A FPS set in the present with a twist on the current political landscape of the world. In the Homefront world, Kim Jung Il is dead, but his son reunited Korea, invited other Asian countries to join in one massive empire, conquered Japan, modified abandoned cargo ships into troop ships, and successfully invaded and conquered the U.S.
You play a combat pilot who is about to be taken away by the "Norks" (think about it) when you're saved by the resistance. This opening scene is brutal. It's right out of Red Dawn, only more graphic. Yes, it's a game, but I'll bet more gamers than not get a little bit revved up to kick ass.
The game play from there is standard FPS stuff with several little mini-games thrown in for variety. It's also very linear, which is one of the reasons this game got a bad rap. VERY linear. But you know what? In my eyes, that's ok because it's fun, and it tells a good story.
If you're wondering, the other reason is because it's short. There can't be more than 3-4 hours of game play in the single player campaign.
It means more towards "real" than other shooters in that cover is really important, actual battlefield tactics are used, you fight with a group ALL the time, you can only carry two weapons, and ammo is hard to come by for any specific model.
I'd set this alongside Metro 2033 (and if you haven't played that, I hate you) in terms of crafting a world that you'll want to spend more time in and learn more about it.
Honestly, for FPS fans, and Red Dawn fans, this is an absolute must buy, especially when it's $5 in a Steam sale.
Get it. (Again, wait until it's $5 on Steam.)
By the way, Homefront 2 is confirmed, and this time Crytek is helping to make it.
Edited By Leisher on 1329594014
Homefront - PC
Homefront - PC
Just finished this and came here to confirm it was short. It is, very short. I got it in a bundle or something.
As far as realism. . . meh. I was taking a beating and not dying. But cover is important. Also, friendly fire is off as I shot my own guys a couple of times with no ill effect. They didn't react to it at all. It was fun though. I put it close to fighting the 'human troops' in Half Life. They were smart, used cover, etc. Fun shooter, I think. I would play HF2.
As far as realism. . . meh. I was taking a beating and not dying. But cover is important. Also, friendly fire is off as I shot my own guys a couple of times with no ill effect. They didn't react to it at all. It was fun though. I put it close to fighting the 'human troops' in Half Life. They were smart, used cover, etc. Fun shooter, I think. I would play HF2.
Homefront - PC
I mean, any FPS has your guy able to heal from bullets, fire, explosions, etc. in seconds, so realism is always graded on a curve.
Homefront: The Revolution is the sequel and if you enjoyed this one, you'll enjoy that one.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
Homefront - PC
Realism I missed (or didn't notice):
Holding your breath while aiming.
More recoil. There wasn't much.
Running and reloading. You could do that.
Jumping off of a ladder. You couldn't. It seemed once you committed to the ladder, you were on it. However, it seemed like it stopped all the enemies while you were on it.
You healed a bit too fast. Allowed me to be more careless.
This is NOT meant to be harsh criticism of the game. Just a counter point to your realism point. Could also be summed up as "Meh, I've seen realer. But I have seen MUCH less real." I'd put it at about a 7 out of 10 realism. With 10 being completely real and not very playable because bullets hurt and kill in real life. You have to be able to be shot in order for an FPS to be playable. I would say the most real I've seen would be a 9 in Insurgency. You could only take 1-3 rounds depending on where they landed. Recoil felt real. Breathing and aiming. Etc. So, this game was above average in realism. In my opinion.
Holding your breath while aiming.
More recoil. There wasn't much.
Running and reloading. You could do that.
Jumping off of a ladder. You couldn't. It seemed once you committed to the ladder, you were on it. However, it seemed like it stopped all the enemies while you were on it.
You healed a bit too fast. Allowed me to be more careless.
This is NOT meant to be harsh criticism of the game. Just a counter point to your realism point. Could also be summed up as "Meh, I've seen realer. But I have seen MUCH less real." I'd put it at about a 7 out of 10 realism. With 10 being completely real and not very playable because bullets hurt and kill in real life. You have to be able to be shot in order for an FPS to be playable. I would say the most real I've seen would be a 9 in Insurgency. You could only take 1-3 rounds depending on where they landed. Recoil felt real. Breathing and aiming. Etc. So, this game was above average in realism. In my opinion.
Homefront - PC
Oh, I get your points. Some of that stuff is tough because are you programming your game to be fun or realistic? Sometimes trade offs need to be made.
I mean, how much fun would a story driven FPS be if one hit could kill you and you had to start back at lvl 1 as a new character? I suppose it would have some appeal, but probably not a ton. I'll bet you'd get a lot of sales, but the number of people who beat the game would be almost nil. The experience just isn't there yet to make it that realistic. With VR, we're getting closer.
By the way, the FPS where one shot kills you is a million dollar idea. Even if you only created one level and grew from there. If anyone makes it please save me from my 9-5 job and take me with you.
I mean, how much fun would a story driven FPS be if one hit could kill you and you had to start back at lvl 1 as a new character? I suppose it would have some appeal, but probably not a ton. I'll bet you'd get a lot of sales, but the number of people who beat the game would be almost nil. The experience just isn't there yet to make it that realistic. With VR, we're getting closer.
By the way, the FPS where one shot kills you is a million dollar idea. Even if you only created one level and grew from there. If anyone makes it please save me from my 9-5 job and take me with you.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
Homefront - PC
That's why I said 10 is not very playable. . .
But then, rogue style RPGs do well.
It would have to be short, with lots of replay options. Kind of like FTL. Short game, but lots of ships, enemies, situations to play though.
I have ideas. . . but that's for another thread.
But then, rogue style RPGs do well.
It would have to be short, with lots of replay options. Kind of like FTL. Short game, but lots of ships, enemies, situations to play though.
I have ideas. . . but that's for another thread.
Homefront - PC
They do, but they cheat and/or are limited.
This is indeed a discussion for elsewhere.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”