User Score
6.0

Mixed or average reviews- based on 398 Ratings

User score distribution:
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
  1. Mar 17, 2011
    6
    A too short single-player campaign, too frustrating, in 2011 it's unacceptable see undestroyable enviroment and a sequence of script like this. I was waiting for it for too long and it disappointed me so much. Too bad.
  2. Mar 15, 2011
    10
    Homefront is a fine game if you give it a chance. The graphics and sound,( voice acting in particular) are poor compared to bombs like BFBC2 or KZ3, and the capaign is shockingly short. I find the excellent multiplayer makes up for this though - once the controls sink in and you begin to adapt to the shoddy graphics there is a lot of fun to be had here. And no, its nothing like COD.Homefront is a fine game if you give it a chance. The graphics and sound,( voice acting in particular) are poor compared to bombs like BFBC2 or KZ3, and the capaign is shockingly short. I find the excellent multiplayer makes up for this though - once the controls sink in and you begin to adapt to the shoddy graphics there is a lot of fun to be had here. And no, its nothing like COD. Comparing games like BFBC2 and Homefront to COD is akin to comparing Gran Tourismo to Ridge Racer...HF is a squad based game, if you run around by yourself like a headless chicken hunting for kills you will be dead continuosly. Over HF does a great job in recreating large scale battles in a (somewhat) fresh environment, 32 players on a map is something we dont see too much of on console, vehicular combat, drones etc are easy to control and offer a satisfying experience regardless of skill level. Expand
  3. Mar 15, 2011
    4
    Picked the game up this morning, and I finished it this morning. Completed the single player in 4 & half hours on normal. Make no mistake about it, this game is a multiplayer only game. If your buying this, your buying it for the MP. The story is semi interesting I give it that. But it's done in a way thats been done 100 times before. The sound and graphics are definitely out dated and notPicked the game up this morning, and I finished it this morning. Completed the single player in 4 & half hours on normal. Make no mistake about it, this game is a multiplayer only game. If your buying this, your buying it for the MP. The story is semi interesting I give it that. But it's done in a way thats been done 100 times before. The sound and graphics are definitely out dated and not up to par with other shooters that flood the market. The multiplayer is decent but I don't see it holding it's own against Battlefield or Call of Duty. Homefront will once and awhile be something else to play from time to time, but you and youyr friends will only want to return to Battlefield, Call of Duty or Halo at the end of the day. This game is a PASS... Expand
  4. Jul 6, 2011
    5
    Ridiculously short game just like this review should be. Returned it to the shop I purchased it from the same day, and swapped it for something with a decent amount of game-play. The devs and publishers who put this out should be ashamed at the minuscule amount of game-play in the single player campaign. Probably the shortest game I have ever played.
  5. May 15, 2011
    5
    It has a great idea and a scary premise. The problem is it never comes to fruition. The graphics are 2006 and the online game-play is original but fidgety. Vehicles can become a problem and hit-detection is sometimes off. I hope they don't lose faith in their ideas as another try with some feedback and a future beta could do wonders for this as a franchise.
  6. Mar 22, 2011
    7
    This game has so much potential but fails to reach it. I enjoyed the single player but really I was begging for some game to knock COD out of first place in multiplayer. I read a review by earlier by Slapper and I wondered what multiplayer game he was playing. The multiplayer servers are terrible. Getting into a game with friends is difficult to say the least. And the game play is lagThis game has so much potential but fails to reach it. I enjoyed the single player but really I was begging for some game to knock COD out of first place in multiplayer. I read a review by earlier by Slapper and I wondered what multiplayer game he was playing. The multiplayer servers are terrible. Getting into a game with friends is difficult to say the least. And the game play is lag heaven. I have an excellent internet connection and went so far as to hard wire the modem instead of using a router and I still only get yellow bar connections. I had high hopes, the potential is there but the multiplayer while not a failure is very poor! Sorry Slapper you missed the boat with your multiplayer comments. I really wanted this game to succeed but COD is still in first place Expand
  7. Aug 14, 2012
    4
    Homefront was a major disappointment. I was excited by the hype and the unique advertising campaign. Plus, I respected the nod to cult classic Red Dawn. The concept was ambitious, but the game fell through in execution. The primary complaint was with the short and easy solo campaign. It took less the 3 hrs on the hardest difficulty. I started after breakfast and it wasn't lunch by the timeHomefront was a major disappointment. I was excited by the hype and the unique advertising campaign. Plus, I respected the nod to cult classic Red Dawn. The concept was ambitious, but the game fell through in execution. The primary complaint was with the short and easy solo campaign. It took less the 3 hrs on the hardest difficulty. I started after breakfast and it wasn't lunch by the time I finished. But even deeper, the environmental interaction was lacking, the set pieces were static, and the graphics were sub par. As for minor gripes, why were there so few weapons? I understand that the Korean military may have standard armaments, but where was the variety associated with American personal arsenals? Where were the hunting rifles from the good old boys and the MAC-10's from LA's street gangs? Further, where were these groups in the game in general? As I'm running through the story, the conquest of America seemed to be very easy compared to any semblance of reality. Sadly, the potential character development is lost in the rush of the barely present plot. So potentially interesting characters are one-note. Will all that said, yes there is multiplayer to up the replay value a little, but it's nothing you haven't seen before and doesn't compare with top tier games like COD and BF3. Much like the solo campaign, the multiplayer is anything but remarkable. Expand
