Homefront losing the battle at launch
Homefront found tough going on its launch day with mediocre reviews putting THQ's stock in a sharp decline, dedicated servers over capacity, and the competition at DICE wondering if KAOS can survive.
It's been a tough release day for Homefront, the near-future shooter in which players take up arms as American freedom fighters fending off occupation of the heartland by a unified Korea. After a massive marketing campaign, the early reviews indicate the game may struggle living up to the hype. Metacritic currently shows it with a 72 "Metascore" (for Xbox 360) based on 31 review ranging from a high of 93 to a low of 50. This puts it in the "mixed or average" category on the site--a score range almost certainly below publisher THQ's expectations.
Investors wasted no time showing their displeasure with the results. Reuters reports that shares of THQ (THQI) fell more than 20 percent during trading today on the Nasdaq. Volume also spiked to several times its daily average during the steep decline.
The game is also experiencing trouble handling the online load of players trying to get into games. In a post on the official forums, 'KAOS CHEFS' gave this update on the status of the game's dedicated servers.
Homefront’s dedicated servers are currently at capacity, and this is causing some matchmaking issues for players attempting to join an online match.
The demand for the servers has outstripped our expectations – so although we’re thrilled that Homefront is proving to be so popular, we’re doing all we can to bring more servers online to cope with this demand ASAP.
Please bear with us – as more servers come online, you should find you’re able to join matches easily and play Homefront the way it’s meant to be played – with 32 players on dedicated servers.
Even the competition took notice of the situation. Battlefield 3 senior gameplay designer Alan Kertz said on his twitter (as spotted by 'sk3tch' on NeoGAF), "I don't expect KAOS studio to last...THQ was already talking up moving them away from New York." This came after an earlier tweet where Kertz joked about the forum comment of the day being "KAOS should've stuck to making complete mods for DICE games" (KAOS formed from the team behind the popular Desert Combat mod for Battlefield 1942). He also added that DICE is hiring, directly addressing KAOS.
From my experience playing the single-player campaign over the weekend and a number of multiplayer matches, I can't say I'm surprised by the tough reception the game is getting. It would have been tough to live up to the expectations with a perfectly executed game and Homefront misses that mark, particularly in the single-player campaign. I'll have my review in the coming days. In the meantime, if you're playing the game share your experiences in the comments.
-
Shacknews
replyComment on Homefront losing the battle at launch, by Garnett Lee.
-
I wish they'd really put more focus on marketing the multiplayer side of the game and deemphasized the single player component. The prerelease hype on the SP (which seemed to be a bulk of it since they were hyping up the Red Dawn connection) got me really pumped and interested, but finding out that it's a half baked campaign kind of ruins my excitement.
Sadly, the target market for it is most likely people who would never even bother to try the SP side of the house, but they're totally put off by the less-than-stellar scores (which are predominantly based on that small slice of the game).
Bummer.-
I agree with you Roush. They should have put more effort into showing off multiplayer. Word of mouth is all that can be done at this point, but shame on the publisher for not standing up and being proud of the game they are selling.
-
-
-
Seriously. They could have just said "You can't change the FOV" then tons of whiny trolls would have given it a 1.
-
-
Tough launch day for KAOS and Homefront. Reviews trended down quickly this morning and that sent THQ stock sharply down; they're having trouble with the servers being at capacity; and one of the Battlefield 3 designers thinks they're not long for this world, though he did offer that DICE is hiring.
-
The sad part is that most of the bad reviews don't really even say anything bad.
-
They're sick of CoD. So unless you surpass CoD you get thrown into the pit of shame.
-
The same reviewers that generally call a game like this unoriginal are the same people come November will be practically giving Activision a happy ending over Call of Duty (insert name) despite the fact they've essentially been making the same game since 4.
-
You see a small group of PC gamers have hissy fits. Imagine what would happen if you gave CoD a shitty score? You'd have cops waiting outside of your house. All your birch trees in your neighborhood would be rammed down by dudebros.
-
-
Honestly I'd say it would be the people that pop up on Xbox live that would I plug in a mic and turn the volume down so I don't have to hear them.
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
Yeah, it seems like it's hard for reviewers to lambaste "proven" studios for mediocrity.
Granted, I thought MW2 was definitely above average. Super slick presentation, some great variety, and fuckin' co-op definitely made it a decent game, but I agree with you in that it wasn't as good as MW1.
-
-
-
-
Your comments make Kertz sound like a bit of a jerk. Is it a fair characterization that he is enjoying the game's bad reception and potential problems at the studio? Anyway, I like a lot of THQ's products lately and I was intrigued early on by this game but several things I've read in reviews have me thinking I'll pass. :/
-
No, well, I mean, I don't know his thoughts exactly but the forum post thing was from their forums, not his words. And he did offer, I think seriously, that DICE is hiring. I can't imagine any one in development being anything other than sympathetic to their fellow devs. It's a tight-knit community.
-
So, wasn't BC2 kinda shitty server wise for at least two weeks after release? Throwing stones in glass houses Kertz? Seriously, BF's quality of patches aren't exactly stellar either.
-
Yeah not to mention Medal of Honor was a total POS of a game. I don't even understand why they used frostbite seeing as they ripped out the features that made it a good engine. Homefront actually has an awesome multiplayer component.
-
I completely forgot about having to constantly reboot my servers and trying to fix the retarded punkbuster issues. Ug
-
-
-
-
The game is so popular that their MP servers are filled to capacity, yet it's not popular enough for the investors? This is fucking stupid.
-
Perhaps they were not expecting alot of people either so didn't have many servers at the ready to begin with. So we could still be talking about a low numbers.
-
So if they were lining themselves up for failure at the onset, why the disappointment?
-
-
-
For sure it's dumb, but I bet there are many uninformed gamers that make their decision whether or not to purchase a game based on its Metacritic score.
For that reason, the investors are assholes, but also somewhat justified from a bottom-line perspective. :(
-
-
-
-
-
I got to see a lot of Homefront at PAX East, and I've gotta say it was quite underwhelming. Perfectly average, generic miletary shooter. The story may be cool, but from a gameplay perspective it did absolutley nothing to distinguish itself in any way.
-
How disappointing. The single player game sounds like it had tons of potential. Like a serious take on mw2 mix with some half life 2.
Might pick this up on a steam sale later. -
Seriously? People are gonna jump ship because of Metacritic? Shouldn't they worry more about the sales numbers than anything else? I actually read some of the reviews that are put out on Metacritc and the one thing I have noticed is that those who score the games low have 2 things in common...
1. They can't really write a good review since they lack consistency in their writing and they can't really get their point across clearly.
2. They nitpick at every little detail in the game ad nauseum. It's either their way or the highway.-
Somebody ^*@$ing tell me!
http://www.shacknews.com/chatty?id=25493280#itemanchor_25493280
-
-
[deleted]
-
exactly, I saw the trailer and thought "well that looks awesome" and if it'd had an epic single player campaign I'd have seriously considered picking it up, but now knowing that its super short and having little interest in the multiplayer, its a no go. Maybe next Christmas i'll pick it up on a steam sale but that's as far as I'll ever go with this one.
-
-
What ever, I bought it and it's good fun
-
That sucks. The game's multiplayer sounds awesome, but the singleplayer sounds like uninspired shit with a toxic storyline. That's why I'm not buying it.
-
-
so you've never played the game? Cool story bro
-
-
-
Yeah I saw your post about the menus and shit that sounds cool I approve of that but DA2 also has a PC specific interface man, and I can't in good conscience support that game either. But you do what you gotta do, PC bro :(
I do plan to check out Metro 2033 one of these days tho, once I clear this obscene backlog I've got going which includes STALKER amongst others-
Metro 2033 is a fantastic title except for the limited FoV.
-
-
-
whatever you think of the game, it isn't a cod clone.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
BTW, really good work with the game. The only sad, is the lack of different weapons.
-
He's one to talk. DICE's MOH MP was fun for a little bit but overall it seemed half assed.
