User Score
6.0

Mixed or average reviews- based on 374 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 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. 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
  2. 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 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
  3. 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.
  4. Mar 15, 2011
    10
    Excellent game. Ashame the CoD fanboys feel compelled to ruin its user rating though. Which is obvious by the 2 ratings. You can know without doubt that those people did not buy and certainly did not play Homefront. Any website that host user ratings should require some kind of verification that the person actually played the game and played enough of it to offer a review. One way for websites to confirm this would be to link the persons XBLA tag or PSNID. Doing this would allow for a check of trophies and achievements. People who stoop to this level or any FanNerd are beyond help and live in a pathetic world devoid of human contact. They are delusional and do nothing but hurt the hobby they claim to love. These people are fans...they are not gamers...not even close.

    Play Homefront...if you are a True Gamer you will enjoy it.
    Expand
  5. Mar 15, 2011
    9
    Finally a new FPS!!! Multiplayer is phenominal with the dedicated servers. The story line is unique and thought provoking. . A great addition to my collection...
  6. Mar 15, 2011
    8
    Ok. The ratings of 2, 5, and 10 do nothing for most readers but show a bit of immaturity and ignorance.

    HomeFrontâ
  7. Mar 17, 2011
    0
    I bought this game with trepidation after reading several of the reviews. Many give the single player outright scorn and rightfully so. I could barely stomach an hour of the campaign it was so bad.

    I really bought the game for the multiplayer, based on reviews that said it was innovative and worth a look. After 10 hours of multiplayer and ranking up to like a level 12 or something I
    called the store and asked how much I could get back for this horrific game. The servers are down all the time, the lag is horrific, and the graphics and framerate jutter make me want to puke; literaly. I played the game for 4-5 hours each day to give it a real shot. I wanted to throw up each time. I've played 50 different shooters across a wide variety of platforms from Doom in the early 90's to all the halo, COD, GoW, Battlefield games. I have never felt like throwing up from any of those experiences. Homefront left me feeling ill with a headache. DO. NOT.BUY.THIS.GAME This is a bargain bin special that the store only gave me 20 dollars credit for when I brought it back the day after launch. The clerks kind of chuckled and said yeah the game is pretty bad. If you really want to try it out, just for the novelty of getting ill and sick from playing a late 90's shooter, give it 2-3 weeks and you will be able to pick it up used for less then 30 bucks I promise. Remember GH Aerosmith? You could get used copies of that for 15 dollars after about a month. That is absolutely where Homefront is headed. Expand
  8. Mar 15, 2011
    10
    This seems to be one of them love or hate games, with majority of the hate coming from fanboys of Cod games, this game is an absolute great time with a great alternative to Cod, finally a FPS with a really interesting story something never before seem. Homefront=Innovation in FPS
  9. Mar 15, 2011
    9
    Being a fan of Battlefield, of course you might be interested in this game. People will try to compare it to COD, but it doesn't have anything to do with COD, it is very similar to Battlefield Bad Company 2, with new features and new concepts. It is a really great game if you are getting it for the multiplayer