  8. Mar 20, 2011
    7
    At some point during the development cycle, around the time of E3 2010, Homefront was destined to be an amazing game. Unfortunately, somewhere along the line that changed. The worst thing (as you should already know if you've read any other review) is the terribly short campaign. It has its moment, but they're too few and far between to be worth the full retail price in my opinion. TheAt some point during the development cycle, around the time of E3 2010, Homefront was destined to be an amazing game. Unfortunately, somewhere along the line that changed. The worst thing (as you should already know if you've read any other review) is the terribly short campaign. It has its moment, but they're too few and far between to be worth the full retail price in my opinion. The multiplayer is fun, and if it weren't for that I would trade my copy in and buy something else. Overall, it's just not as good as it could have been. If you like multiplayer focused FPS games, give it a rent and see if you like it. Otherwise it probably isn't the game for you. Expand
  9. Apr 9, 2011
    4
    Like most shooters now days Homefront tries to rip off Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, the controls are identical, and it's just as short and boring, this should have been called Call of Duty 4.5: Future Warfare, the graphics and sound are dated, and there is delay from the time you hit the button from the time it responds, which for a game that requires fast response time hurts itLike most shooters now days Homefront tries to rip off Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, the controls are identical, and it's just as short and boring, this should have been called Call of Duty 4.5: Future Warfare, the graphics and sound are dated, and there is delay from the time you hit the button from the time it responds, which for a game that requires fast response time hurts it severely, obviously the best part about it is the multiplayer, but the problem with the responsiveness of the controls hurt it here too, all in all with all the better shooters out there like Call of Duty: Black Ops, and Halo: Reach, and the upcoming shooters like Battlefield 3, I can't find a reason for anyone to buy this crappy game. Expand
  10. Mar 26, 2011
    10
    When I was in college I bought my 1st computer to play Delta Force 2. This was in 1999. Since 1999 I have evolved as a online gammer play the Delta Force Series / COD series / etc.. you get my point. This game is ABSOLUTLY AWSOME if you are a true old'skool gamer!!! I have been waiting for a game like this for over 6 years. This game takes skill, actually all the skills that were neededWhen I was in college I bought my 1st computer to play Delta Force 2. This was in 1999. Since 1999 I have evolved as a online gammer play the Delta Force Series / COD series / etc.. you get my point. This game is ABSOLUTLY AWSOME if you are a true old'skool gamer!!! I have been waiting for a game like this for over 6 years. This game takes skill, actually all the skills that were needed for OLD-SKool games like DeltaFocre. I assume that non-skilled gammers that compare a game to Blackops etc will not like this game cause they are n00bs and do not have the gamming skills that old-skool gamers have. They need lag and tin can maps to try to win. This game is OLD-SKOOL BABY!!!! IF you have no skill don't bother getting it. Granted it is a bit buggy it is 100% better that Blackops and battlefield bad company 2. The people that give this game a bad review are children that base there gamming experience on the call of duty franchise. This game will go far.. Expand
  11. Apr 14, 2011
    3
    Wow, this game is awful. Where to begin? First, the story is terrible. Totally unrealistic, but THQ made North Korea the bad guys because they're too scared to anger China who would be a much more plausible bad guy. The string of events leading up to the story are heavily contrived and scoffed at by any reasonable adult who reads the news. The story tries to make you feel like an insurgentWow, this game is awful. Where to begin? First, the story is terrible. Totally unrealistic, but THQ made North Korea the bad guys because they're too scared to anger China who would be a much more plausible bad guy. The string of events leading up to the story are heavily contrived and scoffed at by any reasonable adult who reads the news. The story tries to make you feel like an insurgent in an occupied America, but its so force fed and cheesy that it feels like a lame joke. The support characters are full of stereo types and are one dimensional. As a FPS, the game is also awful. It tries to follow Black Ops, yet bullets are blocked by plants and very thin wood. The AI is a joke as many times the enemy just runs up to cover, only to hide behind it. The enemies literally duck into cover when you place your aiming reticule over them AND jump back out as soon as you move away. Your "allies" sit behind cover while an enemy, who they can see and could easily shoot, unloads on you - yet they do nothing. The overabundance of weapons is a joke as all you see is a bunch of SHINY (Yes, important items shine) weapons littering the battlefield. The only way to know when you truly kill a bad guy is the same audio clip of someone screaming, which gets really old after half an hour. Also, be prepared to kill the same mob over and over as there's only 2-4 models per faction.

