Homefront

 PC
User Score
5.6

Mixed or average reviews- based on 660 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 176 out of 660
  2. Mixed: 277 out of 660
  3. Negative: 207 out of 660
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. grandpajoe6191
    Nov 8, 2011
    0
    LOL. This game's terrible. It doesn't even open in my computer...
  2. Firemom
    Mar 18, 2011
    4
    f you love bugs, lags, low fps. Stupid scripts, 2006 year's graphic. Parodies on Call of duty. it is game for you! One plus! PR was good./
    This game has 7 Levels in campaign. i completed this game for 2 hours. Multiplayer is not bad but not very good. This game not worth ur money. Save your money for anything else
  3. HolyFish
    Mar 19, 2011
    1
    I'll admit that they had me going with their storyline in the previews and the early trailers. io thought i was going to get a 40hr. multipath singleplayer but i was very wrong. just over 3 hrs of singleplayer and that's all you get. do yourself a favor and play a game with a longer, harder singleplayer like BLACK
  4. TheDemonFrog666
    Mar 15, 2011
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. At first, I was really excited about this game. It appeared to have an amazing plotline, and interesting multiplayer. The idea of "war isn't fun or pretty" was what really hooked me on it. I downloaded it from Steam and at once had an issue: no sound. I eventually found a fix that required editing a game .ini file. Games should not be released with these types of bugs... Anyways, after fixing the sound, I started the campaign. It looked interesting at first. At the beginning, a kid watches his parents die by firing squad right in front of his eyes. I thought the game was going to be filled with these gut-wrenching, emotional moments... I was wrong. The game is almost an exact clone of Call Of Duty. The game is constant action with things exploding all around you and countless numbers of enemies coming at you from all directions. The so-called "emotional" aspect is either totally screwed up at times, or non-existent at others. The only reason I give this game a 5 is because of the multiplayer. I'd give it a six if the multiplayer wasn't EXACTLY like CoD. A note to developers out there: STOP MAKING CALL OF DUTY GAMES AND CALL OF DUTY CLONES. After you make the exact same game SEVEN times it's not fun anymore, I promise.… Expand
  5. Blitztm
    Mar 16, 2011
    10
    Homefront is a game that pretty much lived up to the limited marketing hype it got. When the developers were talking about creating an experience where you feel that war is horrible they do just that. The musical score adds to that and gets you in the mood. For example, in situations in the campaign that demand you to be on top of your gain, the music follows suit. Multiplayer takesHomefront is a game that pretty much lived up to the limited marketing hype it got. When the developers were talking about creating an experience where you feel that war is horrible they do just that. The musical score adds to that and gets you in the mood. For example, in situations in the campaign that demand you to be on top of your gain, the music follows suit. Multiplayer takes aspects from the CoD series and BF series and melds them together to get a fast-placed unlaggy experience in which the field changes dynamically. The game itself is not a AAA game, but an AA game. Hopefully DLC for it comes to expand the campaign.… Expand
  6. M13
    Mar 17, 2011
    9
    Multiplayer is unique and fun. Single player is great but too short. All in all a solid game. And I'm sure that some of the flaws people are talking about will be patched soon enough.
  7. thr4sher
    Mar 17, 2011
    4
    I had been waiting for HOMEFRONT for years. I was so excited to finally play it after years of delays. The game had a lot of potential. It had a good story, and good characters. The problem is the game was annoyingly short! I beat the game in one sitting. The Multiplayer isnt bad, but it feels like a mix of Battlefield and CoD... nothing really original going on. My main complaint is thatI had been waiting for HOMEFRONT for years. I was so excited to finally play it after years of delays. The game had a lot of potential. It had a good story, and good characters. The problem is the game was annoyingly short! I beat the game in one sitting. The Multiplayer isnt bad, but it feels like a mix of Battlefield and CoD... nothing really original going on. My main complaint is that the game was just too damn short. After all the hype, the game was a major disappointment. Worth playing I guess, but wait until it goes on sale. I wouldnt suggest paying over $30 for it.… Expand
  8. SPG
    Mar 20, 2011
    10
    Only tried the single player for 1 level, then decided to give the multiplayer ago. OMG how much fun is this game online, reminds me a little of RTCW fairly fast and frantic could do with a few more game types but i am sure that will come. Its another port (like most titles) but considering its only been out 2 days in europe its running really really well, a few memory leaks here andOnly tried the single player for 1 level, then decided to give the multiplayer ago. OMG how much fun is this game online, reminds me a little of RTCW fairly fast and frantic could do with a few more game types but i am sure that will come. Its another port (like most titles) but considering its only been out 2 days in europe its running really really well, a few memory leaks here and there but i am sure it will get fixed.

