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. maverickuw
    Mar 17, 2011
    7
    Bought off steam. Good game but the campaign was over in 4 hours, and since for a shooter that is competing in the same narrative as CoD and MoH, even if they don't want that comparison, it's painfully short.

    I note that I'm not normally a FPS player, but overall the story was great, very crisp, but again, too short. Hopefully the campaign will be extended via cheap DLC since right now    Bought off steam. Good game but the campaign was over in 4 hours, and since for a shooter that is competing in the same narrative as CoD and MoH, even if they don't want that comparison, it's painfully short.

    I note that I'm not normally a FPS player, but overall the story was great, very crisp, but again, too short. Hopefully the campaign will be extended via cheap DLC since right now it seems that we're missing half a game. Haven't tried multiplayer yet, but I will later.

    Pros: Great story, if you pre-ordered on Steam you get another game to play when you're done with this one.
    Cons: Too short, price is high for a 4 hour game.    … Expand
  2. chumpitizer
    Mar 17, 2011
    9
    I REALLY dont understand why so much fuss about this game... The game certainly has its flaws, but bottom line: I had a blast playing it and I will likely continue to do so for a long time... that to me is well worth the $60 I paid for it. The multiplayer is as good if not better than any of its competitors, and the story was (short but) brilliant.
  3. ZanZounen
    Mar 17, 2011
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. So i found out about this game a couple weeks ago. and i got around to try it and even tho the single player campaign is a bit short. it is very good and the multiplayer is a great mixture of call of duty battlefield but in it's very own way. Thanks for a kick ass game Kaos studios :D… Expand
  4. 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
  5. NONSAVANT
    Mar 17, 2011
    8
    I wasn't intending to buy this game until I read a preview about it where the writer said it had the suburban look of MW2 and the feel of Half Life 2. It does feel a bit like HL2 but not as much as I was hoping for. MW2 obvious. I'm a bit over 3 hours into the story line and an hour into MP. The single player is fun! It looks great and the best modded Unreal 3 Engine I've seen so far.I wasn't intending to buy this game until I read a preview about it where the writer said it had the suburban look of MW2 and the feel of Half Life 2. It does feel a bit like HL2 but not as much as I was hoping for. MW2 obvious. I'm a bit over 3 hours into the story line and an hour into MP. The single player is fun! It looks great and the best modded Unreal 3 Engine I've seen so far. The physics in the game are very nice and entertaining. Explosions look great and if timed well will send bodies flying a good distance. The level design is done well. Subtle hints here and there to guide you and to catch your attention. The atmosphere is pretty creepy and embodies what an occupation may be like. You can see LOTS of time was put into the environments. Good attention to detail which most games out at the moment don't seem to be doing. The weapons sound punchy and satisfying. The same with ambient sounds. Nice looking blood splatter and animation. No dismemberment though... Why can't more games have this? It made Soldier of Fortune and COD World at War much more entertaining right?! The dialogue has given me a laugh here and there so far, but over all OK. On the other hand though 95% of all First Person Shooter game dialogue is garbage. When will decent writers start on video games? MP is a nice cross between Battle Field and COD World At War (ever notice how much more open the maps in World At War were?) And maybe a nod to counter-strike when purchasing a flak jacket after a re-spawn? The re-spawning is much better than COD, where as it makes sense and not just a blind spot. Not as much running and gunning compared to cod. Group re-spawn like BF a nice thing. Nothing groundbreaking but they have a decent mix of features from other popular MP games. it would be nice to see some more game modes though. The Game for me so far (3 1/4 hours in) is pretty sweet! It's not genre changing but delivers on everything it should just fine and is quite entertaining. I don't understand most of the negative things i read about it. What games are those guys playing that make them feel the need to condescend to most other games? Over all, the game for me is a solid B when most shooters I've played lately are a C+ at best. Thank God it's not like there PR red balloon stunt. LOL
    If the game keeps going like this, it's worth the $50 and you get to help support new games on PC at $50 and not starting at $60.    … Expand
  6. IzayoiKagemaru
    Mar 17, 2011
    9
    With several titles within FPS military genre HomeFront sets itself apart from the rest. It does some things on the multiplayer side other games have done but in its own way and delivers a different experience in comparison to Call of Duty or Battlefield despite sharing similarities.