    TL;DR This game is awful and a poor Modern Warfare clone. The reviews and scores don't lie. Also - Ignore the THQ employees who pathetically try to inflate the score. You can tell which they are as anyone with half a brain would never give this game more than an 8.
    Expand
  12. Mar 29, 2011
    2
    Great idea- poor execution of the strategy

    Single player- was a bit of a different take in terms of the setting, and it had some moments, however I finished this campaign in 4 hours or so on the hard difficulty setting. It just seems like it is half a campaign and was possibly rushed out for whatever reason the developer had? Multiplayer- I was really quite excited abbot an alternative
    Great idea- poor execution of the strategy

    Single player- was a bit of a different take in terms of the setting, and it had some moments, however I finished this campaign in 4 hours or so on the hard difficulty setting. It just seems like it is half a campaign and was possibly rushed out for whatever reason the developer had?

    Multiplayer- I was really quite excited abbot an alternative multiplayer to Black Ops that could distract me for hours on end! This and the fact that dedicated servers were supposed to create the 'ultimate online experience'..... Unfortunately we got only 2 different online game modes, with widespread lag across the world online. For some like myself it is next to impossible to play with consistent freezing during online gameplay and when I do finally get a game it is always 'one red bar'- the worst possible connection. Again, this feels rushed, and many promises have been broken by the developer and publisher with this game- I will never buy one of their online games again

    My score is for single player only, if it was on multiplayer alone this game would get a zero.
    Expand
  13. May 30, 2011
    4
    Don't buy this game. I believed the hype and the story looked interesting but it is very badly executed. The gameplay is average, voice acting average, graphics average. It is simply not a triple A game. The single player campaign was way too short and very obviously "on rails" as you're guided through the levels. The multiplayer is okay, with large areas to fight in with severalDon't buy this game. I believed the hype and the story looked interesting but it is very badly executed. The gameplay is average, voice acting average, graphics average. It is simply not a triple A game. The single player campaign was way too short and very obviously "on rails" as you're guided through the levels. The multiplayer is okay, with large areas to fight in with several others but it's just not worth the asking price. Expand
  14. Mar 16, 2011
    8
    The engine is clearly dated, but I'll never let that be my sole judge of how I enjoy a game, given that I spend hours across numerous platforms in engines that are by no means modern, and I enjoy the heck out of them. However, if you're put off by paying full price for something that's not the latest and greatest in polygons and textures, then you'll want to reconsider.

    The single
    The engine is clearly dated, but I'll never let that be my sole judge of how I enjoy a game, given that I spend hours across numerous platforms in engines that are by no means modern, and I enjoy the heck out of them. However, if you're put off by paying full price for something that's not the latest and greatest in polygons and textures, then you'll want to reconsider.

    The single player game is short, I've heard, but given that I usually play games in one or two hour bursts during the week, it's going to be a few days before I work all the way through it, and I'm not in any hurry to blast to the end. But, yes, if you're expecting a long, drawn out and extensive single player experience, it's not here.