    I think the critics have been overally harsh, maybe THQ doesn't have the cash to sweeten them up as much as EA & Activision for there so called triple A titles.

    The new battle commander and vehicle system is a nice twist as well. It was £22 this weekend on D2D ok graphically its ok, nothing ground breaking but it fits the game. Sounds are fun. This is how a PC port should be done. A great little underestimated title.    … Expand
  9. klopow
    Mar 18, 2011
    3
    This is a quick review of the game Homefront for the Xbox 360. I bought this game anticipating a short, but epic single player game, which would inspire me to try the multiplayer afterwards. The single player game is so bad that after the 4th chapter I had to put the game back in the box and got it ready to trade-in. The frames per second are terrible, choppy graphics that look likeThis is a quick review of the game Homefront for the Xbox 360. I bought this game anticipating a short, but epic single player game, which would inspire me to try the multiplayer afterwards. The single player game is so bad that after the 4th chapter I had to put the game back in the box and got it ready to trade-in. The frames per second are terrible, choppy graphics that look like they were done in the previous decade. I don't understand how anybody would like this game, even with the theme being "original" - it's completely ridiculous, outlandish, and shows how the developers were trying to evoke patriotic feelings. Game sucks, dudes. Buy a different one, trust me!… Expand
  10. jb0nez
    Mar 16, 2011
    4
    What a waste of money. Total disappointment. Mediocre graphics, low poly models, TERRIBLE animations, gun sounds all the same, plays just like a 5 year old console game. Cmon, we're in 2011 now folks get with the times.
    I will never, ever pre-order a game again.
  11. Kittymonk4
    Mar 22, 2011
    3
    I can not begin to describe how disappointed I am in this game. I chose to get this over Shogun 2:Total War, to try something new, and I completely regret it. The premise is very good and has lots of potential, but honestly the game is just too boring, no matter how many huge explosions and civilian murders I see. The trailer was better done than this console-port of a game.
  12. pro7otype
    Mar 22, 2011
    3
    Review covers multiplayer only: Some great ideas, but the execution is terribly flawed. Aimbotters from day 1 ruining the multiplayer experience combined with a less than polished game leaves me rather bored and going back to my staple BC2 and MW2.
  13. XanderStrike
    Mar 16, 2011
    10
    I buy games for the story, and boy did this game claim to have a story. As a huge fan of Apocalypse Now, I had high hopes for this new title from Kaos (whose Modern Combat mod I enjoyed for months when I was taking my first steps into the still-new world of FPS). I read and watched everything I could find on this game in the days before it's release with great anticipation, assuming that aI buy games for the story, and boy did this game claim to have a story. As a huge fan of Apocalypse Now, I had high hopes for this new title from Kaos (whose Modern Combat mod I enjoyed for months when I was taking my first steps into the still-new world of FPS). I read and watched everything I could find on this game in the days before it's release with great anticipation, assuming that a game built on such a strong story foundation was destined for greatness. However, my assumptions quickly proved to be false.

    Really, really quickly, to be honest. It only took me a just shy of four hours to beat the single player on regular. Apocalypse Now: Redux clocks in at 3:14:59. It actually took longer to download it than it did to complete. Needless to say I was very disappointed. The characters are shallow and a lot of the heart wrenching drama we were supposed to see ended up just being shock value. Outside of a few other gameplay annoyances, though, I did find the game to be pretty fun, with enjoyable missions and some very cool sets. I'm just hoping they don't expect me to actually pay for DLCs with more single player content, they've already ripped me off enough.

