Homefront 2 from Crytek

Spear

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/crytek-to-develop-homefront-2/084999

bit of a slapdown for Kaos to take the franchise away from them.

marco_polo

Not existing anymore was probably a bigger slapdown

http://www.gamepro.com/article/news/220407/thq-closes-homefront-developer-kaos/

DarkJager

Spear wrote: »

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/crytek-to-develop-homefront-2/084999

bit of a slapdown for Kaos to take the franchise away from them.

A developer that throws in a tacked on 4 hour sp campaign or a developer that knows what a decent length of a campaign should be? I know which one I'd pick. The FPS multiplayer market is over saturated and single player is the only thing that will make one stand above the other now.

BlitzKrieg

and I just recently played Crysis 2 and its a damn fun single player game. So I'd look forward to Crytek working on other franchises (though I still think they should do the next AVP game)

5uspect

I really disliked Crysis 2 but Crysis 1 was a great North Korean man shoot so hopefully they'll do good with Homefront.

ríomhaire

I'm sceptical. Crysis was really fun but mostly because of the suit abilities. Messing around with your blatantly overpowered abilities was just great. Sprint from cover to cover tossing grenades, jumping up cliffs and sniping people or just punching down huts with enemy soldiers inside. Take away the suit and you're left with a very pretty but otherwise fairly uninteresting shooter. Not confident in Crytek's skill to make a solid game that doesn't rely on a similar fun gimmick to hold it up.

Chris_Heilong

Crytek are a great company and I loved Crysis 1 and 2, but they usually take a long time to develope their games, I agree with another poster about a good SP experience is most important, couldnt care less about multi player as I have all my COD,gears and Halo for that.

KilOit

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

Crytek are a great company and I loved Crysis 1 and 2, but they usually take a long time to develope their games, I agree with another poster about a good SP experience is most important, couldnt care less about multi player as I have all my COD,gears and Halo for that.

you say that like it's a bad thing, do you even realize how time consuming it is to build a new engine for games. CoD is just a recycled garbage engine that does nothing to advance gaming. Gears engine is unreal 3 engine made by another company, damn good at making them too.

Chris_Heilong

KilOit wrote: »

you say that like it's a bad thing, do you even realize how time consuming it is to build a new engine for games. CoD is just a recycled garbage engine that does nothing to advance gaming. Gears engine is unreal 3 engine made by another company, damn good at making them too.

although I dont think they will be developing a new engine, I am sure they will use Cryengine 3 for this. So maybe the wait wont be too long.

KilOit

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

although I dont think they will be developing a new engine, I am sure they will use Cryengine 3 for this. So maybe the wait wont be too long.

I'd say they will, yes. it stretched the consoles to it's limits and it was an extremely dumbed down version compared to the dx 11 one released after for pc. they'll be a company to watch for the next gen consoles hopefully coming in 2014 or so

marco_polo

ríomhaire wrote: »

I'm sceptical. Crysis was really fun but mostly because of the suit abilities. Messing around with your blatantly overpowered abilities was just great. Sprint from cover to cover tossing grenades, jumping up cliffs and sniping people or just punching down huts with enemy soldiers inside. Take away the suit and you're left with a very pretty but otherwise fairly uninteresting shooter. Not confident in Crytek's skill to make a solid game that doesn't rely on a similar fun gimmick to hold it up.

Far Cry?

I'd be more concerned about them working in an aliens angle to HF2

gizmo

KilOit wrote: »

I'd say they will, yes. it stretched the consoles to it's limits and it was an extremely dumbed down version compared to the dx 11 one released after for pc. they'll be a company to watch for the next gen consoles hopefully coming in 2014 or so

Not a chance in hell of them developing a new engine for Homefront 2. Regardless of whether it's on current or next-gen consoles, they'll still be using CryEngine 3 albeit picking up whatever optimisations are made to the engine along the way.

Potential-Monke

Meh, wasn't impressed with Crysis 2 (didn't even finish it), and HomeFront was an ok game, so this doesn't have my excitement meter filling.

Homefront was a relatively mediocre game, with a somewhat terrible ending - I can't even remember how it finished, but I know I was left feeling shortchanged, like the game was left unfinished. Yes, I realize it was likely setting up for the sequel, but there was nothing there to get me excited about it.

super_furry

I love the concept behind Homefront. I was really looking forward to it and was hoping it would be a spiritual successor to Freedom Fighters. However the campaign was rubbish and the multi-player a dull COD imitation. There's still the bones of a good game in there somewhere if Crytek can add meat for the sequel.

ríomhaire

marco_polo wrote: »

Far Cry?

