 'smartly' of THQ you need a one-off code to play multiplayer... Nice one. The supposed one relatively good part of the game, and I can't even play it tp testify it.

If everyone's talking about how bad it was, it's not like we'll give the sequel a chance unless the reviewers give it a good %90 or over.
Numbers, strangely enough, do give a good insight into the general opinion of a game. 8-10 is usually great-excellent.

Also:

I love the juxtaposition of "Our goal is always to get a perfect score" and "You can't apply math to art." Numbers aren't important at all! Unless you give us GOOD numbers, that is. Then they're the only thing that matters.

This made me lol. Too true.

 

[Frankster]

I actually agree with Danny, homefront is NOT a 7.

It's more of a 5 if we were to go back to a time when we used the full 1-10 rating.

Numbers, strangely enough, do give a good insight into the general opinion of a game. 8-10 is usually great-excellent.

Disagree with thee, 8-10 nowadays just means the game is Flavor of the month or trendy.

 

[Muco5681]

while i agree with ''can't apply math to art'' homefront is NOT! art its a 5 hr on rail shooter with the same old chest high wall and 7 different shade of brown shooter that every other game is now a day and honestly i like it has gotten such low score to me that shows the people are finally getting fed up with fat space marines and MW clones and would like something new so to me it looks like THQ whines about the cash cow has run out of milk and now they gotta be a little innovative

 

[joshthor]

he is right... it should be a 60. i beat it, i played the multiplayer. it wasnt great, it had a lot of bugs, it felt rushed and the story seemed cut short.

 

[Thunderhorse31]

I don't give places like metacritic much consideration but from the reviews I've read Homefront is hardly stellar material.

So wait, you don't give Metacritic (a collection of reviews) consideration, but you do give it to a few random reviews? Reviews that are most likely also on Metacritic?

Alrighty then.

Anyway, I love the angle of Bilson's story.

"The numbers don't matter... but in case you're wondering we sold a million copies. Because of marketing."

XD

 

[KarmicToast]

I only agree with one thing: Homefront is NOT a 71. It's like a 50. Firstly, they didn't ship enough of the promised preorder items to Best Buy, so even though my sotre had 30 preorders, there was only ONE headset. Then, after beating single player in 4.5 hours, for 10 days I only got multiplayer working one time out of hundreds of attempts. The overarching story of single-player was cool, but the incidentals were trite. I wanted to know more about the macro universe, but the only way to know more other than watching the opening cutscene (which was available free on youtube 3 months before release) was to find newspapers scattered around. Look, without looking super intently but still looking I found 12! WTF, like I'm going to go back and re-play your 4.5 hour game 8 times to flesh out your story. Ugh. Homefront FTL

 

[Korzack]

Well, TBH, if they didn't want such a "Meh, it's okay" review, then maybe they should've tried a little bloody harder to make a better game, eh?

 

[RUINER ACTUAL]

I love the juxtaposition of "Our goal is always to get a perfect score" and "You can't apply math to art." Numbers aren't important at all! Unless you give us GOOD numbers, that is. Then they're the only thing that matters.

Duh. lol. These CEOs (or whoever)for these game companies should just stop talking. "You can't apply math to art" is an absurd statement in the first place. Homefront is lucky to have sold that much and be a 71. I would give it a 5/10, the length of its campaign in hours. That game did not live up to anything the devs were talking about.