User Score
5.6

Mixed or average reviews- based on 457 Ratings

User score distribution:

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
  1. Mar 18, 2011
    3
    This game had no beta and has no demo, but I took a chance and bought the game anyway. Big mistake. This is a console game, not meant to be played on the PC. Basic features like aiming with the mouse have bugs. You'll get low FPS in even the lowest visual setting and all eye candy off. There are invisible walls that you can't shoot through. No bullet penetration through any material. Broken spawn points. Game modes with pointless objectives. Last but not least, the first hour I played I ran into a autoaim cheater, and just about everyone who's played MP has as well. If you want a good overview of the problems people are having, take a look at the homefront forums. If you want a better game similar to this one, go with a Battlefield game. Expand
  2. Mar 15, 2011
    9
    So I DL'd it on steam, 9GB and it took around 2 hours. Within minutes I was playing. I played about 5 MP matches first, then the entire first SP level.

    In MP I went 34-16 in those matches and ranked up to lvl. 6.
    SP was engaging and fun.
    MP was a blast. Played 4 on 4 for a bit then 16 on 16. Only tried assault kit. But used perks like BMP, HUMVEE and my favorite, Hellfire missiles. Once
    you save up 1100 Battle points you get 2 shots with the Hellfire. I only missed twice and say I'm about 8/10 with it.

    There is a comma rose for spotting and stuff, there are squads but I couldn't see how to spawn on the squad. Maps are a mix of big and small, most cool thing about them is tons of cover, in and outside of buildings and tons of ladders to climb and get elevated positions.

    Graphics look great, I'm running all on medium at 1440x900 10:9 aspect.

    Set up my controls exactly like BC2. Prone and crouch sprint and knife are all the same.

    I was typically in the top 2-5 on the server. I saw many clans already turning up their servers. But most were like KAOS #101 etc.

    What else? There's no destruction, but considering how softly and thoughtfully you want to move around in this game, that is cool. Most of my kills came from finding a good cover spot with my back protected and just killing idiots who ran runnin' and gunnin' like they were playing COD.

    I really liked the fact that in TDM and BattleGround you never had to worry about a guy spawning behind you, it kept the maps separated by troop concentration for safe spawning.

    I never got spawn camped, and almost always knew what and who killed me and why.

    First 3 hours impression.... I want to play more, but gotta get to work soon.

    I found nothing too odd or glitchey. At one point in MP my controls went screwy, like my crosshairs kept wanting to point in the air on their own, so I restarted the game and it was fine. At another point in one map i couldn't jump up a little one foot step like it was a map error or something.

    Overall I'd find it hard to comparing it to BC2, BF2 or COD. It's kinda it's own thing, a little bit of all of them. Collecting those points and spending them on cool **** is easy, just watch the little meter on the right and when you get 1100 press 4 for Hellfire, or if you want to spend 250 you get 3 AT rockets. They suck vs. infantry though, or I don't know how to shoot them. Of course all that is cutomizable, I unlocked other things like flack jackets and UAV drones that I didn't even load out with yet. I'd say at 4am there was about 600 to 1000 people playing online. I am ranked 1256th on the leader board.

    Anyway ramble complete. If U get the game, you'll likely enjoy it. At least the first 3 hours. Who knows where it goes from here.
    Expand
  3. Mar 15, 2011
    10
    So much better than the PC ports we usually get. The single-player is short but very memorable. The multiplayer is extremely fun. Battle Commander and battle-points are really unique and give some rejuvenation to an old FPS formula. I will definitely be playing this for a while, and this game will be up there with Battlefield 3 and Red Orchestra 2 as the best FPS PC releases for this year.
  4. Mar 15, 2011
    5
    I've been excited about this game for quite a while, I found the premise to be interesting and the game play looked like a decent cross between the Call of Duty franchise and the Battlefield franchise. Unfortunately what I got was a mediocre game at absolute best.