    What did impress me was the multiplayer, and the incorporation of vehicles into otherwise tired, tried and true CoD-style gameplay. There were some server issues last night because, so the server messages claimed, there was such high demand. Once I did get into a game, however, it flowed quite smoothly and was fairly intuitive. I especially like the battle point currency you're awarded for kills and objectives, and how you can purchase equipment on the fly, depending on what options you choose. As a basic Assault kit, for instance, I had a flak vest and a RPG, and I could 'activate' the flak vest for that life with a small amount of BP, and I could buy reloads for my RPG in the same fashion, and those BPs would replenish during the round. Save up enough of them and you can purchase vehicles which you spawn in next time (I don't know if there's a way to buy them while you're still up) but I though that was a good way of everyone fighting over who gets to drive the tank.

    I've made purchases that I've regretted, and Homefront definitely isn't one of those. I've seen a lot of comments about this game being hit by 'sub-par reviews. But how does an average in the 70s qualify as sub-par? Only if you've decided that 'All Games Worth Buying' must receive a 90+. I've played a lot of games, and I'd rank very few of them in the 90s, but that doesn't mean those games were terrible or that they weren't even good, it just means they weren't among the best I've ever played. I give Homefront a solid 80.
    Expand
  15. Mar 16, 2011
    9
    Homefront is a decent FPS. It looks a little dated but over all very playable. The whole North Korea taking us over storyline is a very cool concept. The multiplayer is definitely great with the up to 32 players involved in the game. It takes more teamwork in this game during the multiplayer than with Call of Duty. I think it is a cool direction to go in with FPS. If the graphics wereHomefront is a decent FPS. It looks a little dated but over all very playable. The whole North Korea taking us over storyline is a very cool concept. The multiplayer is definitely great with the up to 32 players involved in the game. It takes more teamwork in this game during the multiplayer than with Call of Duty. I think it is a cool direction to go in with FPS. If the graphics were better, I would give it a 10 but since they aren't it gets a nine. Expand
  16. Mar 16, 2011
    7
    Despite apprehensions from the low review, I bought and played this game last night. I have played most FPS like OFP Dragon Rising, COD -all of it as well as BFBC2. I'm gonna try not to compare it to the games I mentioned...well... maybe a little here and there just to illustrate a point. I want to rate Homefront on it's own merit. Here are some of my observations and experience of theDespite apprehensions from the low review, I bought and played this game last night. I have played most FPS like OFP Dragon Rising, COD -all of it as well as BFBC2. I'm gonna try not to compare it to the games I mentioned...well... maybe a little here and there just to illustrate a point. I want to rate Homefront on it's own merit. Here are some of my observations and experience of the game

    On Single Player : The story sounds too implausible but hey, So was MW2 ;) It's still a good 'what if' story though. I just can't get over the fact that the single player game is too short. Also the textures on the AI characters are just too last gen. Even the Menu interface looked like it was on beta stage. It felt like playing Xbox 1st gen or PS2. The sound of the guns were a bit... meh. I don't know what the exact frame rate is but it felt rough and because of that the close quarters and narrow hallways will give you and i I'm not gonna comment any more on Single Player because I'd rather forget it.
    Multiplayer: IMO here's where Homefront redeems itself. Earlier last night I could not connect, but when I was able to later that evening - I had so much fun I ignored invites from my friends for a round of COD. The maps are quite large and littered with players. It felt like I was in the middle of a war with explosions and smoke trails from rockets. When you get immersed like that, graphic detail and flaws become blurred. Plus i like the way they reward you with Battle Points for helping your team or scoring on your own. It promotes teamwork. From the battle points you get to experience the Helicopters, Airstrikes and those points stay even if you get killed. Which takes the pressure out of getting 7-11 kill streaks. I had some issues with hit detection, when sometimes I was aiming center mass on a stationary target and I still missed. This can be fixable with a patch so it's forgivable. I hope they do this soon though. I'm not sure how many maps are there but I was able to cycle thru 3 only. I hope there are more.
    So I give it a 7 because the single player pulled it down. But +3 if.... THQ, are you reading this?..... IF they add more maps and weapons via Free DLC. Then you would have redeemed yourself totally.
    Expand
  17. Mar 18, 2011
    8
    I truly enjoyed the campaign, but they should have had a few more chapters and in today's FPS market you have to have destructible environments. I have only one complaint with the multiplayer and that pertains to the "battle code" that must be bought if the game is used, rented, or you are not the primary gamer to reach higher than level 5. The rest of the game is great and I do realizeI truly enjoyed the campaign, but they should have had a few more chapters and in today's FPS market you have to have destructible environments. I have only one complaint with the multiplayer and that pertains to the "battle code" that must be bought if the game is used, rented, or you are not the primary gamer to reach higher than level 5. The rest of the game is great and I do realize that there are only two multiplayer game modes. If the modes are good enough, you don't need more. Expand
  18. Mar 29, 2011
    9
    This is a very good game and don't let some of these fools make you think otherwise. Sure the single player didn't really live up to my expectations but I am REALLY enjoying this game. The story just wasn't there for me, I enjoyed the idea and attempted to care about the story and characters but I just didn't at all. The SP is nothing different from any other PFS you will find out thereThis is a very good game and don't let some of these fools make you think otherwise. Sure the single player didn't really live up to my expectations but I am REALLY enjoying this game. The story just wasn't there for me, I enjoyed the idea and attempted to care about the story and characters but I just didn't at all. The SP is nothing different from any other PFS you will find out there and it is pretty short, but there are some very cool scenes to experience. The multiplayer is the meat and 'tatoes of this game. I can't express enough how much I enjoy it, the past couple of years I only really played the last two Call of Duty's as far as console MP games and it was such a nice change of pace. There is a big sense of teamwork and I find a lot of players attempting to communicate with their team while in MW2 and Black Ops everyone is too focused on maintaining their immaculate K/D and getting an obnoxious killstreak.