    A lot of reviews praise the multiplayer as this game's savior. This is what's wrong with the FPS genre in general, but I won't go into it here. The online experience is good, dedicated servers are a definite plus. There are a few nice innovations, but overall it feels like a scaled-down Battlefield game (which makes sense, considering the developer), and looks like any of the recent CODs. Though it quickly gets old if you've played much of either. Honestly the only thing that saved it for me was the Steam version came with Metro 2033.

    Final thought:
    Save yourself 50 bucks and just borrow the game from a friend (you'll only need it for a day).    … Expand
  14. texsov
    Mar 20, 2011
    1
    Yet another installment of an FPS game that slaps it together quickly, promises the world, and delivers a bill. Alot like the latest MoH and I expect its support will be dropped just as fast. A four hour single player???Really?? All this talk of a great storyline and it being penned by John Milius, what a gimmick seems more likely that he wrote a paragraph on a napkin and these monkeysYet another installment of an FPS game that slaps it together quickly, promises the world, and delivers a bill. Alot like the latest MoH and I expect its support will be dropped just as fast. A four hour single player???Really?? All this talk of a great storyline and it being penned by John Milius, what a gimmick seems more likely that he wrote a paragraph on a napkin and these monkeys tried to turn it into a game. There was also alot of talk about how the vehicle controls are going to be with beginner, intermediate, and ace settings. Novel idea except when you can somehow throw away all decent helicopter physics, last time I checked choppers didn't have a forward and reverse gear as well as an up and down. Not to mention the rudder and strafe are mixed up and the tilt of the helicopter has literally nothing to do with movement. Gotta love it when they can take a vehicle that operates off a stick, and consolize so much that its completely useless to use a stick. Seems as if Kaos failed physics class as there is no decent physics work to be seen. Multiplayer is pretty generic nothing groundbreaking except the amount of invisible walls or the fact the server browser is one of the worst I've ever had the displeasure to use. Nothing like joining a server with 24 people only to find out the server is actually empty. These high reviews seem to come from the ones who will buy whatever comes out next because its put in-front of them, with no real expectations of improvement. I wanted this game to be great but sad to say it wasn't even close to what was hyped. Maybe buy it if its under $5 buy it, but then again you'd get more out of the dollar menu.… Expand
  15. sup299
    Mar 20, 2011
    10
    I was drawn in by the many trailers and the buzz around the game, thinking the single player would be a huge success; maybe a 20 hour campaign with a good storyline, but I was wrong about the single player campaign. It took only 3 and a half hours to complete, the story was very linear, and the AI was flawed. But what they did do well with the SP, was to make the player feel something andI was drawn in by the many trailers and the buzz around the game, thinking the single player would be a huge success; maybe a 20 hour campaign with a good storyline, but I was wrong about the single player campaign. It took only 3 and a half hours to complete, the story was very linear, and the AI was flawed. But what they did do well with the SP, was to make the player feel something and not just be killing the enemies because you were told to, but because you were fighting for your land, and defending American citizens. There was one scene where a young child's parents are shot to death in front of him, and another where you have to hide in a mass grave, it's scenes like that that can make the campaign feel worth-while. On to the multi-player. I gave the game an 8/10 because of the multi-player, it could 've gotten a 9/10 if the campaign were better. The multi-player is REALLY addicting and plenty fast-paced. The huge maps and vehicles and upgrades all come together perfectly. It isn't an easy game to master, but its impossible to be really bad at. The multi-player is very solid and i really cant think of anything negative to say about it. It is definitely better than call of duty multiplayer and possibly better than bc2. Overall, its a game worth buying if just for the multi-player, but could have been much better if the campaign were longer and less linear.… Expand
  16. madhotsoup
    Mar 21, 2011
    1
    The game was OK, nothing ground breaking. What killed it for me was technical issues. Excessive screen tearing and artifacting at high resolutions and max settings, even with the latest drivers and every known fix, still made the game almost unplayable. I've never had technical issues this bad with a game before. I am an A+ certified technician so I do know what I'm doing technical wise.
  17. Mafia
    Mar 21, 2011
    2
    This game is not recommended. Ms. part is short lots of gfx errors, sound does not match the environment you are in. The human voice is very bad made
    Then you will spend money on a very bad game you should buy this.