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

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

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

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

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

    In summary I think this game could have been much better. I won't say this game is horrible since it's at least playable, but I won't say it's good either. It's wholly mediocre. If you're only interesting in the single player then I suggest renting it. If you're more interested in the multiplayer then I'd advise you wait until there's been a good deal of post launch support, or until it's in the bargain bin. Whichever comes first. Kaos Studios should have spent more time working on the game than promoting it.
    Expand
  5. Mar 19, 2011
    0
    Let me begin by saying I was a big fan of Frontlines Fuel of War both single player and multiplayer. When I heard THQ was developing another game I was hoping for a sequel without the glitches, lag, etc. Like many of you I was checking the status of this greatly anticipated game on youtube and various other websites for all the information I could get. When the release date was set I began counting down the days only to have it pushed back again and again. "Okay" I thought, I'd rather see a delay then for them to release a game of poor quality. I was wrong, regrettably very wrong! Homefront could have been great; Homefront could have been ground breaking both in premise and game play. Like I said earlier; Frontlines was fantastic, so good in fact the "Big Guys"copied ideas from it such as drones etc. The battle point system was a welcome addition instead of kill streaks which more than likely will and should be copied by other developers. The single player is way to short, the graphics are average to say the least while the movement of your character is like he has a twenty pound dump in his pants! His movements are slow, methodical not at all crisp or sharp like other FPS games. Multiplayer is a joke, that's if you can get in a game at all, joining friends is virtually impossible. It went from dedicated servers to P2P because they underestimated the online attraction; they're in the gaming industry right? MP is what many people play day in and day out and these guys are not prepared? All 16 player games will now be hosted on P2P not dedicated. Make no mistake; multiplayer is a camper / sniper haven which kills it right off the bat, the weapon selection is poor and the fact you can't add more than one attachment to your weapon is a joke. No sight and silencer combo WTF? Why Not? All the while your character is still running around with that dump in his pants! Overall this game is a failure in every way possible, with such high hopes it pales in comparison to other FPS games past or present. I mean really THQ what were you thinking? To add insult to injury if you buy used or rent you have to pay 10 bucks to play online past level 5! This was done of course to prevent people from just renting the game and also brings in a few extra bucks to boot. Like paying 60 dollars for this crap wasn't enough THQ. Put your greedy little hands back in your pockets and try developing a game we were all hoping you would! Save your money and rent if you must. Don't spend 60.00 or even 20.00 for this game, soon enough it will be in the bargain bin or on ebay for 8.00 to 10.00 dollars. Complete and utter fail THQ you should be embarrassed and ashamed! The gamers have spoken and we're not going to take this anymore it's unacceptable, a patch for this, a download for that, a quick fix for the other thing. When are you developers going to get it right? Its no wonder your stock dropped 25 percent the day of release! Thats our way of saying "Congratulations on a job well done" Expand
  6. Mar 24, 2011
    9
    9.o This game is too good for an 8, but slightly missing the mark for a 9. 1st.)This is a solid FPS, and was worth buying. 2.)My friends and I did not have any technical problems downloading or playing this game on our gaming PC's. 3.)the single player mode is driven by an interesting and captivating story, but was unfortunately in my opinion too short, which seems to be the trend in FPS. The graphics are good (nothing new or earth shattering), but good. I did notice differences in graphics when I used different computers. So, if you want it to look good, you'll need an updated graphic card, and a good Flat screen HD monitor/TV. You'll also want to customize your settings. That's what I did anyway, and finally the MP mode is addictive and different. Sometimes you feel rewarded and sometimes frustrated. It will depend on how adaptable you are to different playing styles. You will still find some campers here and there, but at least you have a good shot at squashing them. The game is mostly balanced. It feels good to be able to knife a sniper, who just shot up your team mates, and not see hackers jumping 2-3 stories high in one jump onto a place that no one else can climb up to like in COD. I'm enjoying the MP. So, I really can't complain. Expand
  7. Mar 15, 2011
    10
    I must applaud to THQ for creating a game that's risky yet touches emotions. Never thought anyone would recreate the classic gameplay of Half-Life and give it a new twist. Despite the graphics not being competitive with Battlefield and COD, it was the least of my concerns since the campaign was so unique and inspiring with multiplayer features topping recent FPS games.
  8. Mar 15, 2011
    4
    Play it for the setting if you like the idea of it, otherwise you probably won't enjoy it. I only got 4 hours played out of it. And that's with messing around a bit "talking" to random people and trying to find the news clipping easter eggs, not playing for speed at all.

