Preview: Homefront
No one fights as hard as a man fighting to protect his home.
Read Full Article
No one fights as hard as a man fighting to protect his home.
Read Full Article
Preview: Homefront
- Thread starter Steve Butts
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Steve Butts said:
Aaaahahahahahahaahahahahahahahhahahaha
*gasp*
Aaahahahahahaah
Seriously. I just read this out to my family in the living room. Everyone burst out laughing, even the dog. Just this ridiculous premise on its own has put me off. I know it's just a game, but come on.
Should've made it a Canadian Mountie Invasion of the USA. At least that's a bit more plausible. =P
Oh god this looks so good... I love the whole 'action magnetism' thing they've been talking about.
Plus THQ is one of my favourite publishers. Can't wait!
Plus THQ is one of my favourite publishers. Can't wait!
Had to wiki to find out the game's platforms.
On the premise: How do we know a korean-run US wouldn't be better than the farce that exists now? It's Kim Jong-un, not Kim Jong-il. Granted, civilized nations don't "conquer" others; they buy them out from under themselves, until it's too late to stop them. See what China is doing now, through Wal*Mart and every other outsourcing fink-co. The game's premise is a bit sketchy, actually, since China would have an interest in protecting its investment, and China is the second, silent superpower.
Also, is there a reason to protect the mother and child in that house? Without a family connection I doubt I'd feel anything for them. Hope the game doesn't force you to save them.
On the premise: How do we know a korean-run US wouldn't be better than the farce that exists now? It's Kim Jong-un, not Kim Jong-il. Granted, civilized nations don't "conquer" others; they buy them out from under themselves, until it's too late to stop them. See what China is doing now, through Wal*Mart and every other outsourcing fink-co. The game's premise is a bit sketchy, actually, since China would have an interest in protecting its investment, and China is the second, silent superpower.
Also, is there a reason to protect the mother and child in that house? Without a family connection I doubt I'd feel anything for them. Hope the game doesn't force you to save them.
Justify that first claim. With Chinese and Russian backing I think it's still incredibly unlikely that a nation of only 27m malnourished, cloistered people could ever possible take on a nation of 300m well-fed, well-supplied, gun-toting civilians, let alone the national guard and army proper.pumuckl said:
You'd be substantially less squishy than many other countries if an enemy gets onto your soil.
This storyline is hilarious at best, what about the US Navy? There's no way Korea could invade the US, I mean seriously, are they completely out of ideas?
Now a Russian-Sino coalition, in which Korea is part of, could invade the US. That is likely. But not Korea, by gods no.
Now a Russian-Sino coalition, in which Korea is part of, could invade the US. That is likely. But not Korea, by gods no.
I've watched the trailer for this game and I must say I find it to be a rather silly scenario to say the least. That America somehow misses all this changes and what they could hold for the future of the world seems unlikely, as well as the fact that europe is mysteriously absent in this conflict.
"The team members hope to focus on the memorable moments that define certain games, but were quick to remind us that "games aren't driven by story first." Mechanics must come first, according to the creators in Montreal, and the fiction is just there to "make the mechanics sticky." More than once, we were told that Half-Life 2 was a particular inspiration in this regard, primarily for the way it allows story and gameplay to occupy the same moment."
I can't explain enough how much I find this passage distasteful. A game wherein gameplay mechanics and the plot simply coexist by "occupy[ing] the same moment" is not a game worth playing. If Half-Life 2 was such an inspiration, why wouldn't they do justice to the source and allow for a marriage of gameplay and plot? I'll walk you through it. Using the source engine you immediately absorb the information that you, the protagonist, are in a downtrodden city in the grip of a dictator. This huge idea in the plot is made possible from the use of gameplay mechanics. They exist in a union. Opinions from game developers like this make me not want to spend money on their works.
I can't explain enough how much I find this passage distasteful. A game wherein gameplay mechanics and the plot simply coexist by "occupy[ing] the same moment" is not a game worth playing. If Half-Life 2 was such an inspiration, why wouldn't they do justice to the source and allow for a marriage of gameplay and plot? I'll walk you through it. Using the source engine you immediately absorb the information that you, the protagonist, are in a downtrodden city in the grip of a dictator. This huge idea in the plot is made possible from the use of gameplay mechanics. They exist in a union. Opinions from game developers like this make me not want to spend money on their works.
this is what i was saying, if sumone was to attack america they WOULD NOT be alone, and we as a country dont have the cold that saved russia, the small island coastline that has more or less saved britain, or the sheer numbers that makes no one want to attack china... chinas numbers, russian technology, korean craziness and we'd be royally bonedNolanp01 said:
plus we were saved last time we were "invaded" by rugged individualism, the fact most ppl owned guns, and most ppl had made a living shooting sumone at sum point, that doesnt exist today... foreign enemy crosses our border we'd retreat IMMEDIATLEY i meen we called for an end to the iraq war after a few thousand deaths.. imagine if a war with a few hundred thousand deaths on the first day crossed our borders, we'd be in a panic with no moral, and we couldnt nuke our problem away... we're not even that good of soldiers compared to evenvietnam, andeven iraq dida goodjob beating us down... if they found a way around our navy we'd be in a serious war
pumuckl said:
All moot, because you have nukes, and can always use them to get out of a situation.
Right:
Cold wasn't the only thing that saved Russia, see food shortages;
The coastline wasn't the only thing to save Britain, see the battle of Britain;
No-one wants to attack China because they have nukes, not because they have numbers- see Korean War;
Russians have inferior technology;
Numbers are useful, but not so much when you transport them halfway across the world- imagine the logistics;
No you wouldn't. If we're pulling allies into this, then you'd have much of Europe on your side, too.
Retreat? What! It's different fighting a war on your own soil than it is fighting it somewhere else. Retreating in Iraq is no indicator, especially given the ridiculous patriotism in the USA. God. Think about things for a moment. You might consolidate, but you can't retreat if there's no-where to go. That'd be a surrender, which would never happen.
Ugh. If the other major powers tried to invade it would likely become a pitched, old-style battle rather than the guerilla style wars you're citing. They would want to use their tanks and aircraft and would be thoroughly pwned by yours. As much as I might dislike the USA, the claims you are making as to your vulnerability are ridiculous.
You don't even consider the economic barriers to a war like this.
Placing the player/protagonist in a position of insurmountable power is not conducive to a dramatic scenario or an enjoyable story.dogstile said:
The makers of this game are clearly aware of this.
However, they are so attached to the idea of an American hero that they have to cook up a ridiculous scenario in order to have a America in the position of underdog.
Hence the scorn.
This is just shifting the scenario from one impossible thing to another. North Korea wouldn't stand a chance against either of them - Russia's air force is still strong enough to flatten the entire country of North Korea, and fighting China would be hopeless just on the numbers. Which means that the only way this could work is if the "support" they're getting is willingly given, in which case saying that North Korea is attacking the United States is ridiculously inaccurate. That's like saying that the Iraq War started when Australia invaded Iraq with the support of the Americans. Basically, if China and/or Russia are providing direct military assistance, the war pretty much automatically becomes one between the US and THEM, with North Korea as an afterthoughtpumuckl said:
I don't mind games making up unlikely or impossible scenarios at all, but you still have to call a spade a spade.