Homefront: The Revolution to be released in May 2016

[HEXUS]

Resist Korean forces in Philadelphia, USA, in this open world first-person shooter.

Read more.

[Luke7]

So basically what happens in MW2 (which has probably been done before anyway) with a bit of expansion? No thanks. I'm quite frankly bored stiff of fps games revolving around the US vs nasty communists. Genre done to death.

[dfour]

Easy dont buy it then

[azrael-]

Didn't the first one tank quite spectacularly...?

(Disclosure: I actually own it, but haven't come around to playing it.)

[DemonHighwayman]

Didn't the first one tank quite spectacularly...?

(Disclosure: I actually own it, but haven't come around to playing it.)

That's what I thought, it was well made etc but just bland, dull and has nothing original.

[Tpyo]

So basically what happens in MW2 (which has probably been done before anyway) with a bit of expansion? No thanks. I'm quite frankly bored stiff of fps games revolving around the US vs nasty communists. Genre done to death.

I think the problem is that most 'real world' plots fall into existing categories. The bad guys are Communists/Nazis/Evil corporation/Ancient secret organization/Terrorists. The same thing gets transposed to all sorts of different alternate histories etc. but it is still pretty much the same. The problem with doing anything modern is self-inflicted by the relatively generic script writing - one side is almost always the good guys, the other evil to the core. This then means that whoever is the bad guys in the game is going to be up in arms about being portrayed that way in real life.

Most (not all) real life situations are much less black and white than this. There is often (not necessarily always) a reason why each side has their own point of view, and the morality of the whole thing is often a grey area. One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. Just because the end justifies the means for side A, it doesn't mean that it is seen that way by side B, and it certainly doesn't come across that way to all the other people who get caught up in the middle. That sort of thing (almost) never makes it into these games, other than a couple of bolt-on scenes (oh the humanity!) in between stages of the epic NAZI/communist/terrorist/evil corporation carnagefest.

[Biscuit]

The first one was horrendously short. Gameplay was OK but nothing groundbreaking and it certainly didnt set the world alight. I don't have high hopes and I'm quite surprised they are reviving the 'franchise'.

[crossy]

Didn't the first one tank quite spectacularly...?

That's what I thought, it was well made etc but just bland, dull and has nothing original.

Pretty much.

Then again, I thought it was actually pretty decent (for a single player) - certainly up to the "standards" that CoD gets down to. Reputedly the mp was pretty awful - actually now I think of it, did it even have mp? (kidding).

[azrael-]

Pretty much.

Then again, I thought it was actually pretty decent (for a single player) - certainly up to the "standards" that CoD gets down to. Reputedly the mp was pretty awful - actually now I think of it, did it even have mp? (kidding).

As I recall it, it was sold as being mostly MP. But then again, I haven't played it yet. Just got my hands on the "Resist Edition" for next to no money.