    The battle points system takes the focus off of the long term of your stats and really makes you care about the battle at hand and how you can use them the right way to help your team to win. Although there are few guns I've found myself sticking to a couple anyway and with all the other things you can do in this game it doesn't even phase you. You can use humvees, APCs, tanks, helicopters, and drones. The battles really get crazy after a while with cluster bombs going off and tanks rolling around everywhere, they really captured the sense of a full scale battle. The hit boxes in this game seem really small though. You can be sniping with your cross hairs directly on their head and not hit them at all but in close quarters you don't notice it really. There is also no aim assist and it makes the gunplay tougher due to it but I personally enjoy it, you can't just spray at medium range and take someone out. Also, I've only experienced a noticeable frame rate drop once since I started playing this game and I'm almost a level 50... I have no idea what that reviewer was talking about.

    There are a few quirks about this game though, for one you can't shoot through almost any surface which is pretty odd to me. Also some of the guns sound very cheesy which really bugged me at first but you get over it. Sometimes when i send out a parrot drone it wont let me change the altitude, but I merely just have to leave it and go back then it works fine. Trying to find a game can be difficult but recently it has been running perfectly. With any new game there will be little issues but nothing that is a game changer to me. On the whole this is a good game and very well worth your money if you are looking for a good multiplayer shooter. Some people might be sad because it's not Activision's money whoring machine but considering this being a new IP from a smaller developer I think they did a great job. With huge battles like this there are a lot of different ways to play this game that appeals to a lot of different play styles. I think if people merely gave it a shot they would really enjoy it.
    Expand
  19. Apr 7, 2011
    5
    The title really doesn't live up to its name. The campaign was exciting and had a very fitting story, but it was a bit short, try 4 hours. The ending was abrupt and unsatisfying. Graphics were pretty good. The multiplayer is fair, at most. What I've noticed is that it is a campers paradise. And if you buy it used, why do you have to pay to continue in multiplayer? The weapons are prettyThe title really doesn't live up to its name. The campaign was exciting and had a very fitting story, but it was a bit short, try 4 hours. The ending was abrupt and unsatisfying. Graphics were pretty good. The multiplayer is fair, at most. What I've noticed is that it is a campers paradise. And if you buy it used, why do you have to pay to continue in multiplayer? The weapons are pretty good, along with the different perks and vehicles. The maps are pretty good too. I just don't understand why first-person shooters now-a-days have shorter and shorter campaigns though. They put too much work in the mutliplayer. I look for a good, long and challenging campaign. Not a 4 hour campaign with an unfitting ending. Expand
  20. Apr 14, 2011
    0
    Well over a month and issues with this game are still not resolved' not good enough. Not to mention the campaign takes 3 hours to beat, the story is boring and predictable and the graphics suck.
  21. Apr 16, 2011
    1
    I hate to be like this, but this game is terrible. This is a single sided (no diversity) this game is all about sniping. The maps are gigantic, you could take four of the largest call of duty maps and still come up sort. Also the host always has the advantage on this game.the gins are ok, but like I said the only useful guns are the snyper ryfuls. My full advice is don't buy it, because ifI hate to be like this, but this game is terrible. This is a single sided (no diversity) this game is all about sniping. The maps are gigantic, you could take four of the largest call of duty maps and still come up sort. Also the host always has the advantage on this game.the gins are ok, but like I said the only useful guns are the snyper ryfuls. My full advice is don't buy it, because if you do you will find out and when you try to trade it in at gamestop you'll get 20 dollars for it. You should just go buy call of duty or gears of war. Expand
  22. Mar 18, 2011
    4
    The story was pretty good the downfalls easily outweighed the rest of the game though, the graphics were choppy, i found that even behind cover i was getting hit the hit detection in general was week , only took maybe 5 hours to beat it. Multiplayer was okay it was good to see something different for once but it still needs work in my opinion with that said this game is a rental.
  23. Mar 15, 2011
    9
    This game is all about the multiplayer, single player is cool but short. I give 9 because it has room for a lot of fun. I have had some issues with the servers and lag but I am sure that as time goes on THQ and kahos will straighten this problem out. I would definately recommend
  24. Mar 16, 2011
    9
    Homefront brought a great fresh look to the FPS genre that is being run into the ground by COD with yearly game releases with the same bland story and generic setting. Homefront took the time to make an incredibly immersive, powerful story that, while being much too short, brought emotions out that no game has before. The entire time playing the game, I felt like I really was theHomefront brought a great fresh look to the FPS genre that is being run into the ground by COD with yearly game releases with the same bland story and generic setting. Homefront took the time to make an incredibly immersive, powerful story that, while being much too short, brought emotions out that no game has before. The entire time playing the game, I felt like I really was the character, while dashing between cover when facing that first sentry, while assisting your team in the raids, while fighting every last KOR soldier, I felt immersed in the game. The graphics and AI are a little dated, with other minor issues, but overall the singleplayer was very well done.