    I give it 10 for the multiplayer part alone
  10. 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
  11. Mar 17, 2011
    0
    I am really waiting now only for games that are triple a titles and are reviewed positively great before I buy them. So many times I bet consumers like myself are roped into the hype of a game. Homefront is such a game that professes to be new an innovative. It's all hype don't believe it. Even as I write this I want to go and un-reserve all the games that I have held for upcoming year, based solely on this game. I bought Bulletstorm on a whim and was surprised at how good it was. I was not as "lucky" this time. Graphics: The obvious is that this game looks old and outdated. When playing the multiplayer there are times even on a 55" plasma when both Korean Forces and American Resistance look extremely similar. They both look blocky and underdeveloped. The only way I didn't shoot my team mates what because of the giant green name tag that in design flaw manner would block my vision of enemy behind it and then; pop, dead because of a name-tag. Not only this in single player mode people seemed to be floating over the ground. There are no shadows made from sentry guns spotlights. During the campaign when laying in a mass grave hiding from the KPA clipping issues of being able to see through dead bodies really took me out of the game. This list of terrible graphics could take up my post. Design/game-play: I love it when developers decide they want to slow down the action and express some storyline. Expect when they actually slow my character to that of the speed of a mentally defunct snail on heroine. Oh yes lets explore this small community of rebels hideout, I swear it took me fifteen minutes to walk 30 feet. Invisible walls, all the while the A.I. is telling me to hurry up and get to the next check point. The A.I. is terrible, sometimes standing for minutes at time at a door; unable to go through it. Before allowing me to move to the next part, many times I would have to listen to mindless terrible script. In the multiplayer being dropped by unreliable servers is apparently part of the atmosphere of game; as much as I can figure anyway. The game-play of multiplayer is outdated, a few innovations from battle points, drones, create a class, and many different perks do little to help. The shoddy spawn points several times I would spawn in-front of enemies and would have to wait spawn again. Sound: Don't even get me started, can't even here my gun shoot everything sounds far away. This is not what I expect wearing 5.1 surround sound headphones. The theme music is loud enough to drown out every other sound. C'mon.

    Conclusion: Ripped off, wait for some other game that doesn't suck. Great I just realized I spent 60 dollars for nothing.
    Expand
  12. Mar 15, 2011
    8
    I definitely not Battlefield and COD. But i like it. It's different but in a good way. Great story so far and the multiplayer is fun. I would recommend this game.
  13. Mar 15, 2011
    9
    Homefront offers MP features unique to the competition, and is QUITE a bit of fun to play. Awesome maps, a unique mix of infantry/vehicular warfare, and the feeling of fighting in your own backyard are truly welcome additions to the FPS genre. As others have mentioned, graphically Homefront could have used some additional polish. In order to stand up to other FPS competition, Kaos had its work clearly cut out, as CoD and BF have created some truly memorable vistas and set pieces to battle within. While there is nothing WRONG with the visuals, it seems like they world created simply needed more time. The art IS there... the polish IS lacking.

    Bottom line - MP players, worth the buy. Single players (who don't touch MP), the campaign is short and intense. 6-8 hours tops on Normal difficulty.
    Expand
  14. 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.
  15. Mar 22, 2011
    4
    Disappointing. I mean really? How are people giving this an 8 or more? I can only assume these individuals are fairly new to the gaming scene, or perhaps haven't played many other shooters on the array of different platforms out there. Because HomeFront is by far, one of the worst AAA titles I've recently had the displeasure of owning.

    A short campaign with a fantastic premise and great
    backdrop. Even with the sub-par graphics, some of the levels set the scene very well. BUT. And yes there is a but.... KAOS failed miserably to capitalize on such a good backstory. It feels just like every other shooter. Your small team of mere "civilians" now fighting for the Resistance seem to have superior military training and weapons to the North Korean's. You will literally destroy entire bases, tanks, helo's, you name it.... the Resistance appears to be stronger than any army on earth. It really kills the immersive world they've put you in. And the fact it is so short does not help the matter.

    Multiplayer is badly designed. Huge maps yet no way to spawn on team members or flags that you control?? If you're going to copy BF at least get the basics right. The Battlepoints system is frustrating. To actually make your class worth while you have to spend points. All this does is give the good players an advantage, and the bad ones feel like they're trying to climb the impossible ladder. What happens? Spawn Camping! Great! The vehicles are something from a cartoon and the overall "flow" (which is important for MP games) is not good at all. Coupled with the lack of servers and lag leaves me with no choice but to eject the disc.

    If you enjoy this type of multiplayer, definitely pick up a copy of Bad Company 2 if you haven't yet. It really does blow this game out of the water.

    I'm just glad you can sell X360 games.
    Expand
  16. Mar 15, 2011
    9
    Call me old fashioned, but I play games for fun. Not that eye-popping graphics or a lengthy campaign can't add to the fun provided by a game, but I've played way too many games with "amazing graphics" lately that bore me to tears. After playing Homefront all night, I can say without a doubt that, though the graphics may not be anything special (they certainly aren't terrible), the game is extremely fun to play. And that sort of seems like what games are supposed to be about. Expand
  17. Mar 15, 2011
    10
    Here's the beautiful deal. FPS games are NOT for the single player anymore. Out of the box, the multiplayer is stellar. It doesn't have the destructible like BF, and lacks bullet penetration that made COD innovative years ago, but it does three things perfectly: 1. It has dedicated servers. 2. It's level of customization and perk/killstreak system is second to none. 3. The game is very much "warlike" as opposed to other FPS games that are simply arcade shooters. Anyway, to all of those that downgrade a game because multiplayer is the focus, for shame! Serious gamers don't buy FPS games for single player anymore, it just doesn't provide the gratification from online warfare. Expand
  18. Mar 15, 2011
    10
    Multiplayer is the highlight of this title. Single player is on the short side but tell a pretty good story. The battle commander feature make the game unique
  19. Mar 15, 2011
    1
    This game is terrible on so many fronts. The graphics are 4 to 5 years too old. Many of the elements in the game look like shapes with crappy textures slapped on them as an afterthought. The guns are also quite bland and generic, with textures almost resembling something from the original playstation or xbox. The voice work and sound are also horrific. Many of the guns end up sounding like popguns or toy pistols, completely lacking the force they need to fully immerse players. The syncing of voices with animations is completely off and the voice work itself is forced and generic, completely lacking the emotional weight the game needs. THQ advertised this game as a single player focused piece, but the single player is abhorring short and ends so abruptly. Despite a strong first 5 minutes, it slowly and painfully descends into chaos and stupidity. Thus Homefront unexpectedly becomes a multiplayer focused game. The one thing i can commend about this game is the good connection and hit detection, but otherwise the multiplayer becomes a mess. After collecting enough "battle points", the game's currency system, players can buy vehicles or small support items. Yet the game descends into big vehicle brawl-fests and the original first person shooter mechanics are completely lost, as players focus more and more on controlling vehicles and destroying them. The paltry amount of game modes does not help, as I predict the play-life of this game will be very very short. The killing blow however, are the horrendous animations involved in simple tasks, like reloading knifing and sprinting. Sprinting feels like taking baby steps. Reloading is unrealistic and a pain to watch. The knifing makes my eyes bleed. Despite a nice try on the part of THQ and Kaos, Homefront falls flat on a market dominated by unique and addicting fps games like Call of Duty, Battlefield and Killzone. Expand
  20. Mar 16, 2011
    2
    This is my first review, and I was hoping to have something more positive to say...however, I am absolutely appalled by this game, as well as those who give this game credit. We live in a console generation that demands more from developers. This game does not live up to Next-Gen standards, despite the fact that we have been in the Next-Gen era for nearly six years. If this game were a movie, it would land squarely in the realm of a Sci-Fi channel made-for-TV-movie starring Luke Perry.

    The Graphics - 1/10: Oh my god. They are the worst. I know it is not fair to compare games to titles such as Call of Duty or Battlefield, but lets be realistic. Those titles set a standard, and it is our job as a consumer public to demand that those standards be met or exceeded. This game barely meets the standards set by the Ghost Recon series for the original Xbox. The textures are poorly crafted train wrecks that can not be justifiably defended, unless you are just now putting away your PS One and stepping up to 360 with no frame of reference. Game models are absolutely dreadful, and do not do any of their real-world counterparts justice. Character animation is a joke, resulting in laugh-out-loud moments when you see just how terribly they interact with the down right ugly environments. The "fog-of-war" effect made famous by old-era shooters on PC makes a return in this game in what I'm only guessing is KAOS Studios best shot at saving frame rate. I give this section 1 mark for the developer's loving attention to detail on the Hooters restaurant signs. Way to go. I could go on and on literally forever but lets just leave it at this; This game is ugly as sin, and if you value presentation, save your money.

    The Sound - 3/10: The sound engine doesn't do anything new. Its the same old shooter audio environment that we have been used to for a decade or more. KAOS should have learned a lesson from the Battlefield: Bad Company franchise, which has nearly perfected a fully realized audio experience. This game lacks emotion in its sound...and for god's sake, we know that they spent good money creating the music...but that does not mean we want to hear it. Where is the option menu? Why do developers choose to cram their game down our throats. This game represents a trend in which developers charge more for games and give us less options. I don't like being spoon-fed the experience they demand we have. I'm not a child, and I am not gonna open my mouth for the proverbial airplane.

    Game play - 1/10: I don't give a damn about single player games. If I wanted story, I would buy a book or see a movie. I didn't play the SP campaign. Developers should take note of the smash success of BF2. I did, however, brutalize myself with the multi-player mode for two rounds. Not enough time to effectively rate this game, you might be saying? I say you are wrong. If you are anything like me, you probably wanted to gouge your eye balls out of their sockets for having laid eyes on such an ugly, clunky, cluttered, and convoluted mess. As I said before, the graphics are barf-tastic, the sound is boring, the character animations are unrealistic, weapon models are weak, textures...ugh...the textures. I would have rather played a game that takes place on a texture-less world populated by stick figures and stick figure guns. The gun-play is retarded, recoil is unrealistic, and the Counter-Strike wanna-be "battle-point" system reeks of the stench of rotting cd-rom games in the garbage. I found the whole fiasco repulsively simplistic in movement and form. Ah yes, and don't even get me started on the dedicated server nightmare. How many times are developers going to punish their devoted fan-base by being unprepared for a major title release. It screams laziness, and I will not tolerate it for one more second. I implore you to do the same. If today's generation of network developers worked for me, I would have fired them long ago. Enough is enough.

    Overall - 2/10: Its no wonder that KAOS and THQ opted not to release a demo or beta prior to release. I suspect they knew they had a major stinker on their hands and didn't want to damage their chances of making sales or capitalizing on their huge marketing push. If this were my product and I wanted to make a few bucks, I would have done the same. But make no mistake, guys and gals...This game sucks. Plain and simple. I would not have launched into this tirade if I didn't desire to protect your wallets and keep the FPS community structurally sound. As a devoted hardcore shooter gamer, I demand excellence in a video game. We all invest so much time and money into this that we should expect no less than the standard set by today's AAA titles. This game is so pathetically below those standards that I foresee this game being a bargain bin, used game sales nightmare. You couldn't get me to pay 99 cents for this pile of refuse. Harsh? Yes. But this is reality, and reality hurts.
    Expand
  21. Mar 15, 2011
    5
    the game is decent and it has a lot fault from the campaign to the graphics. seriously where is the atmosphere they're talking about and why the sound effect feel like a toy gun, the voice acting is good graphics feels too old comparing to other game coming this year from the texture to the lighting and why the enemy ai hit you with a with a pin point accuracy and your team AI barely help you feel they are ghost cause the enemy AI always shout at you Expand
  22. Mar 16, 2011
    6
    Just four hours to beat the game in single player without rushing. FOUR HOURS. Multiplayer is fun, too bad there are only 2 real modes. Technically everything in this game looks below average.
  23. Mar 15, 2011
    0
    total crap, looks bad, plays bad. only chiches, bad voice acting, bad score/music, koreans look like power rangers, campaign on easy is beaten in 3 hours tops
  24. pip
    Mar 15, 2011
    10
    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.
  25. 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
  26. Mar 15, 2011
    8
    This game deserves at the very least, a 7.5. At most, 8.5. It all depends on whether you're a singleplayer guy or a multiplayer guy.

    At first, starting in the singleplayer campaign I was like "Oh, typical, I get saved by a hardcore resistance leader and some broad with a fat ass." Said resistance leader is Connor, who seems to have extremely violent moodswings where one moment he'll be
    thanking a teammate for saving his life and the next he'll be telling them to "stfu and keep shooting".
    You play through, and you meet a pretty cool guy named Hopper. He's Korean-American, and one of the things that make the story so tragic is the fact that Hopper is fighting for his life in the resistance, yet he encounters racism, insults, and threats wherever we go in the story.

    Anyway I'm not going to spoil anything, but I began to get more engrossed in the story and my interest mounted on each chapter until I played through the whole thing in 5 hours. And a surprise ending and a cliffhanger sets the game up for a sequel. Pretty short for a singleplayer game to be honest, but multiplayer made up for it.

    Multiplayer is like a mix of CoD and Battlefield. Shot detection is top notch, and unlike CoD where you needed multiple pistol shots to the head to kill somebody, headshots actually register and kill in one hit. Also, the level design is... glorious. Whoever designed the levels (single AND multiplayer) in this game deserve a year off for their work. For a 'linear CoD clone', they managed to find a way to make it explorable and add all kinds of story-related easter eggs and newspapers that give you an insight into the game's story. Some of the setpieces were awe-inspiring: once leaving the labyrinth of Colorado suburbs, we entered a town surrounded by the Rocky Mountains. One piece I can't stop thinking about was a water tower with several bodies hanging from the side.

    My advice? Don't listen to reviewers if you're looking to buy this game. In fact, don't read anymore reviews after this. Reviewers taint your mind and attempt to ruin the experience for you. Graphics aren't "omg crysis", but they're average for this gen. On a high note, I didn't see any of the N64-ish textures you saw in Dragon Age 2. (lulz) On that note, why does every reviewer think that if a game doesn't have Crysis-level graphics it automatically sucks?

    Pros and Cons:
    +Well written, besides Connor's bipolar moods. Best story I've enjoyed in a while.
    +Large array of balanced and extremely customizable weapons.
    +Deep multiplayer that will keep you until BF3 and R02.
    +Magnificent level design.
    +Balanced gameplay.
    -Civilians felt like clones. They all had different faces, but they all wore the same outfit.
    -The Koreans were mostly faceless enemies with little-to-no voice overs and conversations. I would've liked to hear more about what they think about the occupation and if they felt they "should be here".
    -Short singleplayer (5 hours on normal)
    Expand
  27. Mar 16, 2011
    10
    MULTIPLAYER REVIEW: The multiplayer is best described by saying that it has the vehicle and squad elements of Battlefield: Bad Company 2, It has the pace of Halo Reach or Halo 3, And it has the customization,guns, and graphics of COD 4. The multiplayer is phenomenal i bought this game strictly for the multiplayer, though the campaign is a nice addition, Its has sort of squad elements in it (team strategy) In some situations you may need your friend or other player to start to show targets by marking them in a drone; But you can go lone wolf , though it may be better to stay team focused in Ground Control. The first hour i played this game i did have trouble connecting to a match, but i later found out this was because of the high and unexpected traffic on the servers for this game, this problem has already been addressed by THQ which they have said theyll be putting more servers up. For any one who is having trouble connecting to a match try the skirmish mode as instructed by THQ to get into a match easier. The gunplay is similar to that of COD but it has a sort of halo feel since you can jump rather high. The vehicles control like warthogs (or any other vehicle in halo) from halo. The maps are incredible! They're big an open you dont get that boxed in feeling you get from COD maps, plus theres a map with white castle and hooters, which is awesome!. The battle points make things interesting, its sort of like the kill streaks of COD but less stressful since you can die and still maintain your amount of BPs (Battle Points). This makes things alot funner considering you dont have the frustration of being one kill away from your blackbird or chopper gunner. Over all this games multiplayer is fantastic! Its great and right now i prefer it to COD. Definite buy! GET OUT THERE AND DEFEND YOUR HOMEFRONT! Expand
  28. Mar 17, 2011
    2
    TOTAL Schlock!!! It is 2011 and this is the much-hyped revolutionary FPS from THQ? Really? The graphics are PS2, the conceot is solid, but the story and voicing are worse than Sci-Fy channel Friday night movies like Man-Squito. The gameplay is clunky and simply no fun at all. My character felt like a fat, slow short plumber. Wait til you get a load of the animations of climbing a ladder or jumping into a tunnel, too. Your arms and legs disappear. Invisible walls and enemies that all die the same way are game design elements of 5 years ago. Should I really have to wait for the thousandth time for the NPC to open the door for me or jump over the fence? Play one hour of this, then one hour of Crysis 2 or Killzone 3, or Bulletstorm. Then write your review. If you still can give it anywhere near above a 4, you're an idiot and should go buy Dance Central. Expand
  29. Mar 17, 2011
    2
    How people are giving this a 9 or 10 must not be playing the same game I am.

