Metascore
70

Mixed or average reviews - based on 36 Critics What's this?

User Score
5.6

Mixed or average reviews- based on 457 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Summary: The year is 2027. The world has suffered a decade-long energy crisis, and economies have crumbled. Reduced to a mere shadow of the super power it once was, the United States became the target of a North Korean takeover. American malls, suburbs and city streets are now battlegrounds as the civilian resistance fights for freedom. Featuring a compelling single player story crafted by John Milius (Apocalypse Now, Red Dawn), Homefront immerses gamers in an interactive and cinematic FPS experience where they assume an infantry role or take command of a wide variety of aerial and ground vehicles. In a land stripped of freedom, the brave will fight for their home. [THQ] Expand
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 13 out of 36
  2. Negative: 3 out of 36
  1. Mar 23, 2011
    88
    I love this game, and despite a few forgivable flaws Homefront is easily one of the most immersive and emotional campaigns that come to mind in my 30 years of gaming. Sure, the campaign is short. Deal with it. With that ending there is either going to be a sequel or some killer DLC. Meanwhile, you can reap the rewards and satisfaction of some of the best multiplayer combat we've seen so far in 2011.
  2. Mar 16, 2011
    83
    Taken by itself, Homefront's campaign is just plain disappointing. A promising concept ultimately falls flat in the fast-paced, "I don't have time for reading" first-person shooter genre. Once you've accomplished all of the objectives in single-player, the game just "ends". Someone obviously wanted to leave room for a sequel. That person is saved by Homefront's well-designed multiplayer.
  3. Mar 15, 2011
    79
    Homefront never quite captures the feel of guerilla warfare, but its multiplayer mode is a warzone worth fighting in.
  4. Mar 15, 2011
    70
    Incredibly rough around the edges, wasteful of unique opportunities, and light on content, we quite frankly question the longevity of this title. But you know what? There are worse games you could spend your money on.
  5. Mar 31, 2011
    70
    If you're going to buy Homefront, do so for the multiplayer. The campaign is six hours you'll never get back. [Apr 2011, p.52]
  6. Apr 23, 2011
    69
    A damp squib, really. The single player is far too short and the multiplayer only occasionally rises above the average. [May 2011, p.90]
  7. Mar 16, 2011
    40
    Scenario and atmosphere are here. The rest is just missing or undermined by flaws, from its dramatically brief campaign to the numerous technical limitations. What came as a challenger for Call of Duty doesn't even end up close to a good FPS. So much for the promises, Kaos Studios.

See all 36 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 73 out of 193
  2. Negative: 78 out of 193
  1. 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. 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 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 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
  4. 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. Mar 18, 2011
    4
    I feel like I'm playing a really poorly animated movie where every now and then I get to, for a few minutes, do something before the main characters, who I am not one of, then stand around and talk to each other for 5 minutes.

    In Homefront half the objects in the game appear to have a forcefield extending a metre or two beyond them. Sometimes it even makes it impossible to shoot the enemy!

    On top of that, when NPCs walk in front of objects they get fuzzy lines around them. Not to mention that you can't push past NPCs meaning that they, at times, trap you, or annoy you as you have to wait while 2, 3, 4 or 5 of them take their time to walk through a doorway, etc as you stand there and wait 60 seconds to pass so you can then walk through last, and if you somehow manage to get in front of one of the NPCs half the time the game won't even let you walk through the doorway, etc as if the script of the game requires you to go last.

    Plus it doesn't feel like I'm part of some resistance group who is having to survive this evil occupation considering that 3 of us can take out 500 Korean troops, 5 APCs, 2 helicopters and a tank without breaking a sweat with our superior weapons. How did the US lose in the first place?

    I feel like I paid for the game and then paid again by playing it. At the moment I'm only playing it through because I paid for it. It'd feel like a waste of money if I didn't.
    Expand
  6. Apr 17, 2011
    3
    So I bought Homefront on Steam for 49.99. I played through the campaign with a steady 35 fps with decent graphics settings, though I could have gotten better if Direct X 11 would go away, but w/e. The campaign was satisfying to say the least which earned this review the 3 score. Then I hit multiplayer... I don't know what happened to my computer to make it chug away at 10 fps, even on the lowest settings possible, but I sincerely wish I could get my money back. This is precisely why Console gaming will never die. Expand
  7. Dec 29, 2013
    0
    what a steaming pile of poo, so rubbish. half the game is waiting around for someone to walk to a door or open a door. it's like someone made a call of duty game and rubbed it in poo Expand

See all 193 User Reviews

Related Articles

  1. Critical Misfires: 40 High-Profile Games with Disappointing Reviews

    Critical Misfires: 40 High-Profile Games with Disappointing Reviews Image
    Published: October 4, 2012
    Mediocre reviews for a high-profile videogame? It does happen from time to time, as the new release "Resident Evil 6" demonstrates. Inside, we look at 40 games from the past decade that earned disappointing reviews despite major anticipation.