    Having vehicles that spawn whenever you have enough battle points to do so thus preventing the typical "x    With several titles within FPS military genre HomeFront sets itself apart from the rest. It does some things on the multiplayer side other games have done but in its own way and delivers a different experience in comparison to Call of Duty or Battlefield despite sharing similarities.

    Having vehicles that spawn whenever you have enough battle points to do so thus preventing the typical "x amount of vehicles" per map which most MP games have which ends up with one team dominating a match by controlling all of the vehicles, with Homefront this isn't the case.

    You pick your default class and as you "rank up" you will be able to configure classes as you see fit with perks for your play style and for your vehicles too... weapon unlocks, weapon camo and special gadgets like RC Drones and Flak Jacket makes the game appeal to your " battle taste".

    The Single player campaign has a interesting story and plays more like an interactive "book", it is heavily scripted with moments of intense combat in the mix albeit very short it sets the "lore" for the game scenery very well.

    In my book its a fun game, I'm loving the PC version.    … Expand
  7. 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.
  8. 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
  9. 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.
  10. clonmac
    Mar 17, 2011
    9
    This game is fantastic. I've been playing it on Onlive and it is running flawlessly. I got to play it right at midnight. Multiplayer is a blast. This game takes the best of Call of Duty and Battlefield and tweaks it enough to differentiate itself from them, but at the same time is familiar enough for fans of those series to immediately enjoy. Battlepoints are an amazing feature of the gameThis game is fantastic. I've been playing it on Onlive and it is running flawlessly. I got to play it right at midnight. Multiplayer is a blast. This game takes the best of Call of Duty and Battlefield and tweaks it enough to differentiate itself from them, but at the same time is familiar enough for fans of those series to immediately enjoy. Battlepoints are an amazing feature of the game and are way better than the kill streaks in Call of Duty. They are much more fair for all players and are balanced very well. In fact, just about everything about the multiplayer game is balanced.That's quite a feat. Vehicle control is very well done and can be customized to your liking. None of the vehicles are overpowered, but they still contribute to the battlefield and should be feared. The guns are all unique and can be customized with a ton of different scopes, etc. A lot of the multiplayer has your typical fanfare like experience, challenges, etc. The maps are fantastic. There is a ton of "stuff" to hide in and take cover with. One thing that I think this game doesn't get enough credit for is the sound. This game sounds like war! Everything from the muffling when a grenade goes off near by to the distant sounds of gunfire are done very well.

    The atmosphere in this game is top notch. I've only gotten about 30 minutes into the singleplayer, but so far that is very engaging and I can see myself being driven through it because of the backstory even though I usually enjoy multiplayer more.    … Expand
  11. eagleFMJ
    Mar 17, 2011
    8
    Awesome game, I like it alot, its fresh and new. Single player is a bit short and could have been longer, however the multiplayer makes up for it. If you are not a multiplayer user then you might be a bit disappointed in the length of singleplayer so a 50$ price tag isn't a good deal by any means. Wait for the games price to drop then pick it up. But if you will use both game modes thenAwesome game, I like it alot, its fresh and new. Single player is a bit short and could have been longer, however the multiplayer makes up for it. If you are not a multiplayer user then you might be a bit disappointed in the length of singleplayer so a 50$ price tag isn't a good deal by any means. Wait for the games price to drop then pick it up. But if you will use both game modes then the asking price is reasonable.… Expand
  12. jergason
    Mar 17, 2011
    6
    The single player has an interesting story, but terrible execution. It isn't bad that it is so short. The graphics are not great, and the single player is full of frustrating invisible walls and "Ramirez! Shoot those guys!" moments.

    The multiplayer is okay, but not enough to pull me away from Bad Company 2. Weapons are very powerful, with 2-3 shots enough to kill with a rifle. The sniper    The single player has an interesting story, but terrible execution. It isn't bad that it is so short. The graphics are not great, and the single player is full of frustrating invisible walls and "Ramirez! Shoot those guys!" moments.