I just didn't find it fun after the mutants showed up and stopped playing soon after.

dreamers75

Wow this is 5 year old thread.

Its out next week, 1st one was a game that could have been good but i still kinda liked it. 2nd one I will pickup , it 30ish on g2play atm

/plz move if there is another newer thread.

TerrorFirmer

I know it's "only" a game, but the storyline really, really irritates me. A very near future in which North Korea military dominates the United States might as well be Ireland militarily conquering Europe in 2020.

2Mad2BeMad

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

might as well be Ireland militarily conquering Europe in 2020.

I'd buy that game

The beta was absolutely terrible , I know it was only the multiplayer elements but there is no way they have fixed all that was was wrong with it in 8-10 weeks. The words you can't polish a turd really come to mind on this one.

Maybe the main game is great , but I'll be waiting for credible reviews before going anywhere near it.

SeantheMan

dreamers75 wrote: »

Wow this is 5 year old thread.

Its out next week, 1st one was a game that could have been good but i still kinda liked it. 2nd one I will pickup , it 30ish on g2play atm

/plz move if there is another newer thread.

That's a true boardsie there, using that 'Search' function ! :):cool:

wes

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

I know it's "only" a game, but the storyline really, really irritates me. A very near future in which North Korea military dominates the United States might as well be Ireland militarily conquering Europe in 2020.

They probably wanted to use China originally, but changed it as there far to important a market to annoy.

gizmo

wes wrote: »

They probably wanted to use China originally, but changed it as there far to important a market to annoy.

That's exactly what happened in the first Homefront actually. There was an excellent feature on Gamasutra about the demise of Kaos back in 2012 which is worth reading.

The relevant bit, which refers to the input of Danny Bilson, the EVP of Core Games at THQ, is here...

And many feel his creative input ultimately made the game better -- with one exception. It was Bilson's idea to make North Korea the occupying force of Homefront, despite how unlikely a significant U.S. invasion by such a small nation would be. Most North Korean confrontations with America have been little more than posturing.

The premise was widely questioned in the press, which caused the team some stress. According to our sources, Kaos had originally envisioned the invaders as Chinese, but THQ feared that such a portrayal would hurt its prospects for business in China, which has in recent years rapidly begun offering more and more opportunities for Western game developers.

Kaos suggested a coalition of Asian nations instead, but Bilson passionately preferred the Korea idea, and so it stood. An ex-staffer describes this as "demoralizing," in that the implausibility of the premise felt "stupid" to the team, and it was also frustrating for employees to see most of the press at that stage questioning the idea rather than looking seriously at the game.

BlitzKrieg

played a bit of this at a gameshow back in march. It was the co-op mode and I wasnt impressed at all. It was clunky, the handling felt off and north korea showing up with robot tanks just looked weird.

gizmo

gizmo wrote: »

The relevant bit, which refers to the input of Danny Bilson, the EVP of Core Games at THQ, is here...

And many feel his creative input ultimately made the game better -- with one exception. It was Bilson's idea to make North Korea the occupying force of Homefront, despite how unlikely a significant U.S. invasion by such a small nation would be. Most North Korean confrontations with America have been little more than posturing.

The premise was widely questioned in the press, which caused the team some stress. According to our sources, Kaos had originally envisioned the invaders as Chinese, but THQ feared that such a portrayal would hurt its prospects for business in China, which has in recent years rapidly begun offering more and more opportunities for Western game developers.

Kaos suggested a coalition of Asian nations instead, but Bilson passionately preferred the Korea idea, and so it stood. An ex-staffer describes this as "demoralizing," in that the implausibility of the premise felt "stupid" to the team, and it was also frustrating for employees to see most of the press at that stage questioning the idea rather than looking seriously at the game.

They should research how many troops such a small country actually have. They are believed to have the worlds largest army estimated at some 1.3 million troops/call ups :eek:

FAILSAFE 00

Hard to believe this is from the same people who brought us the Crysis games.

gizmo

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

Hard to believe this is from the same people who brought us the Crysis games.

It's not really, when it was in development at Crytek it was their UK studio who were previously responsible for just the multiplayer component of Crysis 2 and 3 as well as some port work on Warface. Even then, the studio saw a pretty significant exodus of staff when their parent company ran into financial troubles which is what lead to Deep Silver stepping in and forming a new studio with the remaining staff to finish the game.

intune

In all fairness the story/setting seems a bit strange. Maybe they wanted to use "China" first but though it would be too confrontational and also not sell in China then at all. So they picked NK instead.