    My computer.
    i7-950
    Kingston HyperX DDR3 1600MHz 6GB
    OCZ Vertex 2 Series 120gb x 2
    GeForce GTX 580
    Samsung SyncMaster 2433BW
  18. alpah_ger
    Mar 27, 2011
    3
    Singleplayer: on rails, cannot get immersed because they exagerate it, they overdo it. They don't let you do anything, you feel unwanted. 2/10

    Multiplayer: performance problems, framerate drops, nice graphics and concept but i don't like the combination of long range fight with very high bullet damage. Weapons are unbalanced (sniper!!) 4/10
  19. darkballz_pl
    Dec 1, 2012
    1
    This buggy piece of junk is only pretending to be a game. And to be honest, i didn't see so many bugs in one game in my entire life. While single player is very dynamic and can be kinda addictive, multi player is masterpiece of lazyness and ignorance. Only 1 good thing is, i have paid for it 5 $
  20. Gmantis
    Apr 17, 2011
    3
    A complete waste of money, I became so bored and annoyed that I never even finished the single player and found the multi-player to be pretty lame. I thought the premise might be interesting, but it turned out to be totally ridiculous. The game is totally scripted, you cant even open a door on your own. The dialogue is terrible, I found myself constantly yelling at the characters toA complete waste of money, I became so bored and annoyed that I never even finished the single player and found the multi-player to be pretty lame. I thought the premise might be interesting, but it turned out to be totally ridiculous. The game is totally scripted, you cant even open a door on your own. The dialogue is terrible, I found myself constantly yelling at the characters to shut up. If i ever get stuck in behind enemy lines with these Conner and the rest I will be turning myself in. The game looks good at times, but that is little consolation. This game feels like it is ten years old and it plays like it too.… Expand
  21. Mr_HatNClogs
    Jul 21, 2011
    2
    To break this review down into more readable pieces I'll do a dashed line spaces to break it up. I'M A GENIUS!! Yes - Homefront. Well the idea was for Homefront to be different, and believe me - its anything BUT different. The crooks of the game is that America gets invaded - stop me if this sounds familiar, don't confuse it with MW2 where America gets invaded, or the end of BFBC2 whereTo break this review down into more readable pieces I'll do a dashed line spaces to break it up. I'M A GENIUS!! Yes - Homefront. Well the idea was for Homefront to be different, and believe me - its anything BUT different. The crooks of the game is that America gets invaded - stop me if this sounds familiar, don't confuse it with MW2 where America gets invaded, or the end of BFBC2 where Russia gets invaded, or Command and Conquer where Russia is invaded, or Turning Point: Fall of Liberty where Nazis invade or even Fallout where China Invades Alaska which technically was America being invaded!! But feel free to get confused with Freedom Fighters because it's the SAME DAMN GAME!!!
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Don't get me wrong in the run up it looked the part, it looked like the writers ate babies for breakfast without any milk, the intro movie was cool too (I watched it twice). It genuinely looked like a good game with a great single-player and story. So I ordered it and sat down for an evening of Homefront....and stood up 3 hours later because I was done. Yes. 3 HOURS! 3 BORING, TERRIBLY SLOW, CRAP 3 HOURS WHICH I WON'T GET BACK EVER! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I'll keep the overview as brief as the game, it's REALLY, REALLY, REALLY REALLY BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD! Save your money for something else like food, shelter and breathing - not this load of rubbish
