'Homefront' shoots for 'What if?' but achieves 'Not again!'

[Scream]

"Homefront" tries to craft an expansive, historical "What if?" scenario. But the new game ends up delivering "Oh ... not again!" game play.

 

The first-person shooter from Kaos Studios and THQ expands on current tensions with North Korea, but delves into a future where North and South Korea unify and ultimately occupy the United States in 2027.

 

You play as Robert Jacobs, a former pilot who is thrown in with a band of rebels intent on fighting to regain control of America.

 

The depiction of a brutalized and beaten-down Colorado city is very well done. In the game, the Korean forces have erected a wall around the city and the remaining homes and businesses look as if they have been under siege for quite some time.

 

It is hard to find an oasis in the bleak surroundings and the scene accurately portrays a sense of doom that plagues a nation after a wartime loss.

 

But The Resistance remembers the old glory of the USA and wants to do what it can to bring it back.

 

Game play is straightforward, first-person shooter action -- with a massive emphasis on shooting. There is very little stealth or strategy involved as the game progresses along a pretty strict linear path -- giving players few choices as they move from one virtual shooting gallery to the next.

 

Weapons are the automatic rifles, machine guns, sniper rifles, pistols and grenades that are typical for the genre. Ammo is scarce early in the game but seems to become easier to find as the story moves forward.

 

The characters who initially rescue Jacobs and assist him throughout the missions border on stereotypical, with very little personality other than what's needed to move the game from point A to point B.

 

There is the strong but calm leader, who ends up getting killed during a cut scene. There is the overbearing foul-mouth who just wants to attack at nearly every chance.

 

There is a female nonplayer character who is good at stealth and is really the only character who exhibits any emotion other than anger. And there is a character of Korean descent that is great at fixing the tech, but is the target of racial hatred.

 

None of the characters really connect on any level. Even when they die, it doesn't really evoke any empathy from the player and just feels like another video-game casualty.

 

The game is frequented by buggy movement and areas that load awkwardly.

 

Often, a scene will be completed and an opening will appear to move on, but instead of walking through, a nonplayer character will block your way for a minute or so before moving on.

 

Other characters will also appear to be having some sort of fit when standing around as they shake violently before progressing.

 

It was really hard to feel immersed in the game play. While there were objectives to be met, there was no real sense of accomplishment in getting them done.

 

In fact, there was one scene where I decided to see what would happen if I made Jacobs just stand off to the side. A nonplayer character completed the mission without my help.

 

The story and the idea for an alternative future with a unified Korea as a world power had great potential. Trying to retake American soil against overwhelming odds is rooted within our national DNA and would have made a great tale for an FPS/strategy-style game.

 

In one scene, the Resistance fighters crest a hill overlooking the town they are attempting to flee, only to see it in flames from Korean rockets and explosives. Instead of exploring possible revenge or expressing remorse, the characters quickly gloss over it and head to the next shooting ground.

 

It was that sort of repetition that brought the game down.

 

Individually, the pieces felt like they were there -- good action, nice story -- but without any sense of accomplishment or involvement, "Homefront" stagnated, hampered by slow transitions and spotty animation.

 

It also didn't help that the single-player campaign was over quickly (six hours for me).

 

"Homefront" also stirred up controversy with its choice of a real world opponent. The game has been banned in South Korea and censored in Japan, removing all references to North Korea and its leader, Kim Jong Il.

 

On the positive side, the multiplayer action was better than the campaign because it took the elements that worked and added objectives that felt real when accomplished.

 

Ground-control mode and "team deathmatch" mode pit one side against the other, but there are bonuses and points that let you rack up new weapons and ablatives as the fighting is still ongoing.

 

Kill streaks can also gain players additional abilities, like increased weapon damage. There's a twist, though. The longer your kill streak, the more likely you are to be targeted by enemy forces.

 

Players become "Instigators" for completing mission elements and the opposite side can then use Hunters to eliminate you. The more missions you complete, the more Hunters can be assigned to find you and kill you.

 

It makes the game feel alive in multiplayer action and it really does take teamwork to win. It is just too bad those qualities couldn't transfer over to the single player.

 

"Homefront" is available on PC, Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. It is rated M for Mature due to strong language, violence, and blood. This review was done on a retail copy for the Xbox 360.

 

© Cable News Network

[=Plat00n=]

Game is very short i think it only took me 2 or 3 hours to complete it on single player

 

7/10 at the most

 

I finishes this only a couple weeks ago and i forgot how it ended so it can not be that good

 

Black ops still is number 1 by a mile

 

I had to check how many missions there was and there was only 7 missions