Homefronts is much better. More options and dedicated servers out of the box. It's great MP on PC.-
Yes. Just by watching youtube videos I can tell that Homefront's online mode plays different. MoH was a shameless, brain dead imitation of CoD. DICE should be embarrassed their logo is stamped on that half of the game. They're one of the titans of online FPS. Prior to shipping, they had to know that the gameplay wasn't going to measure up to anything. I can only assume they were marching to EA's tune.
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
I bought it on the PC, love it, played 4 hours yesterday morning, about to play another 2 now, only 2 things I dont like about it, a ton more things I do like about it, really good multiplayer.
-
So sad, when a game is scoring in the 70s review wise and it's considered a failure. It's a new IP from an unproven studio. Not every title from this combination is going to be a hit out of the park. Too bad studios like this will often never get another chance at bat.
-
Agreed...when did the 70s become the new 30s? We need new IPs.
-
-
-
Oh hi rodneystubbs.
-
-
-
a game in the 70s is considered low because the review sites are skewed where 99% of the games are above 6.0
-
-
[deleted]
-
Especially a 70 that is only 40 dollars. I'd rather pay 40 for 70 than 60 for 80.
-
-
[deleted]
-
funny how we all pan metacritic for not be an accurate meeter for a aggregated review scores...yet it has determined the quality of this game. I thought A- being an 88 or the B- being a 68 would have let us know not to take the meta outta contexta (unless they've changed their aggregation!)
-
How the fuck is a B- a 68?
-
-
I played Kaos' previous game (Frontlines) and I would say the same thing about it that people are saying about this game now. It had some ideas that could have made a great game, but it was not that great game.
I find it a little tasteless that a DICE developer is kicking Kaos employees when they're down. EA bought out the Desert Combat mod team, then disbanded them. The folks who didn't want to work for EA went and formed Kaos. I could understand DICE being a bit jealous if they were massively successful, but poking fun at them after a bad launch just makes DICE look bad.-
Honestly, I'm enjoying the game. The SP leave some to be desired but there are some really fun moments. MP is great though. I'm having a blast with it. It's fun both on foot or in vehicles. The drones are really fun to play too. Even the scout drone was fun tagging guys for my team to take out.
Considering they gave old school dedicated servers for PC, I wish more hardcore gamers support this. It's not GOTY but it's a really good game in my opinion.
-
-
I finished the single player campaign about an hour ago and have dabbled in a very little amount of multiplayer and average is about the best way to describe it. There are definitely aspects I love about Homefront, the shooting for one feels very solid which I like. And there are moments that gave me deep emotional impact which doesn't happen enough.
At the same time though overall the campaign is disappointing, incredibly short and just not really interesting. After an intense first level the rest of it just drags. And multiplayer is really just a Call of Duty clone, of what I've played I do enjoy it but I don't think it'll last.
Basically its a bunch of really nice ideas wrapped in a meh package. -
i love shooters but we are on the 5thHalo, god only knows what number CoD, gears of war 3, Medal of Honor bleh, and so on. Someone needs to come up with something entirely new. Everything is becoming played out. Homefront i didnt even think to look at because Im bored with it all. Maybe its just me...
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
Global leaderboards are dumb anyhow. Friends-only leaderboards are decent.
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
And hackers who like to exploit a very exploitable system.
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
unfortunately i cant even play the game. after the preload, i fired it up, saw a "completing installation..." message, then black screen for half a second and CTD with no message. validate files, it downloads 22k-ish, repeat, same result. try the ini file changes suggested around the web, and i get the same result EXCEPT i get a windows "homefront has closed unexpectedly" message. delete. redownload. repeat with the "completing installtion" dialog and crash.
finally gave up. ill just have to wait for a patch i guess. assuming it even gets one. -
SP is OK, MP is excellent. It's everything MOH was not. Its a lot of fun a things are pretty balanced, even with sniping going on, I never feel like I'm walking into a duck shoot and with dedicated servers, how can you hate on it. Game runs smooth as hot butter on a burning skillet.
SP, well that's about as homely and average as it's eve gonna get. Too bad to. Those silent heroes that follow others around are OVER man! fuck that!
-
I've heard of crashing from several people. Does it happen on some platforms more than others? I have the PC version and I have yet to crash. There's some bugs here and there from the heavily scripted campaign but overall I haven't had anything game breaking happen.
-
-
Not for $60, wait till you can buy it on ebay in 3 months for $30 if you just want the single player, then play it and resell it for $25 =P
-
just saw walmrt posting it for $42, so i don't think you'll need to wait more than a month to see this in the bargain bin.
-
Confirmed, 360 and PS3 versions both 42 bucks, PC still 50.
http://www.walmart.com/search/search-ng.do?search_query=homefront+&ic=48_0&Find=Find&search_constraint=0
-
-
-
-
Red Dawn remake changes its villains to North Korea
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=75300 -
I'm down with Homefront being disappointing, but man, those comments by that guy at DICE are just downright... arrogant. EA's not exactly doing so hot in the genre, either. Medal of Honor and BFBC2 were neither of them super-incredible orgasmic powerhouses of sales.
If you expected Homefront to sell like Call of Duty (and I'm sure THQ thought it would), then of course that was impossible. The game's graphics are by far very plain and not at all state of the art, but aside from that, the reviews I've read suggest the game has a different (if completely implausible to me) story, a short SP campaign, an extensive (if apparently nonfunctional currently) MP, dated graphics, and average sound.
Slap the Call of Duty name on that and the reviews would go up to the 9-ish range and they'd call it yet another incredible Call of Duty destined for awesomeness whose only flaw is that it is beginning to look dated. Without the Call of Duty name (like Medal of Honor before it), it suffers from reviewers who secretly despise Call of Duty and take it out on The Other Guys because they're too afraid to review Call of Duty for what it really is.
I do think THQ should have listened to its own rhetoric and lowered the price on this game to $40 MSRP, reduced the ad campaign, and made a case for why games with a short SP should not be costing the consumer $60. I think that argument would have won over a lot more sales (and money in turn) than trying to go with a full MSRP on an unknown franchise with dated graphics.
It's already $40 on Amazon.com's digital offering. It'll be $20 by August, if not sooner, on PC. That's when I'll probably buy it. It has nothing to do with the game not being compelling SP-wise. It's to do with the fact that I have like a dozen shooters still on my log of games to play and by the time I get to it, I'm sure it'll be cheaper.
I expect the Summer of Perils sale on Steam to knock this game down to $24.99, if not all the way down to $10-15. -
If THQ really wanted this game to succeed, they would have pushed it into June-August release window. Heck even April would have been better than this month. I would say May, but I imagine that entire month belongs to LA Noire. I would have given it a shot if I still wasn't trying to get through Dragon Age 2.
-
I'm playing through the single player campaign right now and I have to say I'm enjoying it. The shooting feels smooth to me, the story line so far has been pretty interesting and there are moments where my emotions are running high with a feeling of I want to kill all of these fuckers.
I haven't played any online with the multi-player and I probably won't, that's not really my cup of tea. I think Alan Kertz is kind of an asshole for making those comments but I guess that is corporate america for ya. -
No one at DICE has any right to even talk about server issues. Bad Company 2 (PC) was having severe issues as little as two months ago. And it was unplayable at launch, just like 1943. BF3 will have the same problems.
-
I had a fun time on the SP and am really liking the MP. I just think there is too much focus on making FPS games because they all start to bleed into each other. Don't get me wrong, I love FPS games but I'd like for developers to take a break. What I would like to see is a little bit more out of the RPG genre, and by that I don't mean games with "RPG elements." Give me the real deal.
-
i'd like to see more RPG's on the market, as all we seem to have is the witcher, fallout, dragon age, and mass effect and the elder scrolls, we need some fresh blood in the RPG genre. maybe im looking through rose tinted glasses but the days of a long game seem to be over in favour of shinier graphics and less substance. i'd prefer to have less eye candy in favour of content.