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The basic story is that the US goes into crisis due to some middle east wars and Korea decides to invade for very poorly justified reasons - using a cool space program which wasn't as cool as Star Trek but enough to overthrow a world super-power, and then you get taken by the resistance and then steal an oil tank drive from the Koreans (dunno why nothing I own that says "made in Korea" on it works, but hey) and take the oil tanker it to California to fuel the US and steal back some city I don't know I got bored with the story. It tries to be a HL2 knock off with the mute protagonist and the characters it has based itself on and the whole invasion suppression thing, but it fails to copy HL2 in the way of a long well written story or good game-play or being...GOOD!
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The characters are a big rip-off from HL2 and are all about as warmable as a day in the arctic - especially Conner (who is the biggest prick this side of the occupied border) and made me not care about them to the point that when Boon or Broon or the black guy got tortured (SPOILER ALERT) the game assumed I'd made a bond where the worst I felt was that's one less character to open doors for me for all the scripted events the game has, and then I realised the AI wouldn't push me out of cover again for their stupid scripted events - seriously, I got killed twice - TWICE! All because the AI had pushed me out of cover into the line of the enemy so that Conner T*at could yell at some civilians he was "trying" to liberate.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Remember when I said that the game was like Freedom Fighters, well it looks like Freedom Fighters too, it's graphically dated - and when I say dated, it's so ugly the game would have to rape it's own hand. Now usually people say eye-candy doesn't matter in a game and usually I'd agree with them provided the game can stand up on something else like story or game-play. For example, Homefront looks like it was beaten with the ugly stick, whereas Half-Life 1 looks like it was gang-raped by the ugly forest - the distinction is Half Life 1 was good. Homefront looks ugly on modern consoles, which is really hard to pull off, but is just plain bad. Now don't get me wrong there were some good bits like the whole first chapter, the helicopter bit and hiding in a pile of corpses but those bits were few and far between and the game isn't special, really.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Now everyone says the multiplayer makes up for it. It doesn't. I tried joining a game and after 10 minutes the game told me there was no mother playing it, so after another 10 minutes of waiting to find someone the game descended into tedium and boredom. Good multiplayer my arse!, and it doesn't excuse such a terribly short and bad campaign, no where near as good as TF2 or CoD4.
    Bottom line: AVOID THIS GAME, do not buy it!    … Expand
  22. PvtPart
    Jul 17, 2011
    1
    Terrible game, it's poorly optimized for the PC, the controls are poor, and You'll get a poor frame rate unless you have a really good pc. My computer can play crysis 2 at an average of 60 fps on the gamer settings but this game rapes my rig. The story is boring and the multiplayer is unbalanced and glitchy, players who pay for the map packs get access to weapons that are completely overTerrible game, it's poorly optimized for the PC, the controls are poor, and You'll get a poor frame rate unless you have a really good pc. My computer can play crysis 2 at an average of 60 fps on the gamer settings but this game rapes my rig. The story is boring and the multiplayer is unbalanced and glitchy, players who pay for the map packs get access to weapons that are completely over powered (a shotgun that can 1 shot kill across the map, while snipers take 2-3 shots to kill). There is no bullet penetration what so ever and bullets often hit invisible barriers when you try to shoot from behind cover.… Expand
  23. ErrorProxy
    Jan 5, 2013
    3
    I logged in for the first time for a long time just to say this game sucks.