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

    Was mediocre, multiplayer is unnecessary and probably tacked on. Not worth 50 dollars - maybe 20. Also, the amount of people who only have 1 rating and 1 review reviewing this game makes me suspicious of astroturfing fake high scores from the publisher/developer.
    Expand
  9. Mar 15, 2011
    9
    Great game, very moody atmospheric single player, and I'm loving the multiplayer. The multiplayer is fast paced, and the developers have clearly payed a lot of attention to making this game feel like a PC game, and not just another console knock off. One rather unique thing that this game does very well is how it makes the battlefield feel extremely chaotic, flaming vehicle debris and explosions everywhere :) Expand
  10. Mar 15, 2011
    10
    Great, bold storyline. Eventhough the campign is short, I think it's just the right duration since multiplayer compensate the lifespan of the game. Hope THQ makes a sequel for it. Keep it coming!
  11. Aug 15, 2011
    4
    The game had an interesting (if nonsensical) premise and had some pretty neat stuff around that; I liked their attempts at building the atmosphere of a threat from the greater Korean republic, even if the basic premises involved were silly.

    This was, unfortunately, the only really good thing about the game. Its single player is very short - even on the highest difficulty on you first
    playthrough, it will likely take you only six hours to beat, and that's if you look for the collectibles - and the gameplay is cookie cutter, taken from every other FPS ever. Health regeneration is ridiculously fast and really makes it difficult to feel threatened by anything other than rocket launchers and one really neat sequence where you only start out with a pistol to fight back with (which was easily the best part of the game). The plot itself does little to help you feel complete - it felt a bit trite, and I would have liked to have actually done more to liberate America in that world rather than it simply ending with a single battle.

    If it was cheaper, say, $20, it would be an okay buy (I picked it up as part of the THQ collector's pack; I didn't even buy it for the game, but I figured, why not play it?) but for $50 you're setting your money on fire. Even so, though, the price isn't all that relevant; the gameplay experience isn't all that enthralling, so basically the only reason to play the game is if you find the premise interesting - there isn't anything else to it which will interest you.

    Perhaps the most offensive thing about the single player campaign is how you are led by your nose throughout the game - you basically have someone yell at you what to do, and there is only one way to do it, and only one path forward for a great deal of the game. The most decision making you make is whether to take cover on the left side of the street or the right side of the street - and at many points in the game you do not even have THAT much choice.

    It did well on establishing atmosphere, but there is nothing else to recommend it and a great deal to say that you should pass this by and purchase a better title. If you want an interesting FPS, I'd recommend Crysis 2, which has some neat stuff in it and is a lot more fun to play.
    Expand
  12. Mar 15, 2011
    10
    Wow! This game is brilliant! I love the graphics eventhough they are not the best I have seen, they are definitly atmospheric and also the story is very exciting. The characters are very well chosen and they make this game feel "real" and dramatic. It's like a movie you cannout stop to watch. It reminds me a bit of the TV series Jericho.

    For me one of the best singleplayergames since
    Half-Life. Or even better, due to the characters. Expand
  13. Nov 7, 2011
    3
    Predictable - Nothing imaginative went into this game.
    Old - A 2011 game that uses game mechanics that feel years old... example no free roaming through the levels to get to the other end... there's 1 path & 1 path alone. You might as well be on rails.
    Story - The story is so bad it makes my me want to go play a casual game like peggle for the simple pleasure of having NO story. Using
    a very linear story with no surprises this also pushes how "great" americans are. Very tiresome.