    The multiplayer is okay, but not enough to pull me away from Bad Company 2. Weapons are very powerful, with 2-3 shots enough to kill with a rifle. The sniper rifle is a semi-automatic lazer beam, so you'll get sniped ALL THE TIME. Battle points are an interesting idea, but I wish there was more incentive to play as a team. Right now it encourages Rambo-style play, and though there is a squad feature, it seems to be of absolutely no use in the game. The Battle commander is actually very well done, where killstreaks mean more people are gunning for you to get extra points and experience. Mediocre at full price, but the multiplayer is interesting enough if you can pick it up on sale    … Expand
  13. tmh
    Mar 16, 2011
    4
    I can't say I was anything but disappointed with the Single-player campaign. With the amount of apparent bugs, technical problems, and that obnoxious, drowning sound, I was struggling to keep myself playing through it. And when I did, it was already over. Within a few hours, the single-player campaign was over. The game did have the sort of atmosphere I was expecting, but the overall feelI can't say I was anything but disappointed with the Single-player campaign. With the amount of apparent bugs, technical problems, and that obnoxious, drowning sound, I was struggling to keep myself playing through it. And when I did, it was already over. Within a few hours, the single-player campaign was over. The game did have the sort of atmosphere I was expecting, but the overall feel of it just felt like a typical, generic FPS game.… Expand
  14. 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
  15. DoctuhD
    Mar 16, 2011
    10
    Homefront brought a great fresh look to the FPS genre that is being run into the ground by COD with yearly game releases with the same bland story and generic setting. Homefront took the time to make an incredibly immersive, powerful story that, while being much too short, brought emotions out that no game has before. The entire time playing the game, I felt like I really was theHomefront brought a great fresh look to the FPS genre that is being run into the ground by COD with yearly game releases with the same bland story and generic setting. Homefront took the time to make an incredibly immersive, powerful story that, while being much too short, brought emotions out that no game has before. The entire time playing the game, I felt like I really was the character, while dashing between cover when facing that first sentry, while assisting your team in the raids, while fighting every last KOR soldier, I felt immersed in the game. The graphics and AI are a little dated, with other minor issues, but overall the singleplayer was very well done. The multiplayer added a few fresh things to the genre as well. The "killstreak" system of high priority targets in Commander mode was a nice twist, and generally gameplay was crisp and rewarding. Overall, despite a few flaws in the design and engine, the stylistic environment of the game, great story, and fresh gameplay make Homefront worth checking out if you appreciate good story and atmosphere over "prestige."… Expand
  16. drdespair
    Mar 16, 2011
    4
    2 hours and you are done with the whole single player experience. The single player story if indeed was written by the guy who did the screenplay for Apo Now probably wrote it on a napkin in a coffee shop simply to get the devs off his back. Maybe I have to be American to get all tear eyed about seeing suburbia in ruins, and feel some how like its close to home because of all the brand2 hours and you are done with the whole single player experience. The single player story if indeed was written by the guy who did the screenplay for Apo Now probably wrote it on a napkin in a coffee shop simply to get the devs off his back. Maybe I have to be American to get all tear eyed about seeing suburbia in ruins, and feel some how like its close to home because of all the brand names used. I didnt feel a thing. This is not a review of the MP experience, maybe it more fun, but dont waste your money anyway, wait until its in the bargain bin.… Expand
  17. AnnoyingPourage
    Mar 16, 2011
    5
    Simply put: Cool story, plays like every other FPS on the market, single-player not very long, multiplayer is take-it-or-leave-it, extremely demanding (graphically) especially if you're used to playing on 1080p, quad-core, with fairly high settings. Not worth $50.
  18. 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
  19. wardad71
    Mar 16, 2011
    6
    I'll keep this short since many others have voiced similar thoughts about this game. So far it has been a real let down for me. A buddy of mine says the gameplay feels quote "it feels like some clunky, free-to-play, and pay-to-perform Korean FPS." - Irony (?) I won't compare it to BC2 or COD because I didn't want to be unfair. At this point all I can say is I'm glad I didn't pick up anI'll keep this short since many others have voiced similar thoughts about this game. So far it has been a real let down for me. A buddy of mine says the gameplay feels quote "it feels like some clunky, free-to-play, and pay-to-perform Korean FPS." - Irony (?) I won't compare it to BC2 or COD because I didn't want to be unfair. At this point all I can say is I'm glad I didn't pick up an additional copy for my son(s) to play...I always get extra copies as I am a gaming dad, but not going to waste my money on this one. Final thoughts are...I really hope they can polish/tweak things a little better or they won't be seeing any more cashflow from this particular gaming consumer. Please, Homefront devs...read these reviews and fix things. Better still...maybe play some BC2 and COD games and get a feel for what works in them and maybe repeat it...yeah you might not want to copy them but they did something RIGHT that us gamers keep going back to.… Expand
  20. 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.
  21. 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.
  22. runbmp
    Mar 15, 2011
    0
    Loved this game, apart from the single player story, which doesn't look as nice as BFBC2 and COD. However this isn't really where Homefront really shines.