    The multiplayer added a few fresh things to the genre as well. The "killstreak" system of high priority targets in Commander mode was a nice twist, and generally gameplay was crisp and rewarding. Overall, despite a few flaws in the design, 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
  25. Mar 16, 2011
    10
    I don't play campaign modes so will not comment on that. The developer has mixed a bit of COD and BFBC with their own flavor in to a fun and fresh multi-player adventure featuring a great variety of guns, tanks, choppers and much more. The action is intense and the maps large, well designed and offer everyone an opportunity to play according to their style. The perks system is great andI don't play campaign modes so will not comment on that. The developer has mixed a bit of COD and BFBC with their own flavor in to a fun and fresh multi-player adventure featuring a great variety of guns, tanks, choppers and much more. The action is intense and the maps large, well designed and offer everyone an opportunity to play according to their style. The perks system is great and varied once again allowing the player to have a vast amount of choices. The graphics are good the sound is particularly well done allowing for judgement of distance. This is a great game worth every penny and congrats are in order to the development team that was ably to break in to the FPS monopoly. There's only so much you can do to a war game to make it different and if you go to far you risk ruining it. I think Homefront has nailed it! It's got just about all you would want a good war game to have.

    It's sad to see the "pro" reviews, clearly there is something working behind what we read...cash?..advertising deals? I don't know, but any once of reputability they had with me is now gone.

    As for the brain washed fayboy morons posting scores of 0, 1 and so on, it's expected and to be disregarded as pure ignorant horse crap.