    I bought this game based on magazine reviews that seemed quit glowing. It's sad to see how far "professional" critics have fallen on the standards of goods out now days. Not only was my pre-order of the game a large waste of money but I think Chaos Studios deserved to be liquidated for their failure on producing something this bad. If it was a lawn mower it would have had a sized engine in the 1st hour... AFTER throwing part of the blade at your dog.

    Skip it... go play Duke Nukem Forever instead. Yes it's about the same but at least you go in expecting it & there's humor, bad humor, some advanced mechanics (unlike Homefront) & nudity.
    Expand
  14. 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 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
  15. Apr 25, 2011
    8
    So this is more of a single player first impression, but i'm a few hours in, and i'm really enjoying it. When i first heard the premise i found it kind of ridiculous, but after seeing the lead in news beats, and picking up the collectible newspapers, it sounds more and more plausible. its easy for me to suspend my disbelief and buy into this story. The graphics aren't tier 1 for 2011, but i think that was expected. But it looks good. The style is gritty and run down, but not too brown as many "realistic" shooters seem to be getting. It doesnt have as much eye candy but it looks good, and I'll get my sugar fix with Crysis 2 next week. The combat is solid, but it might be a little easy. I started the game 1 setting down from the highest, but i think I'm going to max it. the only time i died was when i went somewhere i wasn't supposed to to look for a newspaper and a tank we were supposed to be sneaking past killed me. So far the only vehicle i used was the Goliath. Its a 6 wheeled vehicle with guns and missiles that you control by locking on to enemies with binocs (like air strikes in other games). you aim at an enemy, wait for lock, and fire. And the Goliath goes nuts on em. its really visceral and a lot of fun to watch. He feels like a big brother that's kicking your bullies ass. I thought the use of real brands for stores and stuff would bother me (like it usually does) but not so much. Somehow the fact that they wanted these brands here to add a sense of reality, and not just for more ad dollars makes it feel different. The characters are ok, a little cookie cutter maybe, but i don't really know them yet. So, so far I'm really enjoying it. I have heard that the campaign is very short. This is disappointing considering how hard they pushed the story aspect of this game. But that seems to be par for the course these days. I enjoy MP, but I really go for a nice deep immersive single-player shooter experience. Hopefully, now that they have a great game, and hopefully some serious income, now they'll have the resources to pour into a tier 1 shooter with a campaign of some length. I bought this day one because I wanted to support the fact that they were pushing a different angle on shooters. and they were pushing the story. Hopefully they'll hear my dollars asking for more of that when it comes time for Homefront 2. But until then, I'm really enjoying this one...while it lasts. Oh and lastly. Way to go THQ for FINALLY allowing Steam to give us a midnight release! So many publishers wont even let us preload the game at midnight, never mind letting us play it. THQ let us preload, and i was able to install the game at midnite! love it, wish more publishers would do it. Thanks!â Expand
  16. Mar 15, 2011
    0
    Loved this game, apart from the single player story, which doesn't look as nice as BFBC2 and COD. However this isn't really where Homefront really shines.