    Multiplayer was best describe by my friends and I as BF2 and COD4 had merged together. The sound effects are very well done and they help the overall feel of the weapons. The controls are very tight, and this is where THQ and Choas    Loved this game, apart from the single player story, which doesn't look as nice as BFBC2 and COD. However this isn't really where Homefront really shines.

    Multiplayer was best describe by my friends and I as BF2 and COD4 had merged together. The sound effects are very well done and they help the overall feel of the weapons. The controls are very tight, and this is where THQ and Choas really had me convinced.

    The controls actually feel as if they were tweaked for the PC. You can literally grab a SMG and do short burst and hit someone's head meters away with only a few pixels to target.

    Overall this has long been overdue for the FPS PC gamers, I normally never right reviews and this is in fact my first one.

    bottom line, If you like BF2, COD4, there's a good chance you'll cherish the fine work the CHAOS team did.    … Expand
  23. Gibsonfirebird
    Mar 15, 2011
    10
    I'm not sure what a lot of these people are complaining about. Not going to do a huge review, but this game is great. I feel like the reason this game has gotten pushed aside by reviewers is because the FPS genre is now just dominated by Call of Duty. Everything gets compared to it as a standard, nothing can be it's own separate entity nowadays.

    HOMEFRONT is a great MP game. I have yet to    I'm not sure what a lot of these people are complaining about. Not going to do a huge review, but this game is great. I feel like the reason this game has gotten pushed aside by reviewers is because the FPS genre is now just dominated by Call of Duty. Everything gets compared to it as a standard, nothing can be it's own separate entity nowadays.

    HOMEFRONT is a great MP game. I have yet to try the SP, but if you're looking for a good MP, this is a good place to look.    … Expand
  24. Khthon
    Mar 15, 2011
    4
    Play it for the setting if you like the idea of it, otherwise you probably won't enjoy it. I only got 4 hours played out of it. And that's with messing around a bit "talking" to random people and trying to find the news clipping easter eggs, not playing for speed at all.

    The very best part of the game was the setting/atmosphere. Hiding in a mass grave to avoid the Koreans, abandoned    Play it for the setting if you like the idea of it, otherwise you probably won't enjoy it. I only got 4 hours played out of it. And that's with messing around a bit "talking" to random people and trying to find the news clipping easter eggs, not playing for speed at all.

    The very best part of the game was the setting/atmosphere. Hiding in a mass grave to avoid the Koreans, abandoned suburbs with propaganda posters, labor camps, a Walmart type store turned into a ammo/fuel dump for Koreans, survivalists who have gone crazy forcing Koreans to dance with bullets and dig their own graves and hanging their heads on sticks as a warning.

    Was mediocre, multiplayer is unnecessary and probably tacked on. Not worth 50 dollars - maybe 20. Also, the amount of people who only have 1 rating and 1 review reviewing this game makes me suspicious of astroturfing fake high scores from the publisher/developer.    … Expand
  25. 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
  26. Astrum
    Mar 15, 2011
    5
    I've been excited about this game for quite a while, I found the premise to be interesting and the game play looked like a decent cross between the Call of Duty franchise and the Battlefield franchise. Unfortunately what I got was a mediocre game at absolute best.

    The single player puts you in the roles of an American citizen during the Korean occupation of America. The opening scene was    I've been excited about this game for quite a while, I found the premise to be interesting and the game play looked like a decent cross between the Call of Duty franchise and the Battlefield franchise. Unfortunately what I got was a mediocre game at absolute best.

    The single player puts you in the roles of an American citizen during the Korean occupation of America. The opening scene was actually fairly well done. However, everything after that was nothing more than random gun battles with no real storyline. You meet characters and they die before you even get a chance to start to bond with them. There was no emotional attachment to the story whatsoever. Everything they did has been done before in books, films, and even video games but Homefront lacks all sense of pacing and storytelling making these elements pointless. If there is a silver lining to the storyline it's that it's painfully short. I completed it in just over three and a half hours. There's honestly not much else I can say about this because it was so short.

