Homefront THQ has made it abundantly clear that it intends to step it up as a publisher, marquee titles – the likes of De Blob 2, Red Faction: Armageddon and indeed Homefront are all part of that plan – as the publishing house looks to take on Activision and EA, specialists in the art of the cross-platform blockbuster. Homefront Cop a …
Barbecue lamb, yum...
Anyway, one "Yellow Peril" is much the same as another. Why are Americans all paranoid, it must be the drugs.
A vast number of them are terrified of The United Nations taking their country over. I will tell you the real secret about The United Nations: it doesn't exist. Think about it. There are however many countries in the world, most of them send people to stand and talk in a big building in New York City which is supposed to belong to The United Nations Organization, but that's ALL THAT THERE IS. Outside that building there's no United Nations. And inside it there's nothing but talk, by people who are not agents or officers of the United Nations, they are just visiting.
Does that make you wonder exactly who just told us it was okay to have a war (again)? It should.
Nice description of the background to the game, I would like to know the final set piece. I am imagining 1:1 combat with Kim Jong-un (a la Killzone 2 / Team America).
I tried to stop myself commenting on some of the mistakes in the article, but was unable to do so (it is Friday afternoon).
"leaving the reigns of North Korea... reigns he seizes with relish..."
I was not sure whether you meant "reign of North Korea", until I read the next line about "reigns" and "relish".
In this context, I think REINS would be more appropiate.
After an escape, a prisoner does not go on the 'lamb'. (Cue kebab and/or regional jokes)
It is more usual to go on the 'lam'.
Oh, "KIM" was mis-spelt also (final paragraph, first page).
A pint of beer to whoever finds the remaining grammatical error(s). :-)
Homefront is a Steamworks game that you cannot buy on Steam in the UK.
You can buy it in other regions via Steam. You can buy it retail in the UK and Steam lets you play. You just cannot buy it from Steam.
Steam's official line is that the publisher put geographical restrictions on the game, but they did not explain why.
I ain't even mad, bro.
BFBC2, Shogun TW2 and Bulletstorm (when I get back to it) will keep me happy (until Deas Ex: HI etc at least)
Only game I've bought non-Steam in a year is StarCraft II. Why buy a license to software on a breakable disk when I can buy the license to download it to any machine I want safe from scratches? THQ are "pulling-a-music-industry". Their loss.
So after my initial query about Homefront's conspicuous absence from Steam, I bought the disk from a retailer.
I popped the disk in and something that looked very much like the Steam backup tool opened. It then proceeded to download the full nine gigabytes from Steam's servers, thus rendering the physical DVD a complete and utter waste of time.
A quick google later revealed that even if if the installer works correctly it only installs 5gb (of the 7.5gb on the disk) and then downloads the other 4gb. None of this is mentioned on the box, so you are boned if you have a low cap or otherwise crappy connection.
As for the game, it is OK. Just OK. It's a COD-a-like. It is short, it is cheesy and it is predictable. Oh and the helicopter controls suck major donkey dong. I have not tried the MP yet as it sounds like an unappealing spawn camping sniper fest.
Pro tip: If you play inverted mouse (as is right and proper) then you have to invert the joystick too, otherwise the game tries to implement inverted and non-inverted at the same time.
Check out the Steam user who lost access to all their games because they asked about selling their account.
If you're smart, you'll only use Steam for cheap games and buy the rest either DRM free or on a DVD that has a serial number or that can be cracked in the future.
I still have games pre 1992 that I run. I do wonder if I can run current games in another 19 years..
"By 2025, a Korea now fortified by the absorption of Japan conducts a successful, coordinated strike on US soil and two short years later, has occupied the stricken nation. A little far fetched perhaps, but entertaining, oddly plausible..."
I disagree. North Korea would have to execute on all of the Communist wet dream 5 year plans ever enunciated, simultaneously for the next 14 years, to have a hope of conquering Japan & South Korea by 2025 even without USA support for South Korea and Japan. Then there is the problem of integrating the conquered nations' economies into North Korea's economy. To conquer the USA in that time frame is an opium pipe dream. "...oddly plausible..." - I do not think so... rather more something cooked up in a marketing meeting at the game publisher's head office.
"Thus begins the shooting"
It is good that the shooting starts, because that is what FPS games are all about.
I started FPSs with Doom 2, and have mostly played id and Valve titles but also Crysis, and the FEAR franchise, also Deus Ex (original game) and Deus Ex: Invisible War, also L4D & L4D2. I've played some others but none of them were really memorable enough that I can remember their names.
FPS games do not need a story line or a plot. They just need fun weapons and interesting monsters and good inter-player interaction in online multi-player games.
id games and Valve games before L4D(2) were brilliant when played deathmatch or CTF, but only good for one or two plays against the computer because the monsters were too stupid. Until L4D I never really dealt with challenging computer controlled monsters.
Deus Ex et co., though IIRC it had no multiplayer facility, did have a large ethical choice component which kept the game interesting.
Crysis was a tough fight against the computer, quite well done except for the silly boss fights - but the North Korean angle was stupid: NK can no more project force to an island in the southern hemisphere than it can project force to Tokyo.
Game companies should leave politics out of FPS games, it contributes very little. They should work harder on better fights, smarter computer controlled enemies, better or new multi-player interaction models. They should also not get too worried about the guns: id's BFG9K and rocket launcher and rail gun were totally unrealistic but they were enormously *fun*.
I think L4D/L4D2, whether or not you actually like the games, showed one useful way forward: challenging monsters and an inter-player interaction model that supports players behaving in any manner they like: spanning style from cooperative/supportive, to run the map and damn the hindmost, to outright grief play.
When I play an FPS I want to kill stuff, ideally I want to kill everything, I do not want to deal with the dev's or the marketer's idea of how I should play. I like to back track just to make sure I have not missed anything that still needs to be killed! Playing online, the L4D model is very good because very occasionally I meet another player who needs to be kill and L4D lets me try to do that. The most fun I ever had in Quake 2 CTF was on a server I ran that had friendly fire enabled: we had to be just a little selective during our rocket orgies.
Signed:
Mr. Clock
I'm not a huge multiplayer fan. I don't do online gaming, and I like a strong story driven FPS.
That's probably why my favourite FPS is Jedi Knight. Granted, I enjoyed Doom (but not Doom 2), Rise of The Triad, Duke Nukem 3D, Quake and Quake 2 (I haven't played much more modern FPS). I thought the move to the Quake III era of no single player campaign and endless bot/online fights was a tremendous step backwards.
I'd far sooner travel through a level where the objective is obtaining an item, rather than killing everything, then finding out that obtaining it causes the spaceship you're rushing through to plunge to the ground leaving three real time minutes to get to an exit.
That's much more fun than any number of monster kills.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