    Storyline- Not sure how this is considered a "new and exciting" take on standard FPS's. A ton of games have had the US either invaded or attacked by other nations or terrorists. Don't really think that changing them to Koreans should gain the accolades given for this "groundbreaking" story. The buidup
    trailers and teasers at the official site were actually much better than what was in the game.

    Graphics- My opinion, but looks like an unpolished port of a Wii game. Can someone say, cutting edge 2003 technology?

    Sound- Explosions and gunfire. To be expected, no great positives or negatives.

    Controls- Standard controls. Character feels like they are running and moving with an extra 10 lbs. on each arm and leg.

    Support- Nonexistant. I was shocked upon joining the HF community and seeing the general poor attitude and sense of dislike from the developer towards the gaming community. People asking for the popular mode of hardcore were told in no uncertain terms that it wasn't in the game and they really don't care what people say. Thats one example, and there were more concerns like this that people were basically told, "oh, well."

    Singleplayer- All this hype, really? The trailers and site information took longer to look at than the game to finish. I read about all this, basically crap, about how they had "redefined" the FPS shooter and reworked it, and tweaked it, and loved it. Can't change much in a FPS and they didn't. Character developement wasn't even present, you couldn't care less about them really. The emotional card was basically played on shock value such as mass graves at a baseball field. Common now! It was a baseball field, you don't get more American than a baseball field! Double crossing by supposed allies. Death of your main leader, strung up for display. Etc., etc., etc. Multiplayer- 2 game types, you heard me right 2. Capture objectives or team deathmatch, or get really freaky and play skirmish which mixes them up. 8 maps, buildings and open spaces, done. Battlepoints are kind of cool, makes it much easier for players that are not in the 16 hrs/day, 7 days a week skill range to get some good stuff. Bottom line, killing 10 people to get a helicopter and getting points for killing 10 people to get a helicopter really isn't that much different.

    ***MULTIPLAYER SIDENOTE***

    The greedy's that be, have decided that only one person gets the "full multiplayer experience." You heard that right too. This means that if you have for example, two kids and yourself that game, they expect you to pay another $20 so everyone can have the "full multiplayer experience." You rent it and want to play past level 5, $10 for a new code. You buy it used, $10 for a new code. Eat it steaming and fresh is all I have to say about that.

    Bottom line- Its a only half decent game that due to uncaring developers and greedy publishers is brought down to the bargin bin level. I even think the price dropped $20 the day after release, when has that happened before? If you have the game and really like it, I'm happy for you. If you have the game, and like me, think its a stinker. Well, I guess we can wait for a patch and see what happens. A paid downloadable content to fix this mess and they can shove that with their additional battle code idea.

    Call me a fanboy all you want, I readily admit that CoD games have their faults as well, but are also brilliant in many aspects. I was looking forward to this game as an alternative to CoD, its not even in the same league. All I have to backup this statement is that right at this time, there is more than 2x the number of players online on Black Ops than total sales of Homefront.
    Expand
  30. Mar 15, 2011
    5
    It seems like all of the soldiers in every first person shooter game now-a-days are all suffering from hair loss. I swear to God every character looks the same from Soap Mactavish (Call of Duty) to Sevchenko (Killzone) to Connor (Homefront). The game manages to stay Politically Correct as your squad members include a woman and an African-American (Like most modern FPS games that appeal to silly teenagers). It's just a shame that the story is short and the game mimicks the exact same controls as the Call of Duty series. Plant C4 to destroy a tank? Take out a machine gunner? How original! 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. 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.