Homefront: Not so original?

[LaputanMachine]

You can't expect an original shooter these days. Companies like Activision and EA can easily buy other companies, take their ideas, make it LOOK original, ship it off and make a quick buck and repeat. Black ops, Modern warfare 2 , homefront, Battlefield all have had very little innovation besides a few tweaks. However, these are tried and proven formulas and people aren't going to take risks in a bad market.

 

[Netrigan]

this game isnt original! it's basically half-life 2! with n. koreans! curse this industry's unoriginality!

Especially the bit where the tiny Koreans attached themselves to people's heads and make zombies out of them

 

[Jumplion]

Homefront looks interesting, but sadly it does not seem as original as the developers are claiming it's going to be.

What I see are tiny moments of originality. That scene where you're in the house of a mother and her child, and while the battle goes on you hear the mother screaming and the baby crying. I don't care if you just consider it a bunch of polygons, that's a heart wrenching thing to go through.

Unfortunately, small bouts of originality/innovation does not a whole game make original. The multiplayer also looks interesting, with a command officer giving out orders to "Take down this guy, he's decimating us!" but again, they're small innovations that barely change up the gameplay in a huge ocean of the genre.

I'm keeping an eye on Homefront, it still looks to be an interesting experience.

 

[bob1052]

The fuck? Wasn't that good? What wasn't? A bit of required brain-power for puzzles in FPS games? Excellent humor and timing? Challenging bosses?

The only thing wrong with Duke 3D is outdated graphics/control scheme. I'm guessing that Forever will fix both of these things. My only worry is that they dumb it down for the newer console crowd.

For Half Life 2: you required brain-power for the puzzles? Stacking cinder blocks on the other end of a teeter totter for a incredible physics puzzle is not brain-power inducing. For "excellent humor" I find myself unable to recall any humorous situation from it or any of the episodes, it obviously wasn't that memorable. And did HL2 actually have any bosses? All I remember is that the ultimate climax of the game involved giving you an instant kill weapon to run around with. The only thing Half Life 2 did remotely well was its story, which consisted of using fake science while throwing real sounding words at you to make you think, "Wow that's cool".

For Duke 3D: It stopped being funny when I passed grade 2 and toilet humor stopped being funny and just became dumb.

On topic: Homefront seems infinitely more original than alot of the upcoming games (save Brink, Bulletstorm and maybe Rage, maybe). The only thing that really interests me is the multiplayer, and partially that they want to focus on the result of the battle and who is impacted, rather than the fighting, but that sounds like it will fail horribly for a premise of a single player. The multiplayer sounds like they are taking some cues from Battlefield and from Call of Duty and making something that could very well be better than both.

 

[Adam Galli]

The idea of Home front reminds me of Freedom Fighters which, in my opinion, is one of the best games of the last decade.

 

[p3t3r]

you know what would make this game more original if your character could shoot lighting bolts out of ass. think about it i mean your character can never look over his shoulder in these games so you would have to face the other direction and fire blind to use it. unique different.

also to all those bullet sponge people i don't get it. your character has to be able to take alot of bullets or else it is just frustrating. i found a solution either way though every time you get hit even just once relode the mission, there your guy can take one bullet.

 

[archvile93]

I can't find anything remarkable about the game.

They keep throwing about Half-Life 2 in interviews as a point of influence, but all I've seen so far makes that seem a bit of an insult to Valve.

How so is it an insult to Valve?

Because one's HL2 and the other is a rather unremarkable looking shooter. I could be wrong and it could be the second coming, but right now? Nada.

Half Life 2 is a rather unremarkable shooter in it's own right, it just gets unduly hyped up because people love praising Valve. Good studio, yes, but a fan of HL2, I am not.

Kind of odd, because that was one of the games that made their reputation. Only their second single player release. And they took a pretty decent chance with it. Unlike Doom 2, Call Of Duty 2 or Halo 2, it was a pretty big departure from the original, something which is really odd for a sequel to the best selling PC FPS of all time.

HL2 is a very large part of the reason why Valve fanboys exist today. It's the game that proved they were more than a one-trick pony.

Excuse me, maybe I'm just not very smart, but what significant gameplay differences were there between HL1 and 2? I can think of some technical leaps, but it seemed very samey to me. I always thought of HL2 as being quite generic, but got much praise for its well presented story and atmosphere. The only difference I can think of was the gravity gun, and I didn't find that very interesting or useful (until the end of course), oh and a sprint button.

 

[agentironman]

I bought/reserved the game but mainly because I am in South Korea and I am curious to see how the whole Nork story line unfolds.

 

[inFAMOUSCowZ]

Original or not, I like the concept enough to pick it up close to launch.

 

[cjbos81]

OT: I think we need a game where you play as a resistance fighter who is in a country invaded by the US. THAT would be an interesting story if done right.

THAT would be banned in a second.

Banned by who? Germany?

America. Remember how big of a spazz Fox had when the word Taliban was to be used in MoH? Remember how they got 6 Days In Fallujah banned because it had American soldiers in it that got killed?
A USA = bad guys game will NEVER make it to shelves in the current status quo.

I don't think you understand the meaning of "banned".

 

[Vykrel]

(Author's note: Again, Minor grammar-fixes)
That implies that I believe there's a "Right" and a "wrong" way to enjoy games. Which is simply untrue. As a member of the "Games are art" camp, I believe that anyone can enjoy any game they damn' well please for any reason, even if it's only "It goes with my couch, man"-itis.
Hell, I liked Alpha Protocol and honestly cannot understand why Starcraft II is a thing when there's Dawn of War and Dawn of War II on the market. I'm the last person to run around and calling other people "wrong" for their taste in games.

ya i understand all that. im just saying you should avoid using terms like "over-hyped" or saying that you cant understand why a certain game exists if you really believe others are entitled to their own opinions about games. the way you word it makes it sound like you think theyre all a little bonkers

 

[Thanatos5150]

For Half Life 2: you required brain-power for the puzzles? Stacking cinder blocks on the other end of a teeter totter for a incredible physics puzzle is not brain-power inducing. For "excellent humor" I find myself unable to recall any humorous situation from it or any of the episodes, it obviously wasn't that memorable. And did HL2 actually have any bosses? All I remember is that the ultimate climax of the game involved giving you an instant kill weapon to run around with. The only thing Half Life 2 did remotely well was its story, which consisted of using fake science while throwing real sounding words at you to make you think, "Wow that's cool".

And anybody who thinks "Generic Dystopia, grab a gun and kill dey asses" is an engaging and TOTALLY ORIGINAL GUISE! story might want to read some amateur fiction some time. It's not, guys, it's really not.

(Author's note: Again, Minor grammar-fixes)
That implies that I believe there's a "Right" and a "wrong" way to enjoy games. Which is simply untrue. As a member of the "Games are art" camp, I believe that anyone can enjoy any game they damn' well please for any reason, even if it's only "It goes with my couch, man"-itis.
Hell, I liked Alpha Protocol and honestly cannot understand why Starcraft II is a thing when there's Dawn of War and Dawn of War II on the market. I'm the last person to run around and calling other people "wrong" for their taste in games.

Yeah, I understand all that. I'm just saying you should avoid using terms like "over-hyped" or saying that you can't understand why a certain game exists if you really believe others are entitled to their own opinions about games. The way you word it makes it sound like you think they're all a little bonkers

(Yes, more grammar. Woo.)

That's because I believe everybody is "a little bonkers" and maybe a wee bit too sensitive and defensive to people not praising whatever the mainstream praises and damning whatever the mainstream damns. Worlds get rocked a bit too much.
(For the record, I understand that Starcraft II exists because Blizzard wants to be even richer. I just don't understand why it's a thing and people actually bought it. In my opinion, DoW and DoWII are much worthier things to throw my money at.)

 

[Netrigan]

I can't find anything remarkable about the game.

They keep throwing about Half-Life 2 in interviews as a point of influence, but all I've seen so far makes that seem a bit of an insult to Valve.

How so is it an insult to Valve?

Because one's HL2 and the other is a rather unremarkable looking shooter. I could be wrong and it could be the second coming, but right now? Nada.

Half Life 2 is a rather unremarkable shooter in it's own right, it just gets unduly hyped up because people love praising Valve. Good studio, yes, but a fan of HL2, I am not.

Kind of odd, because that was one of the games that made their reputation. Only their second single player release. And they took a pretty decent chance with it. Unlike Doom 2, Call Of Duty 2 or Halo 2, it was a pretty big departure from the original, something which is really odd for a sequel to the best selling PC FPS of all time.

HL2 is a very large part of the reason why Valve fanboys exist today. It's the game that proved they were more than a one-trick pony.

Excuse me, maybe I'm just not very smart, but what significant gameplay differences were there between HL1 and 2? I can think of some technical leaps, but it seemed very samey to me. I always thought of HL2 as being quite generic, but got much praise for its well presented story and atmosphere. The only difference I can think of was the gravity gun, and I didn't find that very interesting or useful (until the end of course), oh and a sprint button.

HL1 was largely a corridor crawl. A very large part of the game taking place in exactly one location.

The sequel moved the game from the narrow corridors to much larger outdoor areas, included vehicle sections, had you using turrets as traps, gravity gun was a pretty big game changer, and the most common enemy of first was now your ally. The dystopian setting was also quite a departure from the Black Mesa of the first. Still lots of familiar elements to make it feel like Half-Life.

As for Doom to Doom 2. A half dozen new enemies and a couple of new weapons, levels looked much the same as they did in the first. Call Of Duty, same English/American/Russian campaigns with much the same weapons and gameplay. Halo a few new weapons and enemies but levels that looked much the same as they did in the first game.

I can't think of a major hit that changed that much from the first to second game.

 

[SteewpidZombie]

Lets cut to the chase and just start being honest with ourselves...EVERY FPS THAT HAS OR EVER WILL EXIST, WILL BE PRETTY MUCH THE SAME POLISHED TURD, BUT IN FANCIER WRAPPING EACH TIME!

 

[Dethpixie]

A non-spec-ops civilian guy who will still absorb more ammo than the broad side of most barns.

I wish someone would make a game that actually made you feel like you were fighting against overwhelming odds, forcing you to use guerrilla tactics and scrounge for ammo. Also, I'd like it to feature anyone but an American in the leading role, preferably I'd like it to feature no Americans at all.

Homefront just sounds boring to me.

Two question:

One: Do you know for a fact that he will "absorb more ammo than the broad side of most barns?" And two: Do you game on a console or a PC?

Cuz if you're a PC gamer, then you NEED to check out the STALKER games. They feature Ukrainian player characters who die after 3 or 4 bullets, assuming they have decent armor. They also tend to bleed out and die of radiation poisoning if not properly treated and ammo is never around when you need it. In other words, STALKER meets your requirements.

I do not know that for fact, it's just a trend in modern games that I didn't necessarily expect Homefront to break from. I'm open to being pleasantly surprised if it does I just don't expect much in the way of innovation.

I actually recently picked up Shadow of Chernobyl and I absolutely love it despite how thoroughly it kicks my ass. I guess what I'm saying is I'd like more games to take a hint from STALKER's design choices.

 

[TheRobotandtheBeast]

I personally would like to see an fps where Venezuela defends it self from an american invasion.
That would be cool