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

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

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

    bottom line, If you like BF2, COD4, there's a good chance you'll cherish the fine work the CHAOS team did.
    Expand
  17. 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.
  18. Mar 18, 2011
    1
    wow....where do i start. First off just to let you know, I am going out of my way, MADE AN ACCOUNT ON HERE just to warn you how horrible and just down right poor this game is. it has no demo or beta (i can see why now) so it kinda forces you to put your hard earned $60 on that game and pray to god that its worth it. The beginning is uncreative, just casually showing you what happened in the last 30 years as if your watching the history channel. the game does a poor job introducing the main character of the story, and quickly nudges you through until out of no where some unknown rebels help you, and drag you to a secret base, so basically the game doesnt give any detail or background to any of the characters. the game is also extremely predictable. Its pretty bad when your 5 year old cousin knows whats coming up next. rpg explodes here, trigger happy guy goes crazy there, grenade flies in and kills half your guys here...very little creativity went into this game, period. also did i mention that it looks like a 8 year old made the graphics of this thing? seriously, the graphics in mario are better. And finally, IT ONLY HAS ABOUT 3 HOURS OF GAMEPLAY....WHAT!! i feel like i was playing the demo instead of playing the game. overall, homefront is one of the worst games ive played in awhile, possibly that i have ever played. the only reason i am even giving it a point is i like the concept, too bad it was horribly executed.. Expand
  19. Mar 20, 2011
    1
    Terrible disappointment. Extremely linear. Sub par graphics (and I'm running on maximum). Terrible sound design. Want to jump into the back of a pick up truck? Climb over a 2 foot fence? Nope... invisible walls everywhere. Scripted sequences abound, absurdly stupid AI. Boring NPCs. Multiplayer is even worse... again, invisible walls everywhere so it's almost impossible to intuitively navigate your way through a map. I played for 90 minutes and uninstalled it. If you are looking for Battlefield Bad Company 2, or even Black Ops with a twist, forget it. This doesn't even come close.. not remotely. More fun to be had playing Tetris. Expand
  20. Nov 8, 2011
    0
    LOL. This game's terrible. It doesn't even open in my computer...
  21. Mar 20, 2011
    3
    I looked forward to this game, a lot. I was let down.
    The single player is moderately engaging with a decent plot, but ultimately is short and unremarkable.
    This games bread and butter was to be the multiplayer aspect. However, the game falls short in this category as well. Let me start with the fact that KAOS felt it necessary to not put on any anti-cheat systems, so every game has at
    least one blatantly obvious hacker. The official Homefront forum moderators delete any posts regarding this topic. So, basically, that makes the multiplayer absolutely unplayable, and there are no repercussions for cheaters at all.
    There are problems with invisible barriers, basically you can see someone, and more than once we would fire at each other, and our bullets would hit this invisible barrier and do nothing.
    Bullets do not go through thin walls or fences. Hell, even some weeds are bulletproof in this game.
    Vehicles are hard to kill and overly dominate a game.
    The sound effects are ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE. Will the people that make these FPS games PLEASE get real sound effects? I feel like I am playing a paintball match, not fighting a war.

    There are no absolutely major flaws in the gameplay itself. It's just all the little annoyances and the lack of an anti-cheat system compounds into an unplayable game.
    Expand
  22. Mar 16, 2011
    10
    Homefront brought a great fresh look to the FPS genre that is being run into the ground by COD with yearly game releases with the same bland story and generic setting. Homefront took the time to make an incredibly immersive, powerful story that, while being much too short, brought emotions out that no game has before. The entire time playing the game, I felt like I really was the character, while dashing between cover when facing that first sentry, while assisting your team in the raids, while fighting every last KOR soldier, I felt immersed in the game. The graphics and AI are a little dated, with other minor issues, but overall the singleplayer was very well done. The multiplayer added a few fresh things to the genre as well. The "killstreak" system of high priority targets in Commander mode was a nice twist, and generally gameplay was crisp and rewarding. Overall, despite a few flaws in the design and engine, the stylistic environment of the game, great story, and fresh gameplay make Homefront worth checking out if you appreciate good story and atmosphere over "prestige." Expand
  23. 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
  24. 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
  25. 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 for graphics. Save your money for next week when Crysis 2 comes out. I knew I have should have done the same. Expand
  26. Mar 15, 2011
    9
    Its single player tells a story in this 'what if' scenario in a very cinematic way, but that has something to do with it being written by John Milius. But the story and the actual single player gameplay are completely different. Although the story is very good, the actual action sequences seemed to try too hard to mimic what was already accomplished in the Call of Duty Franchise.