    Played and beat this game in 5 hours, generic gunplay, no character depth, story, whatever. Spent like 10 minutes in multiplayer before uninstalling. A generic fps war game. You just shoot Korean soldiers if I remember correctly. The mech parts in the game are pretty cool though. I only pre-ordered this game    I logged in for the first time for a long time just to say this game sucks.

    Played and beat this game in 5 hours, generic gunplay, no character depth, story, whatever. Spent like 10 minutes in multiplayer before uninstalling. A generic fps war game. You just shoot Korean soldiers if I remember correctly. The mech parts in the game are pretty cool though.

    I only pre-ordered this game for the TF2 item and man, that's pretty much all I got.    … Expand
  24. Scottixboy
    Jun 26, 2012
    1
    Terrible online, Combining 2 Great game elements-CoD and Battlefield-And completely Ruining it, Maps are too small for vehicles and vehicles are too easy to obtain. Guns are WAYY too inaccurate and feels very un-lifelike(3 M16 bullets to kill, 2 Clips of ACR to Kill) No Vaulting Move leaving you struggling to get over a small fence, getting you killed. Objectives make no sense and areTerrible online, Combining 2 Great game elements-CoD and Battlefield-And completely Ruining it, Maps are too small for vehicles and vehicles are too easy to obtain. Guns are WAYY too inaccurate and feels very un-lifelike(3 M16 bullets to kill, 2 Clips of ACR to Kill) No Vaulting Move leaving you struggling to get over a small fence, getting you killed. Objectives make no sense and are biased. This game looks like it was Thrown together in a week, Doesn't even Come Close to the games it's trying to Compete with.

    Runs Terrible on Mid-High range PC-Struggle to get more than 50FPS on Medium Settings-I've played FPS Games on the PS2 which are better than this junk.,

    I Paid £3 for it on steam and even I felt ripped off, Don't ever try this game, their are enough reviews on here to prove my point.    … Expand
  25. nmv06
    Jul 27, 2012
    0
    I played the first 2 single player missions and to be honest the first thing that came to my mind when i saw the "usa invaded" was "SERVES YOU RIGHT !"
    Now to be honest, they are trying to get the player to feel something for the americans just because they threw in s few kids to make it mode dramatic. But in my opinion, that really backfired on them because the things they use to TRY to    I played the first 2 single player missions and to be honest the first thing that came to my mind when i saw the "usa invaded" was "SERVES YOU RIGHT !"
    Now to be honest, they are trying to get the player to feel something for the americans just because they threw in s few kids to make it mode dramatic. But in my opinion, that really backfired on them because the things they use to TRY to make me feel sorry for the americans in A GAME, are the things they are doing right now to other countries IN REAL.
    Ok, got that out of my system :D
    Now for the gameplay, most of the 2 missions i got to play were dragged on by cut scenes and waiting for an enemy to pass 2 meters in front of you without seeing you. And when you Finally get to play a little, the controls are buggy aiming is slow to respond, movement feels like you are superman on holiday casually floating in the air with a gun stuck on your face.
    In short, it has a bad story, fails to make you feel anything for anyone, because face it, if you let your continent get invaded by sea so easily, then you probably deserve it. Its a game that you forget about it 5 minutes after you stop playing it, all i can still remember about it at this point(1 day after playing) are some videos taken from real life but even in those i'm not sure what they were talking about.

    It's a bad first person shooter, where enemies take 2 bullets to get killed, and you take it one clip like Rambo then just hide behind a wall and eat dirt to regenerate health (Let's say in the plot maybe that's why USA got invaded ... for it's great health regenerating dirt, in which case the enemy did a bad job with all of them wearing helmets making it impossible for them to take advantage of that)    … Expand
  26. LennartDenmark
    Mar 16, 2011
    10
    This game is in my opinion the best game so far this year and generally extremely fun. I enjoy the new setting and the presentation is simply mind blowing. The story is extremely well made and intense, but can be a little bit predictable some times. Im pretty sure this game will be on my top 3 for 2011.
  27. Xanadoom
    Mar 17, 2011
    3
    Sadly another "Over-Hyped Sub-Par Generic Shooter". Had lot of expectations for this one ... and another disappointment on the score board. Nowadays there's a new phenomenon call 'publicity hype' which let you mirror the game on its best angle and let you want for more, which in turn is not always all bad but lately there's been loads of bad games getting 'BIG' loads of resources onSadly another "Over-Hyped Sub-Par Generic Shooter". Had lot of expectations for this one ... and another disappointment on the score board. Nowadays there's a new phenomenon call 'publicity hype' which let you mirror the game on its best angle and let you want for more, which in turn is not always all bad but lately there's been loads of bad games getting 'BIG' loads of resources on publicity/Public Relations to compensate for its knowingly shortcoming. If those 'hype/PR' would be cut in half and let the other half goes into production and programing maybe this game would've get a more favorable treatment. Homefront is one of those over-hyped game where they've put way too much resources on 'hyping' the game and not enough on production values. I've been playing computer game since the Tandy 1000 back in the 80's and believe me I know what im talking about: I've bought my share of bad games over the years and Homefront is not all that bad but certainly not a good investment.

