Apart from the poor solo game, every other aspect of the game felt well polished. In fact is was a pleasure to play a game without any discernible graphic or control issues. Stetsons off to the game testers!
The best multiplayer I've played in my entire life. It is a pity that there is no edition on the PC, I would play to this day. A huge number of necessary (not garbage) buildings, a lot of equipment and interaction with other players (begging for a flying suit while crouching near the player)))
My username on the Playstation 3 is Sandblazter. I am a huge fan of the games Warhawk and Starhawk. I play them any time that I possibly can. I would rather play Starhawk than call of duty. I feel like everyone should know about this game because it is truly amazing. It is a classic game that allows you to change your base and the battlefield any way you want, along with many weapons and vehicles that will bring you to victory! - November 14, 2016
StarHawk is a pleasant surprise. Predicted as a very multiplayer TPS, it reveals a nice campaign, which is a true advantage in this kind of game. Multi is a little bit disapointing : game modes are far too classic and you'll have to fight with your friends to establish a real strategy. That's too bad, with its nice graphics and its versatile gameplay, StarHawk could have been one of the very best.
Starhawk is definitely a game that was made; I just don't know if it was a game that was designed. Its scope seems at odds with its mechanics. There's nothing inherently broken about Starhawk, it's just painfully straightforward, as if the question of "why" was never asked. And it's one I continued to ponder as I played the game and don't think I ever really came up with a satisfying answer.
Forget what you know about online gaming. For the majority of us the subject of mutiplayer usually conjures up frantic images of run and gunning, crude insults and getting ones head blown off. I am speaking generally as for many folk the typical FPS is the holy grail of gaming. It does seem however that which each new incarnation the die hard fans will complain that the latest is inferior to the last and I am not surprised that the business of ranking up every year is something of a chore.
Bring in Starhawk and what is it that is different. I will still endure frantic shootouts and have my virtual head removed from a couple of clicks away but...
Aside from the hell for leather Free For All deathmatches. The thing that separates Starhawk from every other online multiplayer is the selfish co-operation system it uses. This needs a little explanation;
Each player has the same ability to build structures and vehicles as they see fit. You want to snipe - Build a watchtower. You need to get from A to B - Build a Sidewinder (speederbike). This all adds to a sense of co-operative mayhem and a kind of organised chaos. Each team member is contributing to the cause in there own way. So my Sidewinder corral is accessible for every player on my team to access and spawn a Sidewinder of their own, like wise for the Watchtower, there is a sniper rifle ready and waiting for any team-mate who climbs the ladder.
The greatest success is when you get together on the headsets and plan and plot your strategy as the battle unfolds. Tell your mates you have build an outpost on the farside of the map for sneaky troop deployment or they may not see it to take advantage.
The battles; There is no need to go hell for leather all guns blazing, unless you want to, each battle lasts for 45 minutes - YES 45 minutes, less if there is a score limit but even with a limit we are talking a good 20 - 25 mins plus.
This massive amount of time allows players to try a number of tactics and gauge the battlefield as it develops. Snipers can truly camp out and enjoy the hunt (This camping is addressed cleverly by way of a bright lazer beam emitting from the scope if a player aims for more than a few seconds, notifying enemies and making the sniper hit and run with grater frequency). Players receive XP for building and destroying structures so the great architects and military officianardos can indulge themselves in base building and strategy if the firefight is not going their way.
All of this coupled with jawdropping scenery, huge maps, transforming mechs and an epic score all amounts to something very special and a real treasure of gaming. Starhawk is here to stay and the community online is still going strong with lists of matches filled with players.
A note on the single player - It is a flat tutorial. Great to be included as as a tutorial it is really good but take it with a pinch of salt. If it were not for the campaign many would not bother with this game so it is needed but the heart and soul of Starhawk is online.
I know this game is really about the multiplayer but I couldn't stand to jump into a multiplayer game at the moment and will wait to really give it a shot some time later. That being said, what I did play felt similar to war hawk but at the same time not. I jumped into the single player thinking it would be a good tutorial but found myself liking it for the missions and the story as well. Although the story was not overly compelling it served as a good way to introduce new things and the characters seemed to have a reasonable dynamic that tied them together. It was relatively fast paced and didn't penalize you hugely for making mistakes. I got annoyed once or twice but it was nothing more than feeling stupid for taking to many risks. The controls felt good and the visuals were fairly snappy. I don't know what the fps is on this game (30 probably, right?) but they did a good making it feel like more. The art style felt similar to Warkhawk with the exception of QTE's but I didn't find it to take away or give value. It was brief, sensible, and enjoyable, but by no means great. Am I happy I played it? Yes. Would I recommend it to a friend? Probably not.
Huge Warhawk fan here, and this game turned up the dial for this addition to the franchise, but didn't extend their creative arms as much as they could. The Pros; gameplay has been revolutionized, I mean Mechs? Can't go wrong with a Piloting system that transforms into a Mech. Audio was epic, be it the score or the sound effects. Graphics are a huge improvement from Warhawk while keeping the same mechanics but with a few extras. Single player story was short, but worth its quick play through. Now the Cons; Graphic Novel style cut scenes seem to be overdone with Sony, enough is enough and it feels like a cop-out since the character isn't very comic-booky. The graphics could be improved but it doesn't take away from the gameplay. You can always use more weapons choices, but the multiplayer is so addictive it doesn't feel like an issue. Great game, but could be improved on. Still worth owning it, maybe once it goes on sale.
The long and short of it is that the single player is brief and uninspired, but worth a rental at the very least. The multiplayer was seemingly designed for greifers and between them and players who don't have a clue what they're doing, finding the fun is nigh impossible. Even people who enjoy the multiplayer will tell you it has problems. Personally, this was some of the least fun multiplayer I've experienced.
I really didn't enjoy this game. I bought it mainly for the Multi-player but gave the campaign a shot too. The Multi-player is weak. The guns are far too simple and lack any punch whatsoever. The campaign is quite good fun, but way too linear and voice acting is elementary. The building aspect - which all the magazines talk about as the best thing since slice bread - becomes very old very quickly. The Mulitplayer maps are either far too large or far too small. 2/10.
SummaryStarhawk is a 3rd Person shooter adventure in which you can instantly change the battlefield in the heat of combat. In the future, humanity’s final hope lies in the lawless frontier of space where factions battle over the universe’s most valuable resource - Rift Energy. Caught in the middle is Emmett Graves, an outcast gunslinger who is ...