Homefront

Wait, wasn't the last game an outright war? Why the backstory shift?

They also have a whole backstory thing on their website, showing where the alt history diverged.

I think it's an attempt to revisit the idea but make it more believable - proper alt history akin to C&C or Man in the High Castle.. It's the same theme, but different continuity and gives it more "believably" elements. So, it's not "North Korea" it's a unified Korea under a different leadership with less isolationist tendancies, with Chinese and Russian backing and a MUCH weaker USA which didn't hit the same cultural highpoints.

I think that's better in terms of selling the idea. Plus the gameplay is different - seems less linear as well!

Not much detail on what life in the DPRK itself is like, but from the sounds of things you've gotta wonder just why would they even bother going the militaristic route. They seemed to be making a killing just from the electronics and weapons sales alone, not to mention more than enough positive P.R. to keep their tech and economic hegemony in place.

Plus, strong economies with good technological advancements tend to foster liberal ideas, so if Best Korea still ends up as a despotic hellhole of oppression and Juche, then I think the devs themselves have missed the point of their own alternate history.

Of course, the only way we'll learn about any of this is once the game is released. Until then, it's all just speculation unless more news proves otherwise.

No, I don't mean that, I mean the first game had North Korea and the US in a straight up war because Kim Jong-un faked peace negotiations and started conquering other countries, but here it's a stealth occupation that came under the guise of emergency aid. Why did the story shift that way instead of making a sequel?

I think because the developers changed. The new guys took the concept and put their own stamp on it. Saw a couple of comments on the FB wall along those lines - same idea, same setupish, but new direction.

And if you read their back story, it makes even less sense - NK even goes to the UN. it reads a little propagandary... but essentially it hints at undertones of that anti-US sentiment.

I think they invaded for the same rationale the west does in our universe - an attempt to stabilise and install a favourable leadership. In the alt history, though, the US reads as really recklessly overspending and then doing a Greece and not wanting to repay the loans. Weirdly, NK comes across a vaguely sympathetic. Potentially being driven by an ambitious and possibly angry individual though.

I don't think so. At least the possibility of a peaceful union between the Koreas is more plausible because the last Kim didn't have an heir and so the new guy was appointed Premier.

The more I think about the plot and what's written on the official site, the more I'm thinking this game isn't going to be a straightforward pro-America, boo-Norks affair. Yes, they were born in an oppressive hellhole, but thanks largely in part due to their efforts and business acumen, his family's company is pretty much the reason why North Korea seriously is the Best Korea this time around. And the whole backstory behind his father and the company's legacy is essentially that of the Apple Corporation (heck they even hired Bill Gates and Wosniak at one point!)

With all that in mind, I think halfway through the game we're gonna find out that the new NK Premier seriously sees himself and his efforts as "saving" America, and restoring it to what his father and grandmother believed about The American Dream. And as time passes, he'll end up committing the same sin of over-extension and suffer attrition, just like the U.S. did. They repeatedly mention about how the wars America was involved with dragged on, so it can't just be a coincidence.

No one's blaming the North Koreans about the aid part. It's the brutal oppression and occupation that followed that everyone is angry about. That and taking down the entire US Military so that they could do it unopposed.

Yeah, that part about them having the ability to shut down all electronics without warning raises the question of just how long have the Koreans had that option available, and if they were intending to use it no matter what. It's also surprising how the rest of the world doesn't want to call out Korea for likely adding in that killswitch into their weapons and electronics too, and only complain about it in the UN.

Here's hoping that we will see a bit of that nuance. I'm all for Far Cry style of subverting expectations.

And of course, being a revolutionary, using IE Ds, ambushing enemies and actively blowing stuff up... yeah I think this has potential to go down an interesting route. Of course the game writer could be different from the backstory writer and we do get a BOOYAH FREEDOM message, but something is telling me we will see a well meaning extremist who sees it as necessary to curb American excess and "teach a lesson", but then, as you say, find that running a large land mass as a colony, essentially, is bloody difficult.

Note that the resistance are referred to as Minutemen at one point. I'm getting a bit of Modern era American revolution vibe here as well (And we can't very well have a Modern Day England invading the US. That would stretch credibility even further than NK!)

IGN has a review... and it's not looking good. They gave the game a 5.0 rating.

