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
  31. Dethstar
    Oct 12, 2011
    3
    This game is actually a classic example of why console games should never make it to a PC. At launch it looked crap and dated. Bad textures and generally poor graphics. Characters that although made to look like grown ups had the dialogue and wit of a bullied 13 year old. Definately an xbox special. What an utter,utter waste of money. Seriously made me question buying games anymore andThis game is actually a classic example of why console games should never make it to a PC. At launch it looked crap and dated. Bad textures and generally poor graphics. Characters that although made to look like grown ups had the dialogue and wit of a bullied 13 year old. Definately an xbox special. What an utter,utter waste of money. Seriously made me question buying games anymore and pat myself on the back for ignoring the xbox I bought since I got the first 2 games for it. However, also scared the crap out of me that this is the future of PC gaming too, locked into being limited by the lowest common denominator and games written only to last a single weekend. Fine for the xbox crowd (they can rent this trash) not so great for if you actually paid for it. particular if your used to state of the art pc gaming.… Expand
  32. RefusedAMA
    Mar 18, 2011
    7
    Generaly, a very good game. I was really wanting this game to replace BF, my usual FPS choice. But it wont, maybe when HF2 comes, but not this time. Instead it will be a filler till BF3, and a good one at that. I loaded up on the second day of release, got a BIG patch DL, so not to many bugs when I played MP. Every now and then I get the "stuck drone" bug when on sharp edges. ThatsGeneraly, a very good game. I was really wanting this game to replace BF, my usual FPS choice. But it wont, maybe when HF2 comes, but not this time. Instead it will be a filler till BF3, and a good one at that. I loaded up on the second day of release, got a BIG patch DL, so not to many bugs when I played MP. Every now and then I get the "stuck drone" bug when on sharp edges. Thats it. However, cheaters are pretty rampent, hopefully VAC will catch them soon. SP, short and heavily scripted. Kaos promised a good mix of RPG in it, nope. A lot of "follow the leader". Still the story is good and enlightening. Very well told. MP - Not my cup of tea. Very CoDish. Its challenging, and therefore Im still entertained, when not frustrated by the ease of my death. 1-2 bullet hits and your gone. Plus the maps are a campers paradise. But they are very detailed and elaborate. They also make good use of all levels of elevation. Plenty of things to climb. Too bad there isnt any bullet drop. The "unique" features that Kaos talked about, Battlepoints and Battle Commander, very well planned and implemented, making the game interesting and more fun. Also the in game chat box is obscure, so chat flammers are barely noticed. Squads formation is available, but its an aferthought. There is no squad spawning, everyone just spawns randomly around the map.

    Graphics - Just a little better then PS2 lvl. I was hoping for better w/ PC copy since it was codeveloped instead of a full console port. Nope. Still very dated. Too bad, b/c this game has a lot going for it. Its not bad, it just doesent make the bar, thats all.

    Sound - This pertains mostly to PC users. Sound is as basic as it gets. Like a lot of new titles, your soundboard is barely utilized. Also, no multi channel speakers used, just basic stereo. No EAX, 3D sound positioning or anything, same with headphones. VOiP - doesent work.    … Expand
  33. Silvanoshi
    Mar 19, 2011
    8
    I must preface this review by saying that I am not much of a single player gamer, I much prefer to face and best a foe with a brain, rather than pwning a bunch of ones and zeros. Having only played the multiplayer, I can tell you that that alone is enough to warrant Homefront receiving a 8/10 rating. Sure there is a discernible lack of polish, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Itâ
  34. Baggins_oz
    Jun 5, 2012
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Way too short in single-player, some potential ruined by hackneyed writing and rigidly linear design.

    When I first heard of this game I thought it sounded great. A "Red Dawn" scenario which has so much potential for branching gameplay (infliltration, sabotage, guerrilla actions,overwhelming odds, resource acquisition etc) but instead it turned into an almost "on rails" FPS....and sadly it didn't even do that well.

    The scripting was cliched beyond belief. The scenarios were cliched. The voice acting was ordinary. I can see that the developers wanted us to "feel" for the people we later see massacred...but I felt no attachment to anyone. The only character I truly felt for was the little kid who witnessed his parents execution...that moved me...more of that and I would have been "engaged". The missions had very little sense of urgency, which was broken up even more by the propensity of the game to direct you to the next area by having your companions stand in front of a door/gate calling out "over here". If I wanted to wander about the map I could...for hours...and they'd just keep calling out "over here". And the mission where we "sneak" through a survivalist camp was BS...there was no sense of sneaking or suspense - just follow your companions and do what they say...and the guys 10m away won't notice 4 people running through their encampment!?!?!?

    Only the last assault upon the Golden Gate bridge had any real continuity and flow...and just as I am beginning to enjoy the game, it ends. WTF? So I have helped to secure a bridge, while the rest of the nation is being massacred and I should feel some sense of completion? It's like they had a whole lot more planned but ran out of time/money and decided to end it there.

    On the plus side - the graphics were good. The suburbs were well done, the interiors too.    … Expand
  35. Bulldog6565
    May 20, 2011
    9
    Homefront is better than Black Ops and Bad Company. It brings a whole new meaning to war games. The most important thing is that it's not kill over 100 people and escape, no, it's more like living with the things you've done.The storyline is short but the experience of both singleplayer and multiplayer is very good. The storyline I give an 8 but the experience all together deserves anHomefront is better than Black Ops and Bad Company. It brings a whole new meaning to war games. The most important thing is that it's not kill over 100 people and escape, no, it's more like living with the things you've done.The storyline is short but the experience of both singleplayer and multiplayer is very good. The storyline I give an 8 but the experience all together deserves an awesome 10! In all, I'd give Homefront an awesome and solid 9!… Expand
  36. Gamer71
    Jul 17, 2011
    10
    Given this Game a 10 because of all the Children who rated it 0, but its def worth a straight 8.5.
    This game runs fine on both my AMD athlon II quad core with 8800gtx and my sons AMD dual core with just a 9600 gt .. i built both rigs and they both have 4 gig of ram apiece, i think a lot of idiots think they can buy a cheep Dell and expect to run games like this straight out the box    Given this Game a 10 because of all the Children who rated it 0, but its def worth a straight 8.5.
    This game runs fine on both my AMD athlon II quad core with 8800gtx and my sons AMD dual core with just a 9600 gt .. i built both rigs and they both have 4 gig of ram apiece, i think a lot of idiots think they can buy a cheep Dell and expect to run games like this straight out the box ...lol.
    The single player is fun and very atmosperic the multiplayer is awsome and up there with the best ..as someone else has said this is prob the best use yet of the unreal 3 engine and i agree.. this is to unreal 3 what tac ops was to unreal tournament back in the days ..
    I and my son will be playing it some time to come .. thanks for listening :).    … Expand
  37. buzzbee007
    Jul 20, 2011
    10
    wow this game sounds bad I bought somany junk games lately Iam not risking it thanks for the warning
    I allmost bought it . Ive got to watch my impulse shopping. The duke game was a ripoff Brinks kind of **** Why dont they look at Call of Duty and make them like that. I love Free for all is it in Homefront ?. But iam not risking it The games are to expensive to waste on a game that feels    wow this game sounds bad I bought somany junk games lately Iam not risking it thanks for the warning
    I allmost bought it . Ive got to watch my impulse shopping. The duke game was a ripoff Brinks kind of **** Why dont they look at Call of Duty and make them like that. I love Free for all is it in Homefront ?. But iam not risking it The games are to expensive to waste on a game that feels like a demo.Thanks once again for the heads up on Homefront.If it had a demo and I liked it I might of bought it . I still might when its 10 bucks.    … Expand
  38. Ordish
    May 2, 2012
    3
    I was excited about this game when I saw the advertisements. So after an abysmal 4 hour campaign and a bug ridden and hacker invaded multiplayer experience it was clear to see the best part of Homefront was the advertisements. It is a shame, the game had a lot of potential. If not for the unchecked hacking it would have at least been a decent shooter to play.
  39. CancerEnhancer
    Feb 18, 2015
    0
    I got this game for 8.00$ because of steam sale, and its still not worth it a single bit. I started out with the single player, which started out well. A couple cliches, but its forgivable because its pretty unique. The story made me want to play.