    The multiplayer is rough around the edges to put it lightly. Again they borrowed a lot of unnecessary things from other games even though there was no compelling reason to do so. I had hoped that this was a good cross between the face paced action of Call of Duty and the slower, vehicular team based combat of Battlefield. Well it is to an extent. This game leans more heavily towards the Call of Duty style of FPS games. It even has a similar oblivious spawning system and poor map design which will get you spawn killed time after time.

    Most of the maps are quite open which is actually a problem. Most people will opt to use the sniper class killing people on the other side of the map as they spawn. I'm not sure whether or not this was ever play tested, and I'm leaning towards no, but some of the mechanics make absolutely no sense. For instance the AQ-11 Buzzard is a drone which fires two rockets before having to reload. Inexplicably if you directly hit a person with both of these they will not die. Further their blast radius is somewhere in the range of 10cm. However, a person will usually die in one hit from a sniper rifle making the AQ-11 Buzzard seem like a terrible thing to buy. Similarly the Humvee can take a direct hit from an RPG without being destroyed. In fact if a Humvee takes a hit from an RPG the driver will likely switch to the gunner position and kill you before you even have a chance to fire a second rocket. So apparently bullets are better than explosives in this game.

    Balancing in multiplayer seems to be non-existent as alluded before. However, what's even worse than the atrocious balancing are the bugs. I've come onto the battlefield with a helicopter only to be permanently marked out of bounds and destroyed. I've even accidentally clipped the out of bounds area and returned only to find that I was still somehow out of bounds when clearly I was not. Server disconnects are also quite frequently, and of course whatever XP you've earned is lost when this happens. One more point of contention is the sheer size of the hit boxes for objects in the world. I know hit boxes can't be exact, but there are plenty of instances where it's amazing just how large the hit boxes are relative to the actual object, generally with trees, rocks, and vehicles. Prepare for an invisible hit box to take the bullet rather than your opponent many times.

    Their much touted Ground Control game type is a cross between the Rush, Domination/Conquest/Sector Control, and push-pull. I was hoping this would lead to large, epic battles. Unfortunately it's incredibly limited. Whereas in Bad Company 2 you have multiple stages within each Rush map, in Homefront you have two stages. Coupled with the bugs and balancing issues this makes the game type fairly uninteresting. The only other real game type is team deathmatch, which is just what you'd expect. There are a total of six maps, so prepare to get bored quickly.

    In summary I think this game could have been much better. I won't say this game is horrible since it's at least playable, but I won't say it's good either. It's wholly mediocre. If you're only interesting in the single player then I suggest renting it. If you're more interested in the multiplayer then I'd advise you wait until there's been a good deal of post launch support, or until it's in the bargain bin. Whichever comes first. Kaos Studios should have spent more time working on the game than promoting it.    … Expand
  27. Bags159
    Mar 15, 2011
    7
    Got it off steam, no complaints there.

    Graphics/Performance: Let me begin by saying that I feel that the graphical scaling on this game is a bit off. I don't have the best computer, but I can run Crysis Warhead on medium/high settings at my native resolution of 1900 x 1080 with 30 - 40 fps, but in Homefront anything but 800 x 600 and bare minimum settings was horribly choppy and    Got it off steam, no complaints there.

    Graphics/Performance: Let me begin by saying that I feel that the graphical scaling on this game is a bit off. I don't have the best computer, but I can run Crysis Warhead on medium/high settings at my native resolution of 1900 x 1080 with 30 - 40 fps, but in Homefront anything but 800 x 600 and bare minimum settings was horribly choppy and unplayable. With the worst settings I got 60 fps most of the time, but had a few large drops. TLDR: Worse graphics than Crysis with worse performance.

    Single player: Story started out boring but was strangely reminiscent of Half Life 2. Playing through on normal only took four hours. I'm sure it will take longer on harder difficulties, but it's still a very short single player. When the game ended I was like, "whoo let's do this!! Oh, that was the last mission? Okay..." Just when things were really picking up emotionally and gameplay wise the game just ends. They obviously did this so they can make a sequel, but I felt that single player could have benefited from another segment or two. The story was decent but nothing amazing. Newspaper articles laying on the ground and radio transmissions between missions were a nice touch, though. It was nice to not be in the middle east or Eurasia. They made the story believable.
    TLDR: Decent story, reminiscent of Half-Life 2, but too short.