    Its
    multi player is definitely the pull factor to buy it. The multiple gamplay innovations featured in the game as well as many of the best innovations featured in both the Call of Duty and Battlefield franchises. I wouldn't necessarily name this a "Clone" of those two franchises, but it definitely gets some inspiration from the two. Expand
  27. Aug 23, 2011
    3
    A huge disappointment. Homefront main selling point was supposedly the campaign being written by the great John Milius (Red dawn, Apocalypse now), but it seriously falls short both in content and overall feel. You're supposed to be a guerrilla fighter against insurmountable odds, but often you mow down loads of enemy forces with ease and we reach the common place CoD style objectives and run through of the campaign saturating the market. If you can appreciate what they try to do both story and game wise, you'll enjoy the campaign. Multiplayer is where the title shines boasting both common and new ways to dominate online. Think Battlefield feeling like Call of Duty and that's what you get with the multiplayer component. Expect a balanced and great multiplayer that draws a lot from modern shooters, while taking out the negative aspects. It's worth picking up based on the multiplayer alone if you're that kind of customer, but if you plan on picking it up for the singleplayer expect to be disappointed by its length and depth. Expand
  28. Mar 16, 2011
    4
    2 hours and you are done with the whole single player experience. The single player story if indeed was written by the guy who did the screenplay for Apo Now probably wrote it on a napkin in a coffee shop simply to get the devs off his back. Maybe I have to be American to get all tear eyed about seeing suburbia in ruins, and feel some how like its close to home because of all the brand names used. I didnt feel a thing. This is not a review of the MP experience, maybe it more fun, but dont waste your money anyway, wait until its in the bargain bin. Expand
  29. tmh
    Mar 16, 2011
    4
    I can't say I was anything but disappointed with the Single-player campaign. With the amount of apparent bugs, technical problems, and that obnoxious, drowning sound, I was struggling to keep myself playing through it. And when I did, it was already over. Within a few hours, the single-player campaign was over. The game did have the sort of atmosphere I was expecting, but the overall feel of it just felt like a typical, generic FPS game. Expand
  30. Mar 17, 2011
    8
    I wasn't intending to buy this game until I read a preview about it where the writer said it had the suburban look of MW2 and the feel of Half Life 2. It does feel a bit like HL2 but not as much as I was hoping for. MW2 obvious. I'm a bit over 3 hours into the story line and an hour into MP. The single player is fun! It looks great and the best modded Unreal 3 Engine I've seen so far. The physics in the game are very nice and entertaining. Explosions look great and if timed well will send bodies flying a good distance. The level design is done well. Subtle hints here and there to guide you and to catch your attention. The atmosphere is pretty creepy and embodies what an occupation may be like. You can see LOTS of time was put into the environments. Good attention to detail which most games out at the moment don't seem to be doing. The weapons sound punchy and satisfying. The same with ambient sounds. Nice looking blood splatter and animation. No dismemberment though... Why can't more games have this? It made Soldier of Fortune and COD World at War much more entertaining right?! The dialogue has given me a laugh here and there so far, but over all OK. On the other hand though 95% of all First Person Shooter game dialogue is garbage. When will decent writers start on video games? MP is a nice cross between Battle Field and COD World At War (ever notice how much more open the maps in World At War were?) And maybe a nod to counter-strike when purchasing a flak jacket after a re-spawn? The re-spawning is much better than COD, where as it makes sense and not just a blind spot. Not as much running and gunning compared to cod. Group re-spawn like BF a nice thing. Nothing groundbreaking but they have a decent mix of features from other popular MP games. it would be nice to see some more game modes though. The Game for me so far (3 1/4 hours in) is pretty sweet! It's not genre changing but delivers on everything it should just fine and is quite entertaining. I don't understand most of the negative things i read about it. What games are those guys playing that make them feel the need to condescend to most other games? Over all, the game for me is a solid B when most shooters I've played lately are a C+ at best. Thank God it's not like there PR red balloon stunt. LOL
    If the game keeps going like this, it's worth the $50 and you get to help support new games on PC at $50 and not starting at $60.
    Expand
Metascore
70

Mixed or average reviews - based on 36 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 13 out of 36
  2. Negative: 3 out of 36
  1. 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.
  2. 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. 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.