Between dumb AI, a story that doesn't really explore the world and it's ramifications as deep as it could, and an open world that's actually more restrictive than it looks, the game doesn't do anything innovative either.

Oh, and here's a doozie of an oversight: the game's campaign goes for a Fallout 3 - style ending where you have to reload a previous save to continue playing the story once finished.... yet, you've only got one save slot.

Which is a shame, because according to the Alternate History on the game's page here it seems pretty interesting, if somewhat dark to nearly Grimderp standards.

Part of me is going "eeeeh IGN". But then again, reviews do serve a purpose. I'll have a read and see.

Ok... I find some of their review a bit amusing considering they comment on the "shooter tropes" and yet they rate Co D as a 9. With one deviation (Black Ops). But they make a good point on the open world not really being that open. But AGAIN - critiquing a game for linearity when most other FPS' are also linear?

Meh, I'm picking at straws. I'll have a look at other reviews, see what the consensus is. Disappointing, but maybe this will be a bargain bin purchase. The gunplay apparently is solid at least.

What discouraged me was the sub-par story and the lack of co-op missions. I was hoping that the motivation of the Norks would be decent for once, but apparently they're pretty much just straight-up villains with most of their backstory being relegated to either memos lying around, or the official site's alternate history timeline.

It seems to be the way with games - the writers have a field day with the lore and the story, but then when that gets overlaid onto a game then the design ethos goes out the window. A shame. The backstory certainly built it u pas the US gov't of the time being reckless spenders and warmongers, with the Norks being, well.... at least a little bit justified.

Yeah, is a shame. This one looked like it had promise. But then again, a lot of the dialogue in the trailer was "edgy banter" and "hard boiled".

Fun Fact: In the UK, Norks is a slang term for breasts, leading to unintentional Narm.

edited 18th May '16 6:42:53 AM by YoKab

Yeah. It's like reading Enders Game and them talking about the Buggers all the time.

At least here you don't have kids talking in You No Take Candle and no authority figures deciding to project a Gag Penis onto their body as a joke.

Someone on Twitter discovered that there's a note from the game director about the troubled development of the game when you beat it.

I don't think the Norks being straight up villains is...particularly inaccurate, if their ethos is at all similar to their modern real life one. They're basically a real life version of INGSOC. Of course, them becoming a super power while the US collapses is hilariously unrealistic.

edited 19th May '16 5:23:12 PM by Protagonist506

That's alternate history for you.

It's because of the alternate history behind the game. Given all that was written about their financial gains and global prestige due to dominating the technology industry prior to the invasion, it feels that North Korea should've been running a more saner, civilized occupation - if they even should've bothered invading at all. They probably could've just stopped at the tech blackout and still had enough political clout to force the U.S. to begin paying back it's debts. It's virtually a different country past the original Korean War and the 1960s - may as well been Japan, given how their tech-boom was a mirror of the Japanese and their success.

But the game apparently doesn't reflect much of that. It's mostly focused on the idea that a bunch of Benedict Arnolds and Quislings would begin to take power thanks to being pro-Nork, and personally see themselves as saving America from being torn apart by the insurgency, even if the methods used are uncouth and overkill.

At least a regime change is more plausible than the previous game's backstory, South Korea deciding to suddenly put aside hatred of its worst enemy just because he said "Hey, let's change things and re-unite!" Not to mention that no one bothered to think "Hey, Korea's expanding an awful lot and just let all of those invasions happen.

It is also noted in the backstory itself that Kim Il-Sung was forced to cave in due to a flood in 1977. I think that in real life, even if such things happened, Kim won't give up easily. The best things to do it is for either the Soviets or the Chinese still station troops. North Korea in real life managed to soldier on and keep Juche because there are no Soviet or Chinese troops in North Korea, a point Kim Il-Sung said. He requested the Chinese to go home in 1958 as to prove NK is not influenced by a foreign power. The trick is to have the Soviets shanghai the North Koreans into stationing troops to North Korea again and when it fails, the Soviets could bully Kim to submission.

I mean, from what I have gathered at the gaming sites, the response is varied, but at least the devs are honest about Troubled Production after the credits roll in at the end.

edited 19th May '16 7:46:58 PM by general_tiu

Yeah, a game is almost never going to be good when it has a lot of trouble being made.