    However, the first problem arose, no sound. The entire game was muted, which isn't too bad since I usually put on music while I play. Then I    I got this game for 8.00$ because of steam sale, and its still not worth it a single bit. I started out with the single player, which started out well. A couple cliches, but its forgivable because its pretty unique. The story made me want to play.

    However, the first problem arose, no sound. The entire game was muted, which isn't too bad since I usually put on music while I play. Then I found problem number 2; the subtitles rarely worked. Only every couple minutes would there be random subtitles, obviously not enough to keep up with the story. It was as if the people coding the the subtitles gave up because of too many errors.

    But whatever, I'm not that much of a story guy anyway. But the game forces you to go through painfully boring cinemas, which don't have sound or subtitles, and to make it worse. The cinema scenes are all of people talking.

    The producers also make sure you dont just idle to let the scenes roll through, they make sure that you have to do dull stuff too. Like sprint for 30 seconds to make sure this isn't your first video game ever, then you have to wait 30 secs *for the soldiers to pass by* then sprint another 30 seconds, then wait another 30 ect.
    The game tries so hard to make a emotional and realistic scenario, then completely **** on it by telling you that an entire korean army division dies to 3 rebels. I promptly gave up after being forced to listen (without sound or subtitles) to a random guy I dont know / didnt bond with for longer than two minutes.

    After having such a negative experience I looked online to see what other people said, which was that multiplayer is a redeeming quality. So I decide sure, why not? I join a game and immediately get killed by who knows? Then I respawn, take two steps and see a little robot, which I shoot a good half-clip in before it turns around and kills me with two shots. I start using several different classes, alternating every time in not killed within 10 seconds.
    After an hour, I finally tried all 6 classes, just to realize everyone only uses two; Assault and Sniper. Both of which I didn't have good weapons since I was still a noob. I got two kills in a row and got a barrage of random messages telling me I got 350 BP, 2430 GM, 100 PTV, 8008 SS. I have no clue what they mean, or how to use them. I finished one extremely painful hour long game, and level up once, which unlocked the tank, which I couldn't use because you need to get 20 kills in a row to get it. I'm sure you've seen everyone complain about the hitboxes so I'm not going to bother. Doom 1 has better hitboxes.
    Now, I know im not the best at FPS's, but I know im not bad. I manage quite well because I buy every new fps that comes out. But I was left astonished at how clueless I was at how to do anything.

    But one of the worst sins is the fact that you can buy weapons, forcing you to either spend even more money, or not be able to have fun in multiplayer. This game is universally bad, every aspect of it is crappy, I see no reason why you would get this game over Halo 1. The single player story is mind-numbingly boring (among an atrociously large number of other things), the Multiplayer is bugged, hacked, unfair, and stupendously mean to new players.
    Hands down, this game is the worst game I've ever had the misfortune of playing, I would rather play Twilight:The game than this piece of garbage. I wouldnt even recommend buying it on ebay for a dollar, I feel like this game owes me money.    … Expand
  40. 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
  41. tippy40
    Mar 17, 2011
    0
    I feel bad for those of you who were horn-swaggled with this game. If you happen to like it, great. I purchased this game, paid 50 bucks, and before I cracked open the seal, I used what was left of my brain cells and started reading the user reviews, from this site and others.

    Thank God and Greyhound, I took this stinker back to the store and got my hard earned money back. What a    I feel bad for those of you who were horn-swaggled with this game. If you happen to like it, great. I purchased this game, paid 50 bucks, and before I cracked open the seal, I used what was left of my brain cells and started reading the user reviews, from this site and others.

    Thank God and Greyhound, I took this stinker back to the store and got my hard earned money back. What a dissapointment! I was so looking forward to a long, interesting, challenging story from this game, only to hear of a 3-5 hour demo. What a bunch of crap.

    NO THQ.....you WILL NOT get my $50.00 this time.    … Expand
  42. Hurricane_5
    Mar 15, 2011
    2
    It's a typical first-person shooter with outdated graphics especially since that Unreal Engine 3 is showing it's age. The game play is pretty standard...won't complain about how accurate the guns feel. I just think that they could have done better on using better character models and weapon textures. I feel like I'm playing a game in 2004, yet we have arrived at a quantum leap forIt's a typical first-person shooter with outdated graphics especially since that Unreal Engine 3 is showing it's age. The game play is pretty standard...won't complain about how accurate the guns feel. I just think that they could have done better on using better character models and weapon textures. I feel like I'm playing a game in 2004, yet we have arrived at a quantum leap for graphics. Save your money for next week when Crysis 2 comes out. I knew I have should have done the same.… Expand
  43. 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
  44. 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
  45. MeenChawitTH
    Mar 26, 2011
    8
    This might not be the best game ever or surpass any expectations, but surely, it is not that bad, it got average score of 68 (as current), it totally deserves more, comparing to 2010's Medal of Honor which got 75, This game is a whole lot better. The story present cruelty of war, many aspects that have not been depicted in many, or even most of the game in this field, also with backstoriesThis might not be the best game ever or surpass any expectations, but surely, it is not that bad, it got average score of 68 (as current), it totally deserves more, comparing to 2010's Medal of Honor which got 75, This game is a whole lot better. The story present cruelty of war, many aspects that have not been depicted in many, or even most of the game in this field, also with backstories establishing pretty secure universe of the game. While some are unmoved by it, I am carried away, I shocked at the one of the scene suddenly feel and said exactly the same thing as my fellow AI did, This is unprecedented to me while playing game or even while watching movies, I am impressed., for MP it is like some sort of experimental , just like a mod we see everyday, but unlike mod, it is finished and polished as it is actually funded, though after sometime I felt like it is just one of the kind of variation of gameplay, I'm going back to BF's classical anyway. This is good game though not good enough for 60USD, better wait for price drop.… Expand
  46. Industrial
    Mar 19, 2011
    8
    The singleplayer is short but has memorable moments, I think it was great. By the end it got a little uninteresting, but enough to keep me finishing it. Then I went on to the multiplayer, which I had heard was better; I wasn't pleased for awhile, it was fun but not what I was expecting. I tweaked around with my settings a bit, and got 30+fps boost from turning off Ambient Occlusion! ThisThe singleplayer is short but has memorable moments, I think it was great. By the end it got a little uninteresting, but enough to keep me finishing it. Then I went on to the multiplayer, which I had heard was better; I wasn't pleased for awhile, it was fun but not what I was expecting. I tweaked around with my settings a bit, and got 30+fps boost from turning off Ambient Occlusion! This game is truly awesome when its running well, I hope people who aren't running it good aren't giving it a bad review because of just that.… Expand
  47. lasagnafeeder
    Mar 24, 2011
    8
    A great game marred by performance and optimization issues since release. Hold off until a couple of patches iron things out is my advice unless you're willing to do a lot of .ini editing and searching around online for various solutions/tweaks. As others have said the multiplayer is a very nice mix of battlefield and call of duty, and really brings some great new concepts to the table.A great game marred by performance and optimization issues since release. Hold off until a couple of patches iron things out is my advice unless you're willing to do a lot of .ini editing and searching around online for various solutions/tweaks. As others have said the multiplayer is a very nice mix of battlefield and call of duty, and really brings some great new concepts to the table. Personally I love just flying around in the UAV over a match and marking targets for my team =). If you're up to the challenge, go for it and pick the game up now. Once you get it running, it really is a great title that deserves a higher score than those it has been given so far.… Expand
  48. 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
  49. Sinster
    Mar 18, 2011
    8
    Single player is okay just to kill time. I like single player games and this didn't do it for me. Way to linear and way to scripted. If you don't follow the scripted path they AI will not open doors etc. for you. They friendly AI and enemy AI can be right next to each other and they don't fire at each other in other words all AI focus on you. Also "enemies" appear out of thin air. I'mSingle player is okay just to kill time. I like single player games and this didn't do it for me. Way to linear and way to scripted. If you don't follow the scripted path they AI will not open doors etc. for you. They friendly AI and enemy AI can be right next to each other and they don't fire at each other in other words all AI focus on you. Also "enemies" appear out of thin air. I'm giving single player a 5 out of 10.

    Multiplayer - At first I wasn't happy with it. I kept on playing , learning the maps, and game itself, not comparing it to COD or BF games. The game is actually a good multiplayer game. I find myself playing it more than COD:BLOPS / MOH / BFBC2. The few issue that I find that rub me the wrong way is some of the game physics. For example a sniper has a "rock" in his way, they can see over the rock but are able to snipe you through the rock. Since it uses a modified UT3 you can tweak it so you don't have all the brush and it gives an unfair advantage for those who don't remove the brush. You could be hiding in a cluster of brushes and still get picked off from across the map. AA3 has the same issue. Overall MP is a good game.    … Expand
  50. UndeadSamurai01
    May 13, 2011
    0
    There are no redeeming features to this game. DO NOT BUY IT.

    Homefront was the worst FPS I have ever played, you'd have to go back to golden eye before you saw gameplay mechanics so slipshod. Aiming a weapon in this game is like trying to pick up a nickle with the claw machine. The plot was hackneyed and utterly stupid. I've played FPS's for 12 years and this was the worst experience    There are no redeeming features to this game. DO NOT BUY IT.

    Homefront was the worst FPS I have ever played, you'd have to go back to golden eye before you saw gameplay mechanics so slipshod. Aiming a weapon in this game is like trying to pick up a nickle with the claw machine. The plot was hackneyed and utterly stupid. I've played FPS's for 12 years and this was the worst experience I've ever had with them.    … Expand
  51. RMW_Critic
    Apr 2, 2011
    8
    I came to this game expecting another Call of Duty clone. It looked interesting but nothing that I haven't seen before. Then when I actually get the game the atmosphere blows me away. It shows a life outside of the norm, how people need to rely on each other to survive or die. It fully depicts the horror of the Korean occupation, something that almost brought a tear to my eye. I haveI came to this game expecting another Call of Duty clone. It looked interesting but nothing that I haven't seen before. Then when I actually get the game the atmosphere blows me away. It shows a life outside of the norm, how people need to rely on each other to survive or die. It fully depicts the horror of the Korean occupation, something that almost brought a tear to my eye. I have played Metro 2033 and other atmospheric games and this definitely fits in with them. Unfortunately, the game play is mediocre. It has a CoD feel to it but it just brings up a feeling that there is something missing. It is obviously a console game, with the only difference being promised but not kept dedicated servers, the fact that when you start running it takes you 3/4 of a second to properly gain speed, all of those little things. The multiplayer is good but but not great. I love the little BP (Battle Ponts) killstreak things but the weapons are very limited. There are a total of 11 weapons and this made me feel a little cheated. Other that that a good game with flaws but if you own an Xbox or PS3 get it on that.… Expand
  52. Gamingking007
    Mar 31, 2011
    6
    The story and plot is brilliant and very realistic, graphics good but nothing exceptional! The thing that destroyed the game was the short single player campaign! How can all the great companies pack in a great single campaign and a very long one!was so hyped for this game but was let down!
  53. crymouth
    Apr 17, 2011
    7
    Let me start by saying that this game is not as terrible as some reviews are making it out to be, it has a lot wrong with it but it is definitely worth the 4 to 5 hours of SP game time alone. IMO it is a better SP game than Black OPS was by a margin.
    Sadly it is let down by some stupid mistakes, the main one being invisible walls - I mean if you do not want me to walk there at least add a    Let me start by saying that this game is not as terrible as some reviews are making it out to be, it has a lot wrong with it but it is definitely worth the 4 to 5 hours of SP game time alone. IMO it is a better SP game than Black OPS was by a margin.
    Sadly it is let down by some stupid mistakes, the main one being invisible walls - I mean if you do not want me to walk there at least add a fence or something, a small tin can is not going to justify me not being able to cross it. It is riddled with this. There was one or two places where I witnessed some dodgy AI but this is thankfully kept to a minimum and at times the voice acting is very forced where the story makers want to know that person is this type of person in as quick a space as possible. The story is told well, not by the game play itself but cleverly depicted through the scenery and newspaper articles you collect throughout the campaign. There are some seriously disturbing moments and scenes which really give the player a real sense of oppression and sadness (well at least I felt it) - sadly there is very little humor added in except for a certain section where some uncomfortable comments are made to me about a pet of sorts....but that was really the only moment throughout - perhaps due to the context of the story it is not required though. All be told at the end I felt a real sense of satisfaction and I will be giving it one more play through on the hardest setting to try and collect all of the newspaper clips.

    Onto the multiplayer - the game play is brilliantly smooth and satisfying, the streaks are interesting and not overpowered IMO although I typically only use the personal UAV and Flack Jacket. Note that you need to purchase these by using battle points which you earn by kills, headshots = more points - you effectively choose you loadout which includes the perks. The maps are massive and well designed providing a nice balance for all classes, the downside is it does promote a lot of camping - attempt to run and gun ala COD and you will die a quick death, it is less tactical than a battlefield game however I suspect that this is due to the very limited game types - effectively Team Death Match and Ground Control (which is like Domination (COD)/ Sector Control (MOH) / Conquest (BFBC2)), and that is it - nothing more. I am very disappointed that they did not copy and improve game modes from other titles namely the ever favorite RUSH from BFBC2 and the simply awesome Combat Mission from MOH - this would really have rounded this game off and added to the re-playability. Sadly after a couple of hours of playing it gets boring pretty quickly (at least for me).

    All in all - get it for the SP, it is worth it and try out the MP but I suspect (and based on the number of active players) that it wil merely be a distraction from other online titles.    … Expand
  54. warpuke
    Mar 17, 2011
    5
    Dislike: Squads are largely pointless as it randomizes each time and often puts you on the opposite team as your friends. Furthermore you can't spawn on your squadmates. I also dislike that in the server browser the friend list doesn't work. If you're a lonewolf person and enjoy the fast pace of black-ops it might be for you, but for me it was annoying watching guys jump then prone,Dislike: Squads are largely pointless as it randomizes each time and often puts you on the opposite team as your friends. Furthermore you can't spawn on your squadmates. I also dislike that in the server browser the friend list doesn't work. If you're a lonewolf person and enjoy the fast pace of black-ops it might be for you, but for me it was annoying watching guys jump then prone, jump then prone - all the while killing me. I don't suck at FPS but damn, just annoying.

    Severe imbalances with helicopters but what else is new.
    Like: Campaign, although short was really good.    … Expand
  55. KentKarma
    Mar 19, 2011
    5
    A lot of criticism on this game that I hear is that it plays too much like other shooters and really didn't do anything special graphically.
    Honestly, this is pretty much the truth. Story wise, however, it starts out really good and I thought they did a really good job setting up the plot of the game well. It didn't seem too far fetched and used realistic footage with some context changes    A lot of criticism on this game that I hear is that it plays too much like other shooters and really didn't do anything special graphically.
    Honestly, this is pretty much the truth. Story wise, however, it starts out really good and I thought they did a really good job setting up the plot of the game well. It didn't seem too far fetched and used realistic footage with some context changes to make it seem like it was really happening in the opening video. The problem with the story, however, is it feels like they advertised a game in a way that made it seem like you'd be playing as some sort of everyday man fighting with normal people.
    Unfortunately, you're playing as ex-military pilot (I assume so it makes sense when you use military weapondry/vehicles and know what you're doing) and you're fighting along resistance members who can take out several soldiers on their own.
    Seriously, I know I'm not alone when I say its too unbelievable that the Koreans would have gotten that far in the occupation if we had the super soldiers just waiting to create some sort of resistance. Its really distracting to the entire game.

    In the end, its not a bad game. It really doesn't look bad, in fact they did a great job integrating brand names and small details to make the world believable. The problem is, the game plays like it was made in 2005. I don't really know why it required PHYSX installed when the only thing I saw using physics where cars and bodies. I think thats why the game seems so dated. In most games today, shooting an enemy who is behind a thin piece of wood will damage them, however not here. Bumping into empty barrels usually tips them over, but not here.
    Its sadly a disappointment when the effects look so great. There are parts where they do things so well you forget about all the other problems but in the end they just resurface. The animations were actually believable and I can't understand why I'm reading reviews that say they were terrible, considering some games don't bother much with detailed facial expressions or even making sure the characters have any emotion.

    Play it, its not a bad game, but you'll have to enjoy the story to enjoy playing it.    … Expand
  56. AlcoJaguar
    Apr 12, 2011
    5
    Really DICE made a better online modern combat game a year ago with Bad Company 2 which you can pick up for $30 cheaper than Homefront. On the singleplayer side the campaign is skippable (very short, played through it in about 3-4 hours one afternoon). It's not bad but nothing in Homefront stood out. After playing it with a group of friends we decided the game only made us want to play BadReally DICE made a better online modern combat game a year ago with Bad Company 2 which you can pick up for $30 cheaper than Homefront. On the singleplayer side the campaign is skippable (very short, played through it in about 3-4 hours one afternoon). It's not bad but nothing in Homefront stood out. After playing it with a group of friends we decided the game only made us want to play Bad Company 2 again (and that's exactly what we did, leaving behind Homefront). If it's in a Steam sale for $10-$20 I'd recommend picking it up if only to waste some time, but it's certainly not worth $50.… Expand
  57. Raggz
    Mar 20, 2011
    7
    A classic FPS game with multiplayer elements ripped from other games like COD MW and FOW. Singleplayer is nice enough though short. I really miss a cover system or lean.
    This game is all about multiplayer which i find quite good and fun. Big maps with lot's of action that includes drones, choppers and vehicles. All in all a good game from Kaos studios. Well done chaps!
  58. chr1z
    Mar 20, 2011
    6
    This Game was fun (awsome graphics, lots of action...), but WAY too short. It took me only ONE (!) sunday afternoon to get through the SP mode, which was very disappoiting. (I buy those games mainly for the SP.) Even the 2010 Medal of Honor had a longer play time.
  59. toolintention
    Mar 22, 2011
    5
    I gave it a 5 because this game honestly had potential. The only cool parts were the very beginning and the last level where you assist the US Military! The multiplayer is horrible, its like a rougher version of COD with vehicles... and we all know you dont give COD fan boys vehicles, they have no idea what to do with them! The area where this game gets the most credit and apparently theI gave it a 5 because this game honestly had potential. The only cool parts were the very beginning and the last level where you assist the US Military! The multiplayer is horrible, its like a rougher version of COD with vehicles... and we all know you dont give COD fan boys vehicles, they have no idea what to do with them! The area where this game gets the most credit and apparently the majority of the funding, is the back story... aided by the writer(s) of Red Dawn and several military analysts the story seems somewhat believable assuming certain key events happen over the next 15 years in accordance with the game.... not likely though! Overall the game falls short on delivering what could have been a fresh start for the THQ and Kaos teams... instead we see a somewhat-polished version of fuel of war with a better story, and much better voice acting. Pick it up if you have to, otherwise watch your friend play and follow along... it'll be just as satisfying and it'll save you $50 bucks!… Expand
  60. fryzee
    Mar 29, 2011
    5
    Not only was the single player short (took me 3-4 hours), it's buggy, the AI are annoying, always run in front of you and knock you out of the way so they can climb ladders first etc. And the multiplayer barely works. 1 in 50 games actually connect properly, others lag out and have players continuously running forwards. Overall it's not the game it should have been. Very disappointed.
  61. Vlade
    Mar 23, 2011
    6
    Singleplayer campaign is weak. Both friendly and enemy AI is far from intelligent. The game progression is very awkward and triggering transitions to the next stage is often frustrating because you're waiting on your friendly NPC's to catch up. Multiplayer is fun and feels like a mix of Battlefield: Bad Company 2 and Call of Duty (Modern Warfare/BlackOps), and in that same sense, itSingleplayer campaign is weak. Both friendly and enemy AI is far from intelligent. The game progression is very awkward and triggering transitions to the next stage is often frustrating because you're waiting on your friendly NPC's to catch up. Multiplayer is fun and feels like a mix of Battlefield: Bad Company 2 and Call of Duty (Modern Warfare/BlackOps), and in that same sense, it doesn't bring anything new to the table. Vehicles are limited and not as exhilarating to use as Battlefield ones, however, the heli's aren't bad. I guess its worth a try considering its only 50 bucks, but I kinda feel jipped considering the singleplayer was so darn short and freakin repetitive… Expand
  62. nomisco
    Apr 2, 2011
    5
    Pros: Some great set pieces and scripted parts, engaging story, intense action.
    Cons: Frustrating 'invisible' walls, clumsy AI, far too much clipping on objects.

    In summary, too many bugs for me to recommend, but a reasonable blast for a few hours, just don't expect too much.
  63. Rylan
    Apr 4, 2011
    6
    Homefront is an enjoyable objective led shooter but it's difficult to justify giving the game a higher rating than a 6.

    The story itself is fairly intense but you can't help but feeling like a very small cog in a very small machine. The objectives often seem trivial and often rely on very simple and repetetive tasks but what marks Homefront up is the realism and perhaps shock value of    Homefront is an enjoyable objective led shooter but it's difficult to justify giving the game a higher rating than a 6.

    The story itself is fairly intense but you can't help but feeling like a very small cog in a very small machine. The objectives often seem trivial and often rely on very simple and repetetive tasks but what marks Homefront up is the realism and perhaps shock value of something which, one day, could be a very real prospect. Sadly, the campaign is only three hours long and it's very difficult to justify paying such a high outlay if you don't intend to play the Multiplayer which is iffy at best.

    The mechanics are very last generation. The maps are far too linear and there is only one way to go about any objective which further reinforces the shallow nature of the campaign. There is no bullet penetration of any sort and you'll regularly find yourself frustrated whilst enemies hide behind cardboard boxes and thin wooden fences. There is no destructible environments and even exploding barrels will do nothing to the surrounding features.

    What frustrated me most was the fact that I was made to follow everyone everywhere and you'll find yourself waiting, and being pushed out of the way, frequently whilst your team climb ladders, move through doorways, drop into tunnels etc.

    There are the usual typical nods to things you'd expect from an FPS these days. You'll find yourself calling in airstrikes from time to time and there is a stealth mission which is too easy. The gem of these perks is a mission flying a helicopter but the choppers on board weapons are too powerful to provide much of a challenge.

    Really, if they ironed out some of the more finicky bits, made the game harder and more importantly, made it three times longer. It would be worth buying. As it stands this is rental at best.    … Expand
  64. Iwilechu
    Apr 7, 2011
    5
    The single player campaign's first and last levels are exciting, everything in between is a generic shooter with expendable characters and a shaky plot. For all the hype and advertising gimmicks that surrounded the release, it's also criminally short.

    The multiplayer fares better, upgrade system is intuitive and spending battle points makes the shooter more exciting. As absurd as this    The single player campaign's first and last levels are exciting, everything in between is a generic shooter with expendable characters and a shaky plot. For all the hype and advertising gimmicks that surrounded the release, it's also criminally short.

    The multiplayer fares better, upgrade system is intuitive and spending battle points makes the shooter more exciting. As absurd as this sounds, there's no bullet drop, travel delay, limiting range, or much drift on any of the weapons. The maps seem like they're designed around snipers considering how many long firing lanes are built into them. On top of all that, there are even perks to reduce ADS drift. Moral of the story: play sniper or get out.    … Expand
  65. joen00b
    Jun 14, 2011
    5
    This game brought flashes of Red Dawn to my mind; the game even starts in Colorado (where I happen to live)!! But, then you get into it, and... Ok, I understand FPS games are on rails, there is no deviating from the script, just shoot what the game code throws at ya, I'm fine with that and understand it. This game had potential for an epic story though, and that's what upsets me theThis game brought flashes of Red Dawn to my mind; the game even starts in Colorado (where I happen to live)!! But, then you get into it, and... Ok, I understand FPS games are on rails, there is no deviating from the script, just shoot what the game code throws at ya, I'm fine with that and understand it. This game had potential for an epic story though, and that's what upsets me the most. Instead of writing something great, they went for shock value. Instead of writing a great game, they went for a short story and threw their resources at PVP. The ending was a total let down. I don't play FPS games for cliffhangers, and if they expect to release more as a DLC to carry the story forward, I won't be buying it. That's about as damning as I can be towards the developers: I won't purchase what should have been part of the game in the first place. The game has amazing graphics, cool locations, semi-smart AI, and a cool feel, but, the NPC's are stupid, just downright stupid, reactionary.... it's like the story and personalities were written by a 13 year old boy that watched too many action movies. Cliche after cliche, and done poorly. The multiplayer is fun, using locations from the game... in fact, it seems the PVP maps were put together and a story was kind of put together to put the player in those locations for the stand alone FPS story mode. It's just another FPS with a solid weapon selection, and nothing really to make it stand out from any other FPS game out there. Stick with what you already own and save yourself the cash, other games do it better. Given the choice, I'd be in BF2 playing PVP over Homefront any day of the week. It's not 'terribad', mind you, it's just not that great. They thought PVP first, copied all the other popular games, then loosely strung a story together using a very cool premise, but failed to deliver on the story package. Again, the ending is a total letdown and very anticlimactic. My friends and I all couldn't believe that was the ending.… Expand
  66. mcnultys
    Apr 17, 2011
    7
    this had no beta test or demo i brought it the story is so bad i think mass effect 1 had a better story multiplayer seems rushed i now people will likes this i did a little bit there a better shooters out there
  67. pazin2
    Apr 19, 2011
    6
    I wouldn't go over a 6 for this game as it is irrefutably one of the best storylines that the gaming universe has seen, muddled up in too many cliche scenes and very Call-of-Duty Style Gameplay. I find it as one of those games you can only barely play. Only Just captured my intelligence through many previews and lead-ups to the game. Multiplayer on the other hand does deserve a little ,ifI wouldn't go over a 6 for this game as it is irrefutably one of the best storylines that the gaming universe has seen, muddled up in too many cliche scenes and very Call-of-Duty Style Gameplay. I find it as one of those games you can only barely play. Only Just captured my intelligence through many previews and lead-ups to the game. Multiplayer on the other hand does deserve a little ,if any, praise for its constructive potential and the use of in-game credits to buy power-ups, vehicles, ammo, etc.

    It is a fun game for the first few hours, then becomes boring quickly, Hardly worth anything over $30.

    PaidGamers    … Expand
  68. Aragond
    Apr 29, 2011
    5
    This is what is wrong with many games these days, they're all the same follow-the-bouncing-ball rubbish that makes those of us who have played games for decades roll our eyes and think of Kings Quest and its ilk. What happened to respecting player intelligence, to the wonders of sandbox games, of relying on player ingenuity? Nup. None of that. You WILL move through the suburb in preciselyThis is what is wrong with many games these days, they're all the same follow-the-bouncing-ball rubbish that makes those of us who have played games for decades roll our eyes and think of Kings Quest and its ilk. What happened to respecting player intelligence, to the wonders of sandbox games, of relying on player ingenuity? Nup. None of that. You WILL move through the suburb in precisely this order and you will shoot that guy at... now, and then... etc. And don't get me started on how quick the storyline is over.

    Fortunately, in my humble opinion, what redeems this thus-far stinking pile is two-fold: an excellent (if entirely implausible) story that has been very well thought through (helps to have an actual author on tap), and the multi-player. I'm not saying the MP is good, but I am saying its the first time I've ever bothered with it since I wasted my money on a game that took me 9 hours.    … Expand
  69. yota234
    Dec 4, 2011
    7
    In the start I would like to say, that this is a really average FPS, but it's not bad. The campaign is short but good, but the multiplayer is the most fun, especially when you have friends. The graphics are average too, but passable, not worth the full price, but I recommend you to buy it for a cheap price. I have heard about the Online Pass, which is on consoles, I played the game onIn the start I would like to say, that this is a really average FPS, but it's not bad. The campaign is short but good, but the multiplayer is the most fun, especially when you have friends. The graphics are average too, but passable, not worth the full price, but I recommend you to buy it for a cheap price. I have heard about the Online Pass, which is on consoles, I played the game on OnLive and there isn't an Online Pass, buy it there.… Expand
  70. Raskull
    May 24, 2011
    6
    I thought the single player campaign of the game was good. The storyline was 'Red Dawn' with North Koreans instead of Russians/Cubans. The background story explaining what happened was actually interesting and made sense. The graphics were fine, nothing fancy, and I didn't have the technical problems some people on here were talking about. I was upset with how the single player campaignI thought the single player campaign of the game was good. The storyline was 'Red Dawn' with North Koreans instead of Russians/Cubans. The background story explaining what happened was actually interesting and made sense. The graphics were fine, nothing fancy, and I didn't have the technical problems some people on here were talking about. I was upset with how the single player campaign suddenly ended, very short game, and left me with that sneaking suspicion that because it ended so suddenly with so much left that there will be DLC we will have to buy to continue the storyline to its conclusion. The Multiplayer was OK. The Battlepoints aren't anything new and it didn't have the teamwork feel like Battlefield:BC2 and just didn't seem as much fun either. I would recomend waiting until the game goes on sale as it is worth the playthrough.… Expand
  71. borrrden
    May 28, 2011
    6
    The first time I played through this game, I enjoyed it. However, the second time I found myself getting somewhat bored. This is a game that seems like a connected series of awesome moments, so when I am not in the awesome moments I feel bored. It is an interesting premise for a story, and a lot of the gameplay mechanics are truly entertaining, but I feel like I'm going to forget aboutThe first time I played through this game, I enjoyed it. However, the second time I found myself getting somewhat bored. This is a game that seems like a connected series of awesome moments, so when I am not in the awesome moments I feel bored. It is an interesting premise for a story, and a lot of the gameplay mechanics are truly entertaining, but I feel like I'm going to forget about it pretty soon. Graphically, this game gave my computer a slight amount of trouble at times with lag. My video card has held up well over the years (8800 GTX) and I was able to play this game on the highest settings with little problem. I will play a sequel if it is made!… Expand
  72. Progi
    May 30, 2011
    8
    Ð
  73. oblivion20
    May 31, 2011
    8
    Interesting game this, although flawed from a single player perspective due to the short campaign (7 levels) which took around 4 hours to complete at a push. The game is interesting because it does have a very healthy selection of weapons and ALL of them feel dangerous. Even playing this on normal is kind of like playing call of duty on hardcore, which I found quite refreshing. MultiplayerInteresting game this, although flawed from a single player perspective due to the short campaign (7 levels) which took around 4 hours to complete at a push. The game is interesting because it does have a very healthy selection of weapons and ALL of them feel dangerous. Even playing this on normal is kind of like playing call of duty on hardcore, which I found quite refreshing. Multiplayer is fast and varied and overall enjoyable, although the playerbase has much to be desired sadly. Overall if you find this CHEAP, get it if your a fan of FPS. Feels like a weird mix of COD and terminator salvation (due to building textures, city layouts etc)… Expand
  74. Muran
    Jun 10, 2011
    5
    Although the story behind the game has a lot of potential, the creators of this game did not work it out properly. I won't go in to any spoilers, but I do have to say the game ends rather abruptly and leaves you feeling like there could have been more. I wouldn't have been surprised if out of pressure this game was released before it actually was completed. The singleplayer will keep youAlthough the story behind the game has a lot of potential, the creators of this game did not work it out properly. I won't go in to any spoilers, but I do have to say the game ends rather abruptly and leaves you feeling like there could have been more. I wouldn't have been surprised if out of pressure this game was released before it actually was completed. The singleplayer will keep you occupied for a minimum of 4-6 hours depending on your skill and the difficulty you play it on. (I did it on normal and got stuck a few times due to bad AI and still finished in 5,5 hours)

    The only hope that was left for me was a good multiplayer, but here the game also fails. It is a mediocre mix between CoD and Battlefield, and either of these games would outdo homefront's multiplayer 10 times over.

    Conclusion: Do not buy this game if you value your money and want to play them over a long period of time. Not only does several bugs destroy the overall gameplay (invisible walls, bad AI etc) it's also over way to quickly. Now this wouldn't have been much of a problem if the multiplayer would have been good but that's also not the case.

    All in all I do give it a 5 out of 10, as the singleplayer was enjoyable even though it was very short, if the multiplayer would have been even slightly better it might have gotten a 7. My advice only buy this game if its on offer for less than 10 euros otherwise it's just not worth your money. If you do want to experience the singleplayer see if you can borrow it from someone who has been so unfortunate to buy the game.    … Expand
  75. daveyy12
    Oct 20, 2011
    8
    I agree to some extent with the negative reviews; e.g., game too short, linear plot, etc. However, there seemed to be a lot of action (also alot of cut scenes). I found that the weapons and AI were much better than Bad Company 2, and the battles were entertaining. If you can get this game on sale, I would recommend it highly.
  76. Davy
    Jul 26, 2011
    8
    Great game with a great story line. The characters and story were very in-depth and I could also see this being a film. It gets the player very involved with the war and what is happening down to a personal level. Even though this is a console game it is ported very well onto the PC and its graphics are very appealing even when ran in a lower spec. Multiplayer isnt great but its playableGreat game with a great story line. The characters and story were very in-depth and I could also see this being a film. It gets the player very involved with the war and what is happening down to a personal level. Even though this is a console game it is ported very well onto the PC and its graphics are very appealing even when ran in a lower spec. Multiplayer isnt great but its playable if youre bored or want a laugh with some friends. A good buy but probably not worth £20 at the moment. If youre looking for an in depth story and great SP and its about £15? you cant go wrong… Expand
  77. AlienSpaceBats
    Aug 31, 2012
    6
    Enjoyable and atmospheric; felt like slipping on a comfortable pair of slippers. Story is entertaining and has excellent set-pieces, very memorable and engaging throughout, reminds of both Crysis 2 and Half Life 2, campaign is ridiculously short though, I finished in 3 hours - I've played longer DLC than this. Not a bad buy if you can find it cheap.
  78. th0rn
    Dec 10, 2012
    6
    This game is playable, and in a vacuum would be fine, its is really just another modern shooter that tries to set itself apart with shock value. If you have played all of the other shooters and still want more it is fine and would still be enjoyable, but any medal of honor, battlefield or Call of duty would be better.
  79. Pendulum
    Oct 25, 2011
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Singelplayer: The back story for this game was nothing less than fantastic, but the end result was quit bad. The by far worst misson is when you are sneaking around on the farm where the american resistans is holding fort. Four people sneaking around only meters behind the enemies while talking just gets lame. So clearly the single player was not where Kaos had their focus.

    Multiplayer: The multiplayer for Homefront is quite good and it got a lot off potencial. Battlepoints is a great idea and give less experienced players a chance off getting the "heavy stuff". There is a few technical issus in the game, like the hit detection not always working. it might also be a little bit to easy to experienced FPS players. So all in all, a game with a lot off potencial that is worth checking out if you are tiered off Call of Duty.    … Expand
  80. frankynaky
    Dec 5, 2011
    8
    This game did not merit to receive such a low grade of 70. It's a fun game, and the graphics are oh so pretty if you have the rig to max out settings. This game has an interesting story, with a very disturbing "what if?" scenario. Its not a perfect game, but its not a waste of money. However, i'm also under the belief that no shooter is worth 60 dollars, even "mainstream" games suchThis game did not merit to receive such a low grade of 70. It's a fun game, and the graphics are oh so pretty if you have the rig to max out settings. This game has an interesting story, with a very disturbing "what if?" scenario. Its not a perfect game, but its not a waste of money. However, i'm also under the belief that no shooter is worth 60 dollars, even "mainstream" games such as Battlefield or Modern Warfare. But if you can get at this game at a good price, you will have as much with this game as any other shooter. Except it might be better as it deviates from the standard shooter game formula.… Expand
  81. Kameleonical
    Mar 2, 2015
    1
    Back when it came out I bought the book, the PS3 and 360 versions. I was a big fan.

    The SP is not bad, still now it has a good story with enemies you want to kill - if you are American or an ally. The mechanics though are poor, still now on PC too, just poorly made and there is a great story to read of the history and failure of Homefront. The multiplayer on console was good, it was    Back when it came out I bought the book, the PS3 and 360 versions. I was a big fan.

    The SP is not bad, still now it has a good story with enemies you want to kill - if you are American or an ally. The mechanics though are poor, still now on PC too, just poorly made and there is a great story to read of the history and failure of Homefront.

    The multiplayer on console was good, it was rather balanced, and never seemed unfair, a few years ago... Now on to PC multiplayer as of 2015:

    My score 1/10 reflects this most of all because as with any shooter it's the MP that gives a game longevity and weight. Firstly, this game has no more developer nor publisher support - it is done. What you see is what you get. And you get what the fan-run server gives you; though the servers are VERY few with no more that 30-odd players on at peak times in the EU.

    A typical game involves spawning, and getting shot. Or, it involves you running forward, and getting shot. You have to realise that elite players have been playing a long time, and they are maxed-out, know the maps very well, and use only the best weapons - yes obviously some are much better than others and remember, no updates nor patches will change anything ever again.

    All you are left with is a grind - a grind to get somewhere near the top alongside the other elite players. Be prepared to be slaughtered by certain players who are often on, and be prepared to have to work very hard to take pleasure in this.

    In the past, the console versions were great. But this leftover, unmoderated, with no more patches nor balance fixes game, is quite simply rubbish unless you are one of those elite players enjoying farming uneccessary XP from you.    … Expand
  82. Plantjen
    Jan 26, 2012
    5
    I had too high expectations when starting this game. I see no reason to ever buy this game, unless you are a bit short on money and in desperate need of a new shooter. But even then, you're better of buying an older game that is on discount. It will probably have better graphics, level design and overall gameplay. I also didn't like the story. They went for showing the harsh reality ofI had too high expectations when starting this game. I see no reason to ever buy this game, unless you are a bit short on money and in desperate need of a new shooter. But even then, you're better of buying an older game that is on discount. It will probably have better graphics, level design and overall gameplay. I also didn't like the story. They went for showing the harsh reality of war, but didn't pull it off. They put the bar too high for themselves, the result is not satisfying to play.

    The only reason why I didn't rate even lower is COD:MW3, nuff said...    … Expand
  83. MiyazuHime
    Feb 17, 2012
    6
    The first half of the game will surely disappoint you with boring and simple missions, you will merely shoot few enemies and move forward. It is that bad, because shooting is worst part of this game, you move your rifle as slow as turret, even making a sensitivity higher won't help out. Apart of that drawback a game has it's rebellion atmosphere, you will actually feel as rebellion whoThe first half of the game will surely disappoint you with boring and simple missions, you will merely shoot few enemies and move forward. It is that bad, because shooting is worst part of this game, you move your rifle as slow as turret, even making a sensitivity higher won't help out. Apart of that drawback a game has it's rebellion atmosphere, you will actually feel as rebellion who fights enemy army, which occupies your country. So the story is proper, but that is not enough to be a good game, especially a shooter with bad shooting gameplay. Though there is a good variety of weapons, no knife, but rpg and sniper rifle, which you will use depending on mission's objective. Also the heavy fire will do your rebelion mate's constructed light tank Goliath and you will have a remote control to target enemy to eliminate them. It could be more fun, if you would get a full driving control of it, but anyway it's ok. Later on you will even fly a helicopter, easy to control it and of course fun to destroy enemy humvees and tanks. That's all presents only in a few last chapters, where you will get a plenty of fights, otherwise it would be a plain game. Graphics and sounds are the pros of this game, which highs up a rating of it a bit. I hope developers of Homefront will learn from they mistakes and bring a better game next time. I'll give it 6 of 10 only because of the last chapters.… Expand
  84. Gettys63
    Dec 2, 2012
    8
    This game is really addictive and challenges. But it's surprisingly short game and leave me in cliffhanger at the end. Nothing else to say more about this game. Addictive game is good enough for me.
  85. PatrickJ831
    Mar 9, 2012
    6
    Although it is COD Like game, And the story is shorter, Other part of the still unsatisfactory, For example, scene effects is commendable, But the multiplayer mode is really like a COD of mixed BF
  86. MrMicrochip
    Mar 15, 2012
    6
    This game is hard one to judge. The was nothing wrong with gameplay and even the graphics were ok, but single player was awfully short! The premise was interesting but the game didn't quite make it, actually not even near.
  87. dumle
    Aug 8, 2012
    5
    Homefront tries to set it self apart from the other military shooters by its setting and darker tone. And despite its sometimes over nationalistic-moments is works quite alright. It does not work well enough however to truly set it apart from all the other military shooters and what you get is a pretty standard military shooter with a not particularly long campaign. The combat is decentHomefront tries to set it self apart from the other military shooters by its setting and darker tone. And despite its sometimes over nationalistic-moments is works quite alright. It does not work well enough however to truly set it apart from all the other military shooters and what you get is a pretty standard military shooter with a not particularly long campaign. The combat is decent and the graphic works well enough and if you are looking for a few our of short mindless shooting for a cheap buck you could do worse.… Expand
  88. DeadlyCheese
    Nov 22, 2012
    6
    Homefront tries to be, basically a futuristic Call of Duty mixed with Battlefield and does an OK job but not great. The single player is extremely short and on normal difficulty I was able to complete it within 3 hours by just going straight through and ignoring bonuses such as achievements and collecting notes. Whilst the campaign was fun I found it was extremely similar to other modernHomefront tries to be, basically a futuristic Call of Duty mixed with Battlefield and does an OK job but not great. The single player is extremely short and on normal difficulty I was able to complete it within 3 hours by just going straight through and ignoring bonuses such as achievements and collecting notes. Whilst the campaign was fun I found it was extremely similar to other modern military shooters such as a COD, MOH and BF. The campaign is very limited as you must follow one direction with no choices, it is extremely scripted and the invisible walls can be a pain. Multiplayer on the other hand is a complete change from the single player. The multiplayer is very fun and the Battle points system is great as it allows you to focus on helping team mates and completing objectives in order to gain enough points to spend them on your chosen rewards without the need to promote camping unlike killstreaks. Whilst the guns seemed balanced, the vehicles did sometimes get on my nerves. Overall the game is OK and the multiplayer had much potential however the PC version is close to dead with only around 4 full servers at a time. 6/10… Expand
  89. Glitshy
    Aug 9, 2014
    10
    A great game, the story isn't that good but the PvP is awsome. It has a completely new reward-system for things like calling in tanks or helicopers. Not like in many other games with kills in a row, you get points for everything you do for the team, such as conquering a point or killing enemies. And also a very good price, but sadly this game is pretty much dead.
  90. PrincessRose
    Feb 27, 2019
    6
    A interesting story but rather average game, it's very linear, just follow people around on a map and do exactly what they say, no freedom to explore or go where you want.

    It's ok to buy on special if you want a quick fps you can complete in a day or 2, thankfully I got this for free as the game is too short and not worth the full price of $29.95AUD for it. Since it's an ok game and    A interesting story but rather average game, it's very linear, just follow people around on a map and do exactly what they say, no freedom to explore or go where you want.

    It's ok to buy on special if you want a quick fps you can complete in a day or 2, thankfully I got this for free as the game is too short and not worth the full price of $29.95AUD for it.

    Since it's an ok game and quite fun I'd recommend it.    … Expand
  91. jelikey
    Sep 23, 2015
    7
    A great game marred by performance and optimization issues since release. Hold off until a couple of patches iron things out is my advice unless you're willing to do a lot of .ini editing and searching around online for various solutions/tweaks. As others have said the multiplayer is a very nice mix of battlefield and call of duty, and really brings some great new concepts to the table.A great game marred by performance and optimization issues since release. Hold off until a couple of patches iron things out is my advice unless you're willing to do a lot of .ini editing and searching around online for various solutions/tweaks. As others have said the multiplayer is a very nice mix of battlefield and call of duty, and really brings some great new concepts to the table. Personally I love just flying around in the UAV over a match and marking targets for my team =). If you're up to the challenge, go for it and pick the game up now. Once you get it running, it really is a great title that deserves a higher score than those it has been given so far.… Expand
  92. pratikgorasia
    Feb 25, 2016
    10
    homefront is short but action packed game
    great gameplay,good acting and emotiions
    graphics are cool ,paly in very high graphics looks awsome and beutiful
    campaign have good story but short
    i enjoyed it very much
    waiting for sequel
  93. batailxx
    Jul 25, 2015
    7
    Nice Game, but very short! I have finished the game after 10 hours.
    I was very surprised, because I bought the game without looking critics or sth. else. The price was the reason. 0,99€. I think for this price, 10 hours gaming is OK.
  94. renogza
    Dec 27, 2015
    7
    I played the entire game through on guerilla difficulty and that's when the best and worst aspects of the game both really come out. The gameplay was fast and furious and more realistic than any other fps I've played to date, but the limitations hurt even more too. Creative solutions are a no-no here, since the literally endless supply of enemies and horribly cramped level boundaries meanI played the entire game through on guerilla difficulty and that's when the best and worst aspects of the game both really come out. The gameplay was fast and furious and more realistic than any other fps I've played to date, but the limitations hurt even more too. Creative solutions are a no-no here, since the literally endless supply of enemies and horribly cramped level boundaries mean you've gotta play it their way, plus with no real control over your weaponry, mods, or knowing anything about how good one is versus the other, you've got a looooot of trial and error ahead of you.… Expand
  95. Brian_Williams
    Aug 13, 2016
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Look, this game is old now. Spoilers will be spoilers but this is one of the more real games that I've played. It really brought the feel that there was no hope in the game for America. If there was one moment in the game that made it real. Was North Korean soldiers shooting a kids parents while I passed in a prison bus. And seeing the kid crying while holding onto his now dead parents. I just thought that was pretty real to be honest. Just had to get that out there. I frankly loved this game to death, far away from any Call of Duty title besides regen health. But hey, is great game.… Expand
  96. EptaEpt
    Sep 13, 2022
    1
    Sorry, but positive feedback is not available in your region. At least until your leadership changes the two-faced policy in their actions and statements.
  97. Arquitte
    Apr 6, 2011
    5
    the multiplayer is about all this title is good for. once you reach the convoy hijack in this game forget it. all enthusiasm goes out the window. the chopper controls are a chore and once you get into position the action to hijack cant be done. dont waist your money.the half a game you get is not worth the price they ask for it. this game left me fealing ripped off and not wanting to buythe multiplayer is about all this title is good for. once you reach the convoy hijack in this game forget it. all enthusiasm goes out the window. the chopper controls are a chore and once you get into position the action to hijack cant be done. dont waist your money.the half a game you get is not worth the price they ask for it. this game left me fealing ripped off and not wanting to buy a thq game ever again.… Expand
  98. DGDrocks7
    Mar 5, 2015
    6
    Now I see why people didn't really like Homefront. Don't get me wrong, it's NOT a bad game, but it's a disappointing one, especially when you see how much THQ advertised and promoted this game. So what's brought this game down? The singleplayer. First, it's awefully short; you can beat it in 4 hours. But the story, wow, there's such a cool background and the characters are totallyNow I see why people didn't really like Homefront. Don't get me wrong, it's NOT a bad game, but it's a disappointing one, especially when you see how much THQ advertised and promoted this game. So what's brought this game down? The singleplayer. First, it's awefully short; you can beat it in 4 hours. But the story, wow, there's such a cool background and the characters are totally relatable. And that's what annoyed me the most. It has such a good premise that you wonder why isn't it any longer. And the gameplay. It's like a typical military shooter. The problem is that it holds your hand WAY TOO MUCH. For example, you'll have to take out certain enemies, and there's an icon on it saying "SHOOT". Well, what else would I do? Blow a kiss to it? The problems of the singleplayer outweighed it's benefits.

    Multiplayer fares better. The PC servers are still up, and there's at least one full server on afternoons. It's like a combination of Battlefield and COD. You can use points in-game to purchase things like armor and even vehicles. Maps are quite good too. Ground Control, the main mode, has you capturing certain points, like Domination in Battlefield, only that you can move up to a certain area if one team dominates it, like in the Rush mode in Battlefield.

    In summary, Homefront is full-priced game with budget-game quality. Buy it on sale.    … Expand
  99. keefbaker
    Jan 1, 2014
    5
    This game suffers from unforgivable sins. Scenes where you are stopped not by a genuine obstacle but because the narrative doesn't want you to walk there yet. As opposed to the call of duty single player campaigns which are filled with characters and spikes in the story this was just grey porridge. Sure, the idea of a Korean invasion of America and a resistance army is a good one. But whenThis game suffers from unforgivable sins. Scenes where you are stopped not by a genuine obstacle but because the narrative doesn't want you to walk there yet. As opposed to the call of duty single player campaigns which are filled with characters and spikes in the story this was just grey porridge. Sure, the idea of a Korean invasion of America and a resistance army is a good one. But when it's implemented like this it doesn't matter how good the idea is.… Expand
  100. Larux18
    Feb 18, 2020
    4
    Very generic shooter, not that I didn't have fun with it, but it just doesn't innovate both in terms of story and in terms of gameplay. The campaign is incredibly short and fails to make a real impact on you, since it throws all of these "shocking" moments almost all at once, making the player more apathetic, achieving the opposite of what it set out to do. While the multiplayer isVery generic shooter, not that I didn't have fun with it, but it just doesn't innovate both in terms of story and in terms of gameplay. The campaign is incredibly short and fails to make a real impact on you, since it throws all of these "shocking" moments almost all at once, making the player more apathetic, achieving the opposite of what it set out to do. While the multiplayer is actually very fun and still has some people playing it, there's definitely many better alternatives now a days which make this game not really worth your time.… 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 »