    - Single player: Colorful, Some of the scenes are down right good but most are just ok, Incredibly short. Generic, Nothing stands out from other shooters. I've been in the army and full-auto firing is just way too accurate. Offense-Defense-Sniping scenarios and put it on repeat cycle... get boring after a while.

    - Multiplayer: Complex maps; sneakers and snipers can get away with it, which is good. Map scenes diversity, has lot of it. Numbers of maps, is not enough ...Epic FAIL. Camping; too many snipers camping around, either that and the scouts camping in some bushes to wipe 3-4 players in less than a second with no effort on targeting. Weapons; again way too accurate, no ballistics involved whatsoever, Servers are mostly empty (maybe its the 3rd day after launch effect), No Real sense of achieving anything other than seeing the capture points moving around (maybe im being harsh about it but i like seeing/interacting with objectives by blowing/building/hacking objectives and that would've been a good thing to add on this game even in SP.) Vehicles downright SUCKS (clunky turrets, obstructive terrain and too many ways to bring them down easily) Like I said, i have played loads and loads of games in the past, maybe that makes me less of a 'common' player but yet again i can tell when companies tend to 'butch' things up (*cough* EA *cough*) rather than 'trying and failing' like Homefront. By the way, Homefront has alot in common (other than being the sames two companies Kaos Studios and THQ) with the disappointment going by the name Frontline: Fuel of War which share many similarities: guided mini-tanks/helicopter, way the game feel, objectives type, clunky turrets ... etc, etc, etc ... Total letdown is all im feeling right now ... Not worth 50$.    … Expand
  28. SasquatchFelix
    Mar 17, 2011
    8
    I think the single player is really holding this game back, it could have amazing if they developed it more and didn't simply copy paste missions from other fps. The multiplayer is very well made and should not be missed by battlefield and cod fans. The multiplayer is the reason for purchasing the game, do not get if you are only interested in the single player aspect.
  29. kotay
    Jun 11, 2011
    9
    I actually really love this game. I am not really into single player campaigns but I thoroughly enjoyed homefronts, although I would say it seems to just end. Multiplayer on other hand is awesome, like a less hardcore arma 2, fast paced, shoot someone they die fast, and vehicles for those that like that sort of thing, I just stick to my drones :)

    All in all I would say if you like    I actually really love this game. I am not really into single player campaigns but I thoroughly enjoyed homefronts, although I would say it seems to just end. Multiplayer on other hand is awesome, like a less hardcore arma 2, fast paced, shoot someone they die fast, and vehicles for those that like that sort of thing, I just stick to my drones :)

    All in all I would say if you like military shooters but do not like how easy games like cod and bc2 are then get homefront, if you think cod is the best thing ever then you will probs not like how fast you can die in this game.    … Expand
  30. DaGleese
    Feb 18, 2012
    2
    i bought this game for ââ
Page:

Awards & Rankings

27
#27 Most Discussed PC Game of 2011
40
#40 Most Shared PC Game of 2011

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
70

Mixed or average reviews - based on 36 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 13 out of 36
  2. Mixed: 20 out of 36
  3. Negative: 3 out of 36
  1. Worth Playing
    Mar 12, 2012
    75
    I have a hard time recommending the PC version of Homefront. It's a decent game with a unique take on world events, and its fresh and fun new ideas for two-mode, bot-less, online only multiplayer kept me coming back long after I'd waved adieu to the single-player portion, but the performance and playability on this platform is far eclipsed by the stability found on consoles.
    Read full review
  2. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    May 22, 2011
    70
    Very short but intense firefight shows not a very cheerful vision of the near future for North America. Game story is excellent but playability loses because of over-scripting. [Issue#203]
  3. Bit-Gamer
    May 18, 2011
    50
    It's dreadfully average and far too quickly finished, providing nothing more than the most basic type of fun on the first run-through and little incentive to revisit. Not because it's broken; just because it's boring.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »