In Kaos Studios’ Homefront, players are dropped headfirst into a war fought on American soil.
While most figured that the battle to reclaim the suburban lifestyle would be a long an arduous one, an early review of the game reveals that the single player campaign for the game clocks in at somewhere around five hours.
Perhaps a disappointment to some, others will be quick to note that, though the single player offers only five hours of campaign (not necessarily a bad thing), there is a compelling, if not familiar, multiplayer experience that comes packaged in with Homefront – sure to deliver more than five hours worth of entertainment. Adding further credence to that point, the reviewer for PSM3 says that, though the short campaign was a disappointment, that frustration stemmed from a desire to play more of the game – rather than a lack of worthwhile content.
Already being compared to Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, Homefront has done a lot of things right in trying to mimic one of the more popular shooters to come out over the years. In both the multiplayer and the single player arena, Homefront shares many similarities with Call of Duty‘s flagship franchise – many might have a hard time differentiating the two but is that a bad thing?
While each Call of Duty title might take somewhere in a range similar to Homefront (around 6 hours) to complete – each one has provided enough thrills per minute that it feels like the same sort of high octane experience one would receive from a lengthier title.
In the competitive world of game development, it seems as if there is a pre-occupation with the lifespan of a popular title. While some, like Homefront, might boast an added multiplayer experience complete with all the bells and whistles that equal as many hours of fun as any gamer is willing to tolerate – others try to pack in enough single player content to warrant a $60 price tag.
While both equally viable options, each one has their inherent pros and cons. Some might look at the game that has a short campaign, but the added boost of multiplayer, as a title that is surely worth purchasing because of the longevity that comes with an online offering. Others will look at that same game and perhaps opt only to rent the title and never give the multiplayer more than an hour of their time.
At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter how you approach a video game – whether you’re looking for a 40-hour or a 5-hour title – as long as the game provides an engaging experience from beginning to end, gamers are going to be interested in it – such is the case with Homefront.
Does hearing that Homefront’s campaign takes 5 hours to complete mitigate your enthusiasm for the game? Will multiplayer help make up for this perceived lack of game content?
Homefront releases March 11, 2011 for the PS3, Xbox 360, and PC.
Source: PSM3 (via CVG)
Microsoft: Banned Players Lose Access to Purchased Xbox One Games [UPDATED] 
Microsoft Officially Backpedals on Xbox One DRM Policies 
Xbox One Policies ‘Alienated Entire Military’; Entertainment Research Forecasts Trouble 
Xbox One E3 Demos Found Running on Windows 7 PCs 
Loading ...
Hahaha nope it makes me laugh though! XD Cuz i know a lot of people are gonna be upset about it!
disappointed seeing as how they had a decent writer write the games narrative. at first i was keen on getting this but when i actually saw gameplay of both SP and MP i was turned off b/c of the average graphics and half decent MP. hope i’m wrong and that the game stands out along side crysis 2, brink and BF3 so that activision dies out
At first it did mitigate my enthusiasm. But when I learned I could just play it on Hard to get more value, I got back my hopes for this game.
Damn, for shooters I find around 10-15 hours is a good length. Although if the game is really good, then I wouldn’t mind it lasting 40 hours.
But 5 hours is pretty short…
I hope they release some additional content later or something…
i have never ever played a shooter that lasted me longer then 10hrs… bioshock included (though that more of a hybrid). the only one that has had me hooked would be borderlands and that doesn’t count as a straight out shooter b/c its a hybrid.
I don’t remember how long it was exactly, but I’m pretty sure Half Life 2 was close to 10 hours or longer, or maybe it’s just because I investigate EVERYTHING when I play games and I “played” with the physics a lot in the game. The gravity gun was addicting…
Half Life 2 is the only shooter with a 8+ hour campaign, 10-15 hours is good for a 3rd person adventure game and RPGs are endless.
But I’ve probably received more than 20 hours of fun from that since I’ve played through the game like 3 times… I love that game, can’t wait until Episode 3 comes out…
Crysis 2, apart from having 10x better graphics than homefront, has a campaign about 10-12 hours long, and its not just a big shooting gallery the entire time.
DLC will be added after all major press releases for homefront finish.
And it will be set after the current home front levels.
Anyway it took me 3 hours and 15 mins to complete.. But I still loved the game and the plot!!
It was battlefield 2 + COD
But as I went through, and I’m a mediocre gamer, even I spotted many mistakes..
Eg: on first level you find 2 people both shooting (you think at a window) when they’re talking, if you look at what they were shooting, its just a wooden bored with one tiny hole in it..
And when your sniping to get to the chopper, before the fire starts, the doorway you just come from blocks up with wood.
Lots of bugs, and last level, it lagged like hell!
And the enemy was frag spamming >:[
Really? I thought the whole thing was this was going to have a deep campaign, at least that’s what it seemed like with all the talk of story. I won’t buy it now, thanks for saving me the 60 bucks GameRant haha
WoW Homefront sound like a good conept,But after hearing how short the game play is from gamesrant just saved me $60 of my own money but what i am looking for in a game,is about qulity balance innovation what i mean about balance is soild game play and compeling storying not graphic.Homefront had so much potential in being a good game but at the same time i am not going to spend $60 of my hard earn money on a short game.
A little disappointed, but who knows how fast the reviewer was playing through it. Someone who is looking for strict action could burn through a shooter like Black Ops in one sitting, and a speed run could be anywhere around 3-4 hours.
When Kaos said that GHalf-Life was their biggest ifluence, they also mentioned that players were taking incredibly different amounts of time to play through it.
http://gamerant.com/homefront-campaign-influenced-by-half-life-dyce-62805/
So I’ll hold out hope that it can be as long as I want it to be, and the reviewer saying that it doesnt leave players feeling like they missed out still has my hopes up. If it’s a great story, it doesnt have to be an 8-hour experience in my opinion.
Short, long or no Campaign at all, I’m getting this game solely for the Multiplayer. I’m sure the single player portion of this game will go untouched maybe after one or two times of actually playing it. It’ll be pretty much like playing Battlefield Bad Company 2: roughly 10 hrs playing campaign; to 95+ hours (and still counting) playing Multiplayer.
5 hour single player campaign? That’s a deal breaker for me. I might rent it, or wait till it hits the $5 bargain bin in a year or two. I don’t really get into multiplayer, see no point in paying $60 so I can listen to some teen kids screaming their manly manfulness safely through the internet. It’s a pity, because I was really looking forward to this one. Glad I didn’t pre-order. Wonder if anyone’s made a Half Life 2 Red Dawn mod…
Will be interesting to see how it compares to Crysis 2 as it’s sp is rumoured to be about 10 hours long.
Maybe they should sell games with a short campaign at reduced prices for people who aren’t interested in online play. Then if they wanted to use it online they would have to pay the extra to unlock it.
I miss the longer sp games, like the early CODs and MOHs.or the FEAR series.
I just finished after installing earlier- I’m done not quite 5 hours later and my jaw hit the floor, because I had not read about how short it was. There’s simply no excuse for it, unless you’re charging $5.99.
Online, as someone above put so well, is ruined by teen and twenty-something manly men raging over their own shortcomings and telling everyone else how to play the game (plus, who would spend time on this multiplayer when there are much better options, like Team Fortress 2?)I have no interest in being disrespected by those half my age, or listening to their newfound vocabulary of exciting swear words that are oh-so-impressive.
I am *so* glad I didn’t buy this, considering my money is beyond limited. It’s a great example of why I *never* buy first anymore, and I’m leery of buying *any* first person shooters again as they seem to be forming a habit of missing 30-60 hours of campaign.