Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

5 out of 10 from edge magazine. To read: (BUY THE MAGAZINE YOURSELF YOU CHEAPSKATE)..

Heres a summing up of the Review:

Actually pretty damning, coming from a long time reader a 5 out of 10 usually means that a game was highly unoriginal and bland. The review repeatedly states that it is indeed unoriginal and that the singleplayer is highly uninspired with graphics that quickly dip in quality after the initial levels. The story is described as ridiculous and poorly told (MW2's being ridiculous but well told) the review even gives a hilarious example of it's heavy handedness. The gunplay is however described as 'solid' but again this is tempered by stating that this is par for the course for a cod ripoff. Of smaller note is the description of movement being 'floaty' which is something i personally hate.

As for the multiplayer little is said, compared to last years review of Bad company 2 which had a significant portion of the review devoted to the multiplayer this one has a small paragraph. The multiplayer is described as unbalanced due to the battle points system. The online play is summed up as a good copy of Bad company 2 mechanically without the tactical and fun aspect of environmental destruction.

For comparison MAG actually managed to scrape a seven. I will not be buying Homefront! Thanks Edge.

What the feth is Edge Magazine?


As a side note, this is the first preview of Homefront that has given it anything below an eight. most of them have given it a nine.

Oh right. To Americans Edge is the closest thing to a well written Magazine about Videogames in Existence. They are Known for their Iron will when it comes to opinions, and have given out less than 10 full scores in their illustrious history. They give the best reviews and have never obviously been bought out, examples: They famously gave Kilzone 2 a seven (i still like that game but defo a 7/10) Mass effect a seven and Dragon Age a 5.

http://www.next-gen.biz/tags/review Website, i think they are the same text as the magazine. Not got Homefront yet though.

Try gaining more than one opinion on a game rather than relying on just a single gakky magazine that's too busy sucking DICE's metaphorical wang to give an honest review.

The gentleman's magazine Zoo gave the game 9/10.

Playstation Italy give it 9/10.

And so on and so forth.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Perkustin wrote:Oh right. To Americans Edge is the closest thing to a well written Magazine about Videogames in Existence.

Looking at their "reviews", I Can't help but point and laugh at this.

I wouldn't call Edge a bunch of peen-suckers.

Oh what the feth, you put up ZOO as an example? You? Zoo? Hello, it's a titty rag, not a gentleman's magazine.

You noticed?

PS: "gentleman's mag" is a phrase whicih refers to exactly that

Perkustin wrote:5 out of 10 from edge magazine. To read: (BUY THE MAGAZINE YOURSELF YOU CHEAPSKATE)..

Heres a summing up of the Review:

Actually pretty damning, coming from a long time reader a 5 out of 10 usually means that a game was highly unoriginal and bland. The review repeatedly states that it is indeed unoriginal and that the singleplayer is highly uninspired with graphics that quickly dip in quality after the initial levels. The story is described as ridiculous and poorly told (MW2's being ridiculous but well told) the review even gives a hilarious example of it's heavy handedness. The gunplay is however described as 'solid' but again this is tempered by stating that this is par for the course for a cod ripoff. Of smaller note is the description of movement being 'floaty' which is something i personally hate.

As for the multiplayer little is said, compared to last years review of Bad company 2 which had a significant portion of the review devoted to the multiplayer this one has a small paragraph. The multiplayer is described as unbalanced due to the battle points system. The online play is summed up as a good copy of Bad company 2 mechanically without the tactical and fun aspect of environmental destruction.

For comparison MAG actually managed to scrape a seven. I will not be buying Homefront! Thanks Edge.

...They gave MAG a 7?

Huh. Interesting. So how much do they get paid for reviews?

Also:

God Of War 3 - 7
Fallout 3 - 7
Mass Effect - 7
Killzone 2 - 7
GT4 - 7
SOCOM 2 - 6
Heavy Rain - 7
LittleBigPlanet - 6
Borderlands - 6
Saints Row - 6

And then Starcrap 2 gets a 9 (despite being rehashed crap from the late '90s with slightly improved graphics), Dead Space 2 gets a 9, Metroid: Other M an 8 (despite being decried as the worst Metroid game ever made by most other people what with it depicting Samus as a whiny bitch), etc. They try to claim that fans of No More Heroes need shock therapy (seriously, I'm not making that up), and gave Left 4 Dead 2 a 6/10.