After the (semi) fail of the first one it looks promising though as this title is going to be more less open world I've read? So maybe it isn't too bad. Give it another try and see.

K.O.Kiki

Deleted User wrote: »

They should research how many troops such a small country actually have. They are believed to have the worlds largest army estimated at some 1.3 million troops/call ups :eek:

1.3 million troops who are underfed from birth, uneducated in the world, and ill-equipped to fight a modern war. :pac:

TerrorFirmer

I guessed the China thing but lots of big games have made the decision to feature China, the Middle East and Russia as protagonists - Modern Warfare, Battlefield, etc.

They should research how many troops such a small country actually have. They are believed to have the worlds largest army estimated at some 1.3 million troops/call ups

The army is a dinosaur though full of obsolete and junk equipment, the North wouldn't be able to take on South Korea let alone the USA. SK's tank force, air force, navy and ground forces are all 10x more modern and better equipped.

Even China wouldn't have a hope, but it would be somewhat believable for the purpose of a video game. North Korea though is just so unbelievably stupid I can't get around it.

Same with the remake of the movie Red Dawn - instead of Russia like in the original, it's North Korea has invaded and conquered the US in the current day.

intune

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

North Korea though is just so unbelievably stupid I can't get around it.

Maybe they ran out of plots so they decided to come up with something really silly :P:P

Early reports suggest this is a steaming pile of you know what riddled with bugs and frame rates from hell.

Edit: Review http://ie.ign.com/articles/2016/05/17/homefront-the-revolution-review

bigphil2

Well Jim certainly has a few things to say about the PC version..

http://www.thejimquisition.com/homefront-the-revolution-review/

dreamers75

Getting slaughtered in the reviews.

Sigh......still gonna buy it.

FAILSAFE 00

I'll buy it too, but only when its for a few euro.

dreamers75

Seems it not out till the 20th in Steam it still says the 17th.

Sephiroth_dude

Any PS4 reviews?

Spear

dreamers75 wrote: »

Seems it not out till the 20th in Steam it still says the 17th.

17th for NA, 20th for EU.

Spear

I've given this two hours so far, and it seem very reminiscent of Far Cry 3/4 so far. There's a lot of collectibles, the open map, lots of crafting bits to collect, outposts to overtake, alarms to trigger/avoid, rouse the population to overthrow the oppressors etc etc. Except that it's all in an enclosed urban environment, so there's no grand vistas, but equally no bloody quicktime events against the wildlife. The gun modification is essentially torn direct from Crysis, which isn't surprising since it's the CryEngine. So far, it seems an okay game. But just okay, not as terrible as the lynch mobs appear to be making out, but neither is it in anyway innovative or impressive.

But there's far better games to buy right now if you have to make a choice on what to buy, and certainly so if you've had your fill of the Far Cry formula.

It'll be discounted plenty in a few weeks, and in a years time will be the filler in many a Humble Bundle.

dreamers75

Unlocked last night but had to get up early.

Will giver a go later, is the Coop any use?

EG not happy with the console version, I should be fine on PC.

That_Guy

This'll be Games With Gold/PS+ fodder in a few months time I'd imagine.

I was tempted to play through the original Homefront the other day but decided not to. I remember feeling really pissed off because I finished it in one sitting and felt really short changed.

I liked the few trailers they had for this one but given all of its development hell it was always going to be difficult to garner any hugely positive support for it.

BlitzKrieg

I got the original homefront in the great THQ sell off. When they sold everything they had on steam for a single price (bought it more for the saints row/darksiders games)

Never played it. Never even installed it.

Perhaps I should someday.

dreamers75

Its a perfect example of why games shouldnt be €60, its not a bad game its enjoyable in SP and also in Coop.

But not worth €60.

K.O.Kiki

dreamers75 wrote: »

Its a perfect example of why games shouldnt be €60, its not a bad game its enjoyable in SP and also in Coop.

But not worth €60.

Games are whatever the publisher thinks they can price them at to recoup development costs (which are in the millions).

You are free to not buy at €60.

dreamers75

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

Games are whatever the publisher thinks they can price them at to recoup development costs (which are in the millions).

You are free to not buy at €60.

I paid 30 on a "dodgy" key site........I am free to do that too.