    Great game! See you guy's at Hooters!
    Expand
  26. Mar 30, 2011
    8
    Really? I went to the negative reviews out of curiosity and well amazed by how many people rate a game a zero. There is no hope for the human race. Now I understand why the game is ranked so low.
    So I will get the negatives out of the way first since that is why this game deserves a zero in so many people's eyes.
    Yes. The single player is short. Around 5 hours. But that is becoming a
    Really? I went to the negative reviews out of curiosity and well amazed by how many people rate a game a zero. There is no hope for the human race. Now I understand why the game is ranked so low.
    So I will get the negatives out of the way first since that is why this game deserves a zero in so many people's eyes.
    Yes. The single player is short. Around 5 hours. But that is becoming a trend isn't it? And it is mainly shooters with multiplayer right? The COD and MOH games are the same way. Most people will by it for the multiplayer anyways and the devs know that.
    Yes the game kind of hits a sore spot with parents getting shot in front of their kids. Hey? It happens.
    One thing I didn't like about the game is it glitches. And at the time of this writing I can't even play it because it freezes after the title screen.
    So aside from the glitch, everyone is complaining about what has became standard in today's shooters?
    Now let's judge the game on its own merit.
    Graphics- Pretty average. It is about on par with M.A.G. It does have a cartoon look with a lot of color so I found it pleasing to play compared to the drab look of other games. I was told take Battlefield BC 2 and fade the color and add some jaggies and you have Homefronts look. That is a great way to describe it. Animation is good and effects like lighting make the game look better than it probably does.
    Sound- The music is fitting and the sounds of combat are what you expect. It works but it doesn't match shooters by Activision or EA.
    Control- The game shines here to be honest. Great hit-detection and the control is responsive.
    Multiplayer Control- It only takes a few shots to take someone out which is nice. If you shoot first you will get the kill. That is a nice change of pace to other shooters where a full clip will not take someone out or you get killed even though you shot first. Sniping is easy also. Plus the vehicles control similar to halo where the right stick turns and the left stick moves forward and backwards.
    Multiplayer maps- Not a dud in them but none of them are spectacular either except maybe the Suburb map which is on the 360 only. Some maps do favor snipers and campers which is a problem.
    Replay Value- The single player is short but to get all the achievements you will have to go through it twice. It is a decent story but most people will only go through it once and stick with multiplayer. Hopefully the game will be a hit because the multiplayer is a blast.
    In conclusion the story was worth the play through but the only thing that stuck with me was the amount of cruelty and controversial elements . I am surprised Fox News didn't catch on. The mulitiplayer is a mix between MAG and Battlefield. It holds up well to both of these games but Battlefield has a little more polish. I personally prefer Homefront.
    Expand
  27. Mar 16, 2011
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I really can't understand why a lot of people are hating on this game. The campaign is short, yes, however that's the only thing that I don't like about it. The story itself is very good, something new. And at the moment I'm having the best multiplayer experience I've had in any game so far. Graphics look nice, don't really think their outdated at all. So I would recommend it. Expand
  28. Mar 16, 2011
    7
    This is multi player focused game. The Single player game is short, with some fun set pieces but the focus is on multi player, and that the game excels in this area. The new 'Battle Points' feature and the fairly large list of add-ons/perks allows players to customise their play style. I've never been a fan of the 'run and gun' style of COD, much prefer vehicle and group tactics of BF.This is multi player focused game. The Single player game is short, with some fun set pieces but the focus is on multi player, and that the game excels in this area. The new 'Battle Points' feature and the fairly large list of add-ons/perks allows players to customise their play style. I've never been a fan of the 'run and gun' style of COD, much prefer vehicle and group tactics of BF. This reminds me alot of BFBC2 but moves the gameplay forward. Expand
  29. Mar 16, 2011
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Homefront provides the gamer with a realist experience of what it's like to fight for your country and your community. It feels real. It's not just a FPS where you blow through people on a map but also provides a human element. The story is totally exciting, new and original and the gameplay is something I have yet to find in other FPS. Expand
  30. Mar 16, 2011
    10
    Honestly, this game is great. Its a multiplayer game, and not so much of a campaign game. The campaign may not be so good, but i give a 10 just for the multiplayer. It's definately not CoD, which makes it different and fun as hell. I can guarantee that all the people who dont like this game were just expecting another "CoD-like game". well its not, so get over it. On the other hand, theHonestly, this game is great. Its a multiplayer game, and not so much of a campaign game. The campaign may not be so good, but i give a 10 just for the multiplayer. It's definately not CoD, which makes it different and fun as hell. I can guarantee that all the people who dont like this game were just expecting another "CoD-like game". well its not, so get over it. On the other hand, the graphics arent that bad. i dont see why everyone is saying that they are terrible, Im not saying they're the best.. but they're not bad. This is going to keep me playing for a while Expand
Metascore
70

Mixed or average reviews - based on 85 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 34 out of 85
  2. Negative: 4 out of 85
  1. May 24, 2011
    84
    The story is way too short and the multiplayer doesn't deliver the fun you know from the Call of Duty or Battlefield games.
  2. games(TM)
    Apr 25, 2011
    70
    One of the most interesting shooters of the year. [Issue#108, p.114]
  3. Apr 19, 2011
    50
    The core focus of Homefront is online but with rival releases doing this just as well if not better, there isn't any real incentive. A fun rental perhaps, but spend your money elsewhere and you'll thank us.