    Gameplay: Almost the exact same as Modern Warfare; everything from the feel of weapons, HUD, melee animations, and cross-hairs. The only difference is vehicles are a lot more prevalent than in COD which I feel is a plus.
    TLDR: Modern Warfare with vehicles.

    Multiplayer: I haven't touched it and don't really plan to. I'm not terribly into COD style shooters' multiplayers, although player controlled vehicles could mix things up.


    Overall: If you like Call of Duty you should like this game. If you don't like Call of Duty very much, wait until it's on sale. If it was long I would have given it a better score.    … Expand
  28. lovegames
    Mar 15, 2011
    10
    Great, bold storyline. Eventhough the campign is short, I think it's just the right duration since multiplayer compensate the lifespan of the game. Hope THQ makes a sequel for it. Keep it coming!
  29. Knoxeh
    Mar 15, 2011
    9
    Its single player tells a story in this 'what if' scenario in a very cinematic way, but that has something to do with it being written by John Milius. But the story and the actual single player gameplay are completely different. Although the story is very good, the actual action sequences seemed to try too hard to mimic what was already accomplished in the Call of Duty Franchise.

    Its    Its single player tells a story in this 'what if' scenario in a very cinematic way, but that has something to do with it being written by John Milius. But the story and the actual single player gameplay are completely different. Although the story is very good, the actual action sequences seemed to try too hard to mimic what was already accomplished in the Call of Duty Franchise.

    Its multi player is definitely the pull factor to buy it. The multiple gamplay innovations featured in the game as well as many of the best innovations featured in both the Call of Duty and Battlefield franchises. I wouldn't necessarily name this a "Clone" of those two franchises, but it definitely gets some inspiration from the two.    … Expand
  30. tyler89
    Mar 15, 2011
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Honestly, I wanted to like Homefront, I truly did. When I saw that this was a game about what would happen to America, if we were occupied, it caught my imagination immediately. Unfortunately, the game itself failed to live up to its expected expectation. First, the character dialogue is pretty crappy, and the characters themselves are not really believable. You have Rianna, who for some reason is caring a gun and is in the resistance in a major war, but yet complains every other minute about what were "doing." (Killing Americans, fighting soldiers, etc) Well, then there is Connor, the complete opposite of Rihanna. He's the type of guy who is all about the bloodshed of the enemy, he's a true patriot in the sense that he's a complete psycho and truly unbelievable. His viewpoint is that no matter the cost or sacrifice, the end justifies the means. Next, we have the tech. guy, who is unmemorable, as he barely talks the entire game and Connor treats him like his personal punching bag. All three characters are way too polar-opposite in their own personalities, that makes the Spartans in Halo: Fall of Reach, seem more "realistic."

    Next, I absolutely hated the fact that the U.S. army was maimed, killed, and for all intents and purpose, raped by the N.K. army. U.S. helicopters blown out of the sky, soldiers blown to hell, and the sense that the U.S. army was ran by some inexperienced general made for a lower opinion of this game. To me, it seemed like the only way the the U.S. army won back San Fransico was by Jacob's hand alone. Jacob, a helicopter pilot by nature, somehow manages to always be put on the spot to act like James Bond. Taking on many soldiers by himself, destroying key targets, and being that silent figure of "mystery." I truly wanted to like this game, and I bought it way in advance because the game was so hyped, and the story just seemed so intriguing. I beat the game in four and a half hours flat, and I truly feel like it was not worth the money nor time. I didn't learn anything new about America's struggle against the N.K. empire. Before you cry "what??," it was simply do to the fact that I already knew America was fighting N.K., I knew that Americans were divided, and I knew that the N.K. army was brutal to the civilian population. What I wanted to learn more about was what the world was thinking, what else was happening outside of just the four man mismatched squad of saviors. In the end, when Homefront 2 comes out, I will wait until after its release for the reviews on it before making a call as to rather or not to buy it. I don't think this game was half-***ed, but I do think that the creators totally f*cked it up.    … Expand
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 »