-
-
-
my thoughts exactly
-
Technically its by a DICE guy.
-
-
-
-
Please note the context. That comment was referenced as "forum comment of the day" and not something Kertz was saying directly. He in fact termed it as "harsh."
-
-
It's so stupid to build the SP up of this game as "HL2 inspired Red Dawn with Koreans that'll blow your mind!" and then it's like a 4 hour campaign. I don't care if it's a really good 4 hours it isn't worth $50/$60 to SP gamers, imho. If the MP rocks than that's what it should have focused on.
This is like when Crytek marketed Crysis as "The game you can't play on your hardware" and then cried as sales totally underperformed for months & months yet it was at the top of the torrent lists. WTF is wrong with these marketing departments? -
Despite poor reviews, it is selling well:
http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20110316006861/en/THQ-Announces-Robust-Day-North-America-Homefront%E2%84%A2 -
the only reason i think investors are upset with the review score is that call of duty usually scores in the 9's so 7 must be horrendously bad.
-
Played it for a few hours last night. The single player game has a really good story, but the game in general is very average. Multiplayer isnt too bad, infact its quite a bit of fun, but I think it will struggle with the likes of BF3 coming out soonish. All in all not a bad game but not a great one either.
PS. On PC had no issues finding servers, must be a console only issue. -
KAOS resting a top their expensive NYC studio is making nothing but garbage. This HomeFront game was overhyped from the start and I knew they are just trying to cash in on being that BF or COD clone they boasted about. They said this was a COD killer also, which in my opinion is a joke. DO NOT BUY THIS GAME you're just supporting a dev company doing nothing good for the game industry. Thats my rant, nothing good came out of this game, and they are already working on a 2nd one promising a longer single player game, haha a little too late guys... R.I.P Kaos, not paying 60 dollars for a crap game like yours again....
-
Yeah I'm playing it right now and I must say that I am not happy with what my money got me, I'm trucking through the single player right now and its just awful. I had such high hopes for this game because I love scenarios that this game is supposed to represent. The graphics are really nice and there are some good emotional scenes but holy crap is this game a HEAVILY SCRIPTED whack a mole COD clone. I feel it's even more scripted then any COD game I have played. I mean I literally have to back pedal to trigger the AI to MOVE AT ALL. I just went through the TigerDirect store about 10 times because apparently I was running to fast through it and killing myself with the "scripted" explosions going off. I had to move one step at a time as to not get to close to the explosions once I triggered them because i kept dying. Holinka this rant is nothing against you at all, I feel the game was properly made for PC ie controls and options are great but the gameplay is absolutely terrible.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Can't help but to be frustrated man, I have been waiting for this game for so long and have been following its development an equal amount of time and the single player portion of the game failed on so many levels. How can you justify 3.6 hours of game play for 50-60 dollars? (I won't get into the bad scripting that made up 95 percent of the sp) Please don't use multiplayer as leverage when THQ highly HIGHLY marketed the SP portion of the game for so many years. Sorry to offend you but I truly had my hopes up for the game and wanted it to be epic.
-
That is the problem right there. People in development miss the point of the industry, and can't relate to actual gamers anymore. He spent $60 on your game, which means he earns the right to voice satisfaction, or dissatisfaction as it were. It's not personal, and it certainly isn't "not friendly".
Think of it another way: when he paid $60, so that you profited from the sale of the game, it stopped being "your game" and started being "his game". I'm not saying this to be overly cynical, but some perspective is needed by developers to understand the reality. You are selling a product, accepting payment, and that's part of the deal.
When you sell your "art", it also becomes a "product", something that is sold to deliver some level of satisfaction, and can then be rightly evaluated on how much satisfaction was delivered/derived.
Just because you worked hard on something, doesn't mean that it's automatically worth the price that it's sold at. That's the cold reality of it. It doesn't invalidate your hard work, it's not personal, and if you accept that going in then there will be much less frustration and disappointment in the long run.