I don't trust them any further than I trust IGN, hell, I probably trust IGN more becauswe I sincerely doubt that Homefront is actively worse than Kane and Lynch 2, which Yahtzee described as "sucking so much it now breathes spunk instead of air". Especially when this is the only review thus far that has gone below an 8.

Left for dead 1/2 got a 9/8 and littlebigplanet got a 10 dont know where your finding these. I can see why Fallout 3 got a seven it is buggy as hell and severely under polished, anyway a seven is still a good score from edge just means the game has alot of bugs/flaws.
I frequently buy games edge gave a 7, it's 6 and below which are the crap. 9 for Deadspce 2 is a bit generous, it has 8 all over it, also they gave MoH an 8 when it is defo a 6/7...

*shrug* I don't particularly trust them. They're the ONLY reviewers thus far that have given the game below an eight. Everything else has been eight or nine.

Frankly they're just trying for controversy, and their reviews are gakky anyway.

MS Xbox World - 8.5
OPM Italy - 9/10
Xbox Addict - 93%
HardGame - 9.5
Multiplayer.it - 8.5
PSM3 Magazine - 83%
Zoo Magazine - 9/10
EDGE Magazine - 5/10
Spaziogames.it - 8.5

Notice the outlier here?

After doing a q-test for a 90% confidence level, we can safely throw out the 5/10 given by edge magazine.

I don't generally trust review sites. I know what I like (giggedy), and I've really enjoyed a tonne of games that got less than 70 on Metacritic. I think that a lot of these sites rate based on the expectations of hardcore players that dig way further into the guts of a game than they need to.

I swear, these review sites get into absurd things when they do their analysis. Things like "Weapon C's DPS is actually lower than it should be when compared to a real-life example. See, Weapon C takes ammuntion 'W', which it fires at a rate of 'Y' rounds per minute. Ammunition 'W', when impacting the target, should do 'Z' DPS, rather than the amount it does now. -1 FROM THE SCORE OF THE REVIEW!"

I'm feeling rather confident about Homefront. I loved Red Dawn, I loved Apocalypse Now, and I enjoyed the campaigns in BFBC2 and CoD:MW2 (Though I still think BFBC2 needs an offline skirmish mode like the old BF games) I'll probably enjoy this Homefront based on that. Plus, I'm not a hardcore FPSer. I rather consider myself more of a Beer N' Pretzels shooter player. Everyone else is concerned about tactics, I'm more like Leeroy Jenkins on a ho' nutha' level

metallifan wrote:Everyone else is concerned about tactics, I'm more like Leeroy Jenkins on a ho' nutha' level

Is it because you're in an actual tank?

Hey, as long as you can shoot well and react quickly it's perfectly fine to rush.

metallifan wrote: I'm more like Leeroy Jenkins on a ho' nutha' level

Alright guys, times up; LEEEEEEEROY JEEEEEEEEEEEEENNNNNNNKINS!

I don't really trust review sites/magazines, either. I prefer friends, as they usually have the same tastes as I do.

I just subscribe to Game Informer for the news.

halonachos wrote:

metallifan wrote:Everyone else is concerned about tactics, I'm more like Leeroy Jenkins on a ho' nutha' level

Is it because you're in an actual tank?

Hell no. To paraphrase Duke Nukem: "Tanks are for pussies!"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:Hey, as long as you can shoot well and react quickly it's perfectly fine to rush.

Or if you can spam an armoury's worth of grenades...

There is an ability that lets you have extra grenades/secondary explosives I believe. Fist Full or somesuch.

Duke Nukem never had a tank, that's why he doesn't like them. Its sheer jealousy. I prefer the choppers myself, pick the engineer set buzz some tartgets and land for repairs.

Yea but who needs a tank when you have a Nuclear Powered Monster Truck?

Throw in some "Dude Beer" and that's pretty much as manly as it gets, barring a Nuclear Powered Monster Tank with a nekkid lady paintjob.

What about the Nuclear Powered Monster Tank with a nekkid lady paintjob that shoots Nuclear Powered Monster Trucks?


Poor Duke, he has to be manly for every man on Earth.

It's THQ biggest game for about a year; of course they're gonna buyout those sellout rags/sites you picked (they are a pretty poor spread, bar edge, of magazines i must say). Plus Edge has the closest thing to professional journalists of any Gaming magazine. If you dont like their reviews you dont like Professional Journalism. Only 'Amiga Power' (so good i read a load of issues i found in the garage in 2008! ) comes anything close to Edge writing wise.

Buy Homefront if:
You are tired of the BFBC2 maps and want an inferior but similar experience.
If you are tired of MW/Black Ops maps and want an inferior but similar experience.
If you are tired of MoH maps and want an inferior but similar experience.

Never trust anything, Edge can have all the professional journalists it wants and I still won't trust it. Not because it gave a game the lowest score its ever gotten but because in the end its all just a matter of opinion.

Perkustin wrote:
Buy Homefront if:
You are tired of the BFBC2 maps and want an inferior but similar experience.
If you are tired of MW/Black Ops maps and want an inferior but similar experience.
If you are tired of MoH maps and want an inferior but similar experience.

Strange, it almost sounds as if you're passing off these opinions as if they're based on your experience playing an unreleased game, rather than eating up a review from a 3rd party that may or may not be accurate to the reader's personal tastes, without so much as a second thought.

Perkustin wrote:It's THQ biggest game for about a year; of course they're gonna buyout those sellout rags/sites you picked (they are a pretty poor spread, bar edge, of magazines i must say). Plus Edge has the closest thing to professional journalists of any Gaming magazine. If you dont like their reviews you dont like Professional Journalism. Only 'Amiga Power' (so good i read a load of issues i found in the garage in 2008! ) comes anything close to Edge writing wise.

Buy Homefront if:
You are tired of the BFBC2 maps and want an inferior but similar experience.
If you are tired of MW/Black Ops maps and want an inferior but similar experience.
If you are tired of MoH maps and want an inferior but similar experience.

...lolwat?

You're aware that most of those "sellout rags/sites" that Melissia picked, in fact, do not 'sell' reviews, yes?

IGN, ffs, got in trouble because through some schmuck's mistake there was an ad for Kane & Lynch on the review page for it--when they gave it a fairly 'decent' review but everyone else was giving it 'meh' reviews.

They haven't been caught.

Which means less than jack. Also less than diddly . And certainly less than gak.

Feth edge magazine. They have gakky tastes in games.

TBH, for it apparently being 'The All Powerful Voice' of gaming review, I've -NEVER- heard of them.

Ever.

I've never even heard a mention of them until this thread. Hell, I haven't even seen them counted among popular reviewer scores posted on 3rd party sites. Gotta hate it when unknowns tout themselves as top sources of feedback.

Yeah, and just becasue you give the worst reviews doesn't mean your "the best". Anyways, IGN and Gamespot are kinda my go to guys for game reviews.

I have homefront on pre order...I'll buy it, play it for a few weeks, and probably trade it in towards Brink. Medal of Honor was decent until Black Ops came out, then the community left, not because it was a bad game, because the titan game came out after. Medal of Honor was a decent game as well.

I'll play any game that's fun, I don't nit pick too much. I didn't think Black Ops was all that great, IMO BFBC2 was better, their Vietnam expansion was actually done rather well.

MoH, BFBC2 play differently than MW2 and Black OPs anyway, different gun mechanics, larger maps, etc. I hate comparing the two. Both different communities.

Arionel wrote:I have homefront on pre order...I'll buy it, play it for a few weeks, and probably trade it in towards Brink.

I wouldn't hold your breath on Brink. It's a Bethesda game, so while it might look pretty, you can solidly put your money on it doing everything but work properly for the first month or so until Bethesda gets around to patching all the issues that should've been done before they released the game.