THQ Hammered by Sub-Par Homefront Scores

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

THQ Hammered by Sub-Par Homefront Scores

image

Less-than-stellar review scores for the new shooter Homefront have take their toll on THQ, driving the company's already-low share price down by more than 20 percent.

THQ was counting on big things from Homefront, the Red Dawn-esque FPS that came out on March 15. The game promised a different take on the modern combat shooter genre by telling the story of American civilians fighting a resistance against invading Korean soldiers, but while the concept was intriguing, the game hasn't quite lived up to its early promise. Our own Russ Pitts scored it a 3/5 in his review while on Metacritic it's put up an average of 73 across the PC, Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3.

Those are far from spectacular numbers and THQ is feeling the brunt. Its share price, which had already dropped by more than 15 percent since the company lowered its profit outlook in its third-quarter earnings report in February, took another sharp turn downward today. After closing at $5.94 on March 14, it opened at $5.43 today before ultimately closing at $4.69, a close-to-close slide of 21 percent.

"This score is a bit of a disaster for THQ and the share price today is reflecting that," said Mike Hickey, an analyst with Janco Partners. "The market is a quality driven market [and] you need at least a score of 80 and above on Metacritic to do well."

The game's critical failure could also spell bad news for Kaos Studios, the developer that actually made the game. Following reports that THQ was considering relocating the New York-based studio to tax-friendly Montreal, vice president Danny Bilson explained that the decision would hinge largely on the success of the game. "I tell them the more successful a game is, the better the economics are for the franchise, and that will help to influence what we do," he said earlier this month. "A lot of it has to do with how successful it is and how strong that core team comes out on the other side."

Source: Reuters

Permalink

Well that sucks for THQ.

hem dazon 90:
Well that sucks for THQ.

There is only one single reason why this game was hit bad.

It didn't have "Call of Duty" in the name, so the fanboys didn't buy it and instead bombed it because it could have been what Modern Warfare 2 and BlackOps will never be.

Said one dev, "Now I know how BioWare feels... oh, too soon?"

Hooray, free trip to Canada?

I have to add that most reviews say the same things: 'Single player is kind of lame. Multiplayer is awesome. It averages out to an average game.'

This is not the case, but devs, don't stick useless single player campaings in the future. THIS IS YOUR FUTURE!

Nice work Milius

That.... wasn't really unexpected... was it?

We all knew it was going to happen.

DaHero:

hem dazon 90:
Well that sucks for THQ.

There is only one single reason why this game was hit bad.

It didn't have "Call of Duty" in the name, so the fanboys didn't buy it and instead bombed it because it could have been what Modern Warfare 2 and BlackOps will never be.

No it was hit bad because the story was not even 5 hours and the multiplayer is barely above average but still no where near the quality of other shooters out there.

DaHero:

hem dazon 90:
Well that sucks for THQ.

There is only one single reason why this game was hit bad.

It didn't have "Call of Duty" in the name, so the fanboys didn't buy it and instead bombed it because it could have been what Modern Warfare 2 and BlackOps will never be.

You're absolutely right. $10 says the next CoD game gets stellar reviews, even though it won't be any different than the last two iterations. I love how the campaign was criticized for its length when it's no shorter than any campaign lengths from the last 4 CoD games. In the review it says, "it felt short", well so did that last CoD games, but no one was there to criticize them for it. No, CoDBlