Homefront - Catch all

I'm curious if this would appeal to the BF/BC2 crowd as a filler between now and BF3 (After 200 hours on BC2 maps I'm looking for a change of scenery). How is the movement? Gun feel? Vehicles?

Already not liking what I'm hearing about the camera PoV.

RichyRambo wrote:

I'm curious if this would appeal to the BF/BC2 crowd as a filler between now and BF3 (After 200 hours on BC2 maps I'm looking for a change of scenery). How is the movement? Gun feel? Vehicles?

Already not liking what I'm hearing about the camera PoV.

Short guys can also fire guns, you know?

:p

RichyRambo wrote:

I'm curious if this would appeal to the BF/BC2 crowd as a filler between now and BF3 (After 200 hours on BC2 maps I'm looking for a change of scenery).

I think it might fill that void well.

TempestBlayze wrote:
RichyRambo wrote:

I'm curious if this would appeal to the BF/BC2 crowd as a filler between now and BF3 (After 200 hours on BC2 maps I'm looking for a change of scenery).

I think it might fill that void well.

*inappropriate comment about your mother*

/Thursday Night Battlefield

oMonarca wrote:

Definitely tagging this baby. I want to know GWJ's reactions to the game. Can it dethrone DoD:S to me?

Me too, I am thinking about it, but waiting for the verdicts from goodjers!

Played through the first lvl after it unlocked on Steam last night and was impressed. The atmosphere definitely has a Red dawn vibe, which is great of course and the graphics are excellent (comparisons to Crysis notwithstanding).

I wasn't impressed with the AI (both friendly and enemy) and the game seems to compensate by throwing waves of enemies at you. This is only the 1st level though so hoping different environments will allow more interesting AI in SP. I also didn't like the mouse smoothing but that could easily be my settings, I was playing in 3D with the 50% performance hit that goes along with it. I'll mess around in non-3D and to see if it feels better with 60+ fps.

RichyRambo wrote:

I'm curious if this would appeal to the BF/BC2 crowd as a filler between now and BF3 (After 200 hours on BC2 maps I'm looking for a change of scenery). How is the movement? Gun feel? Vehicles?

Already not liking what I'm hearing about the camera PoV.

In MP the PoV is normal. They have the ability to make squads too. I think it'll be a fun diversion until BF3.

Tkyl wrote:
ranalin wrote:

The graphics arent on Crysis 2 level, but i like that. It makes things feel more scuffy? Not sure how to explain, but nice and shiney models would've felt off. Plus it helps performance. Biggest complaint really is not know what it takes to unlock things in MP. Some things are listed and give you a lvl you need. Others nothing. When its locked you cant even get info on the object. Map areas are very well done.

If you're talking about scopes and camos for weapons, those are unlocked by getting kills with the weapon. If you go to the service record, somewhere in there it will show each weapon and your current kill count and needed kill count for the next unlock.

Well i'm trying to unlock sniper rifles first. I dont see any additional scopes for them, but the camos do tell you at what level of a kill streak you need to unlock them. But thats it. When i highlight the next sniper rifle. M200 it doesnt say anything. Its just locked.

How's the pacing in MP so far? As a reference, I found MW2 a bit more on the frantic side, while BC2 on the more pondered one.

Where does HF fall?

oMonarca wrote:

How's the pacing in MP so far? As a reference, I found MW2 a bit more on the frantic side, while BC2 on the more pondered one.

Where does HF fall?

depends on the map mode. They have a TDM and a Control Point style map, and i think a third but i've not played it yet. TDM reminds me more of MW2. The CP more like CP2. The maps are really cool. Yes there's wide open areas for snipers, but there's plenty of cover too. There's a death cam. Oh i'm sure some will hate this, but there is a melee knife. I've used it a few times of course. Now iwhat i'm sure some will definitely fuss about is that when going up against someone with a pistol 1 shot wont kill unless its head shot. Its enough time to get the stab in. M16 or other guns i was dead b4 i could blink their way.

Ouch! Reviews are starting to trickle in (like the Eurogamer one), and it seems the SP campaign is enough of a stinker to drive away people who might actually try to pick up the MP.

I wonder if this game actually gathers enough of a community to last online :S It doesn't sound hopeful, although I don't see nothing wrong with it, and the theme is actually pretty interesting.

Thin_J wrote:
oMonarca wrote:

Ouch! Reviews are starting to trickle in (like the Eurogamer one), and it seems the SP campaign is enough of a stinker to drive away people who might actually try to pick up the MP.

The Eurogamer review read to me like they handed the game to someone with completely unrealistic expectations.

Yeap, seemed like he was all about the SP portion of the game. Destructoid has a more balanced approach, even if it's scoring it lower. Guess I'll be checking on Steam Stats for the next couple of weeks. If the game gathers a solid 5000 regular user base, it might just be worth it.

oMonarca wrote:

Ouch! Reviews are starting to trickle in (like the Eurogamer one), and it seems the SP campaign is enough of a stinker to drive away people who might actually try to pick up the MP.

The Eurogamer review read to me like they handed the game to someone with completely unrealistic expectations.

He mentions things that are basically completely standard in this particular genre at this point and then complains about them for a paragraph at a time.

I've not played the game yet so I don't exactly have a horse in the race at this point, but that particular review sounded very much like the reviewer just has FPS fatigue in general and needs a break from the genre.

83% downloaded. Go Steam Go!

oMonarca wrote:
Thin_J wrote:
oMonarca wrote:

Ouch! Reviews are starting to trickle in (like the Eurogamer one), and it seems the SP campaign is enough of a stinker to drive away people who might actually try to pick up the MP.

The Eurogamer review read to me like they handed the game to someone with completely unrealistic expectations.

Yeap, seemed like he was all about the SP portion of the game. Destructoid has a more balanced approach, even if it's scoring it lower. Guess I'll be checking on Steam Stats for the next couple of weeks. If the game gathers a solid 5000 regular user base, it might just be worth it.

But they flogged the SP experience in the runup to release. Honestly, if there ever was a case from dropping SP and just releasing a MP game might this be it?

Don't think that's enough. You gotta have that lure in order to really make it big. It's hard to properly market a MP only game. A really scripted campaign? Well, it's adequately full of trailer material, and if it's easy to market (and for the public to understand) then it's easier to make a big profit.

But if the expectations set by marketing aren't met, well, that whole awareness works against the game, as a thunderstorm of potty word of mouth ravages all that development work.

If anything, I think THQ sold this game wrong. If it took a more subtle approach, with lowered expectations, it might actually take away some pressure off the game so it could shine under a better light.

It is, after all, a new IP.

If the campaign is short, I wonder what the difficulty balance is. Trying to decide if I should play on a harder difficulty.

Yeah. That's the irony. I'm game to try new IP. I feel like I was "tricked" in this case, though. Like they attempted a bait and switch and if I give them my money I'm the sucker. So I won't buy the game until the price drops significantly.

I think the other thing that bums me out is having played "The Saboteur" I got a taste for the whole idea of an open world, story-based game about a resistance. I enjoyed it and would happily have played a serious game like that about the US. They just didn't make that game.

oMonarca wrote:

Don't think that's enough. You gotta have that lure in order to really make it big. It's hard to properly market a MP only game.

Really? I'm sure i'm not the only one who couldnt give a flip about a SP narrative in a FPS.

ranalin wrote:
oMonarca wrote:

Don't think that's enough. You gotta have that lure in order to really make it big. It's hard to properly market a MP only game.

Really? I'm sure i'm not the only one who couldnt give a flip about a SP narrative in a FPS.

Yeah, but those really big numbers lie on a good SP campaign. I think. MP-only shooters haven't struck gold yet. I really think a flashy SP sells a sh*t ton more units, and a solid MP maintains momentum.

oMonarca wrote:
ranalin wrote:
oMonarca wrote:

Don't think that's enough. You gotta have that lure in order to really make it big. It's hard to properly market a MP only game.

Really? I'm sure i'm not the only one who couldnt give a flip about a SP narrative in a FPS.

Yeah, but those really big numbers lie on a good SP campaign. I think. MP-only shooters haven't struck gold yet. I really think a flashy SP sells a sh*t ton more units, and a solid MP maintains momentum.

Not sure... i think we've seen a swing since MW2 to a focus on MP more than SP. Why the SP portions are getting shorter. I think the numbers would show its the MP that drives sells.

DSGamer wrote:

I think the other thing that bums me out is having played "The Saboteur" I got a taste for the whole idea of an open world, story-based game about a resistance. I enjoyed it and would happily have played a serious game like that about the US. They just didn't make that game.

I was thinking the same thing, a more open-world approach in a fps like this would have been something much more interesting. As is, playing follow-the-leader with an annoying npc from scripted setpiece to scripted setpiece is not something I really ever care to do in a game again. I want to feel like I have choice and agency in a game, not simply follow a developer-dictated script in some kind of interactive movie.

oMonarca wrote:
ranalin wrote:
oMonarca wrote:

Don't think that's enough. You gotta have that lure in order to really make it big. It's hard to properly market a MP only game.

Really? I'm sure i'm not the only one who couldnt give a flip about a SP narrative in a FPS.

Yeah, but those really big numbers lie on a good SP campaign. I think. MP-only shooters haven't struck gold yet. I really think a flashy SP sells a sh*t ton more units, and a solid MP maintains momentum.

Yeah... name a multiplayer only multiplatform FPS that saw real mainstream success.

I've played about half an hour of the campaign and an hour of the multiplayer.

MannishBoy wrote:

If the campaign is short, I wonder what the difficulty balance is. Trying to decide if I should play on a harder difficulty.

It seemed hard enough to me. Actually, I didn't even see a prompt to change the difficulty. It might be that you need to unlock a harder mode.

oMonarca wrote:

Ouch! Reviews are starting to trickle in (like the Eurogamer one), and it seems the SP campaign is enough of a stinker to drive away people who might actually try to pick up the MP.

This is bizarre, reminds me a lot of the recent Dragon Age 2 reviews. I'm reading a lot of good things about the story in one review and others saying that the campaign is no good. They're tied, no? This, to me, just solidifies the need for personal hands on experience. It's getting to the point when I agree fully with *no* reviews. If someone is expecting the next big jump in shooter campaign evolution, bad news - they're not going to fix what works, even if it doesn't for jaded and burnt out reviewers. The introduction to the campaign, both the cinematic and in-game stuff, definitely left me on-edge. I stopped because I needed to get some MP in before work.

The MP seems very good, but the game is no doubt rough visually. My only long-term FPS experiences have been MW1 and MW2, not that I haven't tried others, and I could see myself playing this for a while. The BP system is nice, provided you're somewhat proficient. I feel like once I learn the maps and learn the controls for vehicles I'll be able to dominate.

The maps are good, with a lot of nooks to shoot from, and vantages to those nooks to counter. I liked the open trainyard one less than the other two I tried.

I'll stew on it a bit at work and decide whether or not I want to buy this afterward. It seems to me, if nothing else, like a good alternative to MW2. Where MW2 is twitchy, this is a little more subdued. Where MW2 is small-scale to the point of claustrophobic, this is larger scale (6 player teams vs. 12). I've never put more than 2 hours into a game's MP that features vehicles, so it's a fresh experience for me.

oMonarca wrote:

Yeah, but those really big numbers lie on a good SP campaign. I think. MP-only shooters haven't struck gold yet. I really think a flashy SP sells a sh*t ton more units, and a solid MP maintains momentum.

I wasn't part of the scene at the time, but IIRC Battlefield was essentially MP-only. Or there were single player challenges that were just bot-driven.

And CS was certainly not driven to the peak of the genre by a campaign.

How cluttered MP servers are on launch days makes me think ranalin has the right of it here.

Thin_J wrote:

Yeah... name a multiplayer only multiplatform FPS that saw real mainstream success.

I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not. I blame Daylight Savings.

Podunk wrote:
Thin_J wrote:

Yeah... name a multiplayer only multiplatform FPS that saw real mainstream success.

I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not. I blame Daylight Savings. :)

I'm not sure what you're saying. Many of us ignore the SP campaigns. I've never played SP in BFBC 1 or 2 and ignored it in MW2 and BLOPS, but plenty of people are motivated to buy these games by it having the complete package. I think the best example is Halo. People largely enjoyed the change of pace in ODST and Reach and I think in the case of those games people played the SP and often ignored the MP, the MP being old hat at this point.

Podunk wrote:
Thin_J wrote:

Yeah... name a multiplayer only multiplatform FPS that saw real mainstream success.

I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not. I blame Daylight Savings. :)

It isn't. Team Fortress is essentially a failure on the consoles, and it was the best example I could come up with. CS and Battlefield were multiplayer only PC titles, and in Battlefield's case then got SP campaigns when they went to consoles.

The only real success I could think of was BF1943 and it was a $15 downloadable title.

http://www.joystiq.com/2011/03/15/homefront-review/

Occasionally, when you notice you happen to be fighting on a Little League field or mall parking lot, you get a glimpse of Homefront's potential, but profoundly stupid in-game advertising is there to snatch it away just as quickly. The only thing I can figure is that the Koreans have turned the area outside San Francisco into some sort of Hooters/White Castle internment camp, so densely do they dot Homefront's retail landscape.

In game advertising? What were they thinking? I think that's why I'm so bummed about this. It seems like there was a really cool idea here and it's been pooped on.

ranalin wrote:
oMonarca wrote:

Don't think that's enough. You gotta have that lure in order to really make it big. It's hard to properly market a MP only game.

Really? I'm sure i'm not the only one who couldnt give a flip about a SP narrative in a FPS.

I'm with ya. I haven't touched the single player part of BC2. Bought it strictly for multiplayer. Maybe if I get bored I might give it a try, but unlikely.