But Bilson, who's been the driving force behind the game since he joined THQ in 2008, is pretty happy. "A million units in a week on an original IP coming out of nowhere I think speaks a lot to the concept and the marketing of the game," he told IGN. "I think we really captured people's imagination with the IP. I'm very proud [of] what the teams have done with that game."
The goal, he continued, was not to beat modern shooter behemoths like Call of Duty but just to get THQ "in the conversation" and in that regard, he described it as mission accomplished. "Everybody's talking about Homefront," he said.
"Do I prefer that it's controversial? No, I'd prefer if everybody in the world loved it," he continued. "But there are 20-plus reviews that are over 80, there are some haters, and there are some mid-range ones. Do I read them all to see what we can do better next time and have every review be 100? Of course, our goal is always that. What I will say pretty clearly is the game is not a 71. You can't apply math to art."
Uhmm... what I took away from this section of the original article is that Bilson says he's pretty happy with how Homefront was received. I can't find anything in the entire article suggesting he's pissed because "it's only a 70, not a 71" (Or, of course, higher).
He's even saying they're looking through these reviews to see how to improve on the game. That might all be lies to save face, and it does sound strange considering he says math is not applicable to art a mere sentence later, but it doesn't take away from the fact that I don't see him condemning the reviews, scores or general reception of the game.
My question to you, Shamus, would then be: Where do you see it?
Maybe I'm not that good at reading in between the lines, but it seems to me you went into this one with a great deal of pessimism toward Bilson and
Homefront.