If I don't like your game, it doesn't mean I don't like you. Again, the best way to think of it is as soon as you start taking money for your work, it stops being "your game" and starts being "theirs".
-
Well since I have walked in both sets of shoes, as a person buying games from the industry and now as a person designing games to be sold, I have a very different perspective than you. You cannot give me $60 and suddenly the game is no longer "mine" but instead it is "yours." I'm fine with it being "ours" but you really can't claim to understand the ownership I feel over a game I've devoted 3 years of my life to. You think you're upset the game didn't meet your expectations after spending $60? I totally understand and you are rightly justified. But don't ignore how upset me and the rest of the team get when the game does not meet our expectations. You can buy and play the game then dismiss it. This game will never leave me. I'm glad that gamers want the game to be theirs and I'm ready to share that ownership with them. But if you think you can take this game from me simply by handing me $60, then it's you who has missed the point of the industry.
-
Fair Enough. The sale of the product does not strip it's creative worth from you, no one can take away that investment. However I stand by the reply to "..you could refrain from so emphatically trashing my game..." with a firmf "uhm no, you took $60 for him, so it's as much his game now as yours. When you sell your product/worth, you lose the right to be butt-hurt if someone is dissatisfied with it"
My reaction was rather pointed in direct reply to the above quote, because I really think sentiment like that comes up too often. Just because someone doesn't like your game, doesn't mean they don't like you. This is difficult already in the press/development relationship, but it's even more true with the consumer. Because they paid real money for the game, which means they have the potential to even be "ripped off". There is no money back guarantee.
In a perfect world, sure, we could all own games, the reward would be in the simple act of creation itself. Sadly though there is a business transaction involved, the player pays, and the developer collects. Because they are making that investment they certainly have earned the right to be dissapointed without regard for the "feelings" of those who made it. It's one of the parts of being a "professional", in any endeavor.
I'm not meaning to single you out or anything, and I obviously take a very pro-consumer position (although I actually have personal friends in development myself), but I see this sentiment a lot and I really do think it's unfair to the kid paying $60 of his hard earned money. Doesn't mean he can criticize you personally, but he sure as heck can evaluate the game; that was part of the deal when the $60 exchanged hands.
I certainly respect the blood sweat and tears, the extremely large creative investments involved in making games, but that doesn't automatically result in a free pass.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
You are either 13 or sound like you have a personal vendetta against a game developer.
Which one is it?
-
-
Sucks for the developers but from what I read THQ sort of deserves it. I saw that the studio was beasting the devs right up to the end trying to push the game out on time. I know that isn't unusual at all in the industry (understatement of the year) but as a publisher how can you expect any other result when the developers are under such a gun. Give them time to get the game right and not force them to meet a deadline just because thats when your marketing push has been set up.
I'm not trying to give the developers a pass on this and I haven't played or followed the game much so it may be that it just sucks but I hate it when they get the blame when their game doesn't do CoD numbers on day one. Here's a hint, few games launch like that so maybe if you spent accordingly the game doesn't need to sell 2+ million the first day in order to make a profit. Didn't anyone learn from the success of Stardock, or even care? -
My brother said he was going to get it but then he heard
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/292449/news/homefront-campaign-is-five-hours-long/
That's way too short.-
-
Same reason why he didn't buy those games either. Just because it's the norm, doesn't mean it's accepted (at least to everyone).
We can debate all we want about how to determine a game's worth, but you've got to be kidding me if I'm going to pay $60 for a 5 hour game. That's just way to short.-
Wrong 3.6 hours on hard difficulty and yes that is a fucking joke. If THQ expects people to pay for ANY SORT of DLC for this game they are out of their damn minds. I will not be suckered into one of your games again. I had this game pre-ordered for so long with such high hopes only to be completely ripped off.
-
-
-
-
I played the singleplayer for 2 hours last night and fucking loved it. I love the story so far; it doesn't feel like a Call of Duty game; the characters and story feels, so far, a lot more real.
Also, I jumped in to MP for like half an hour. I died a lot but I had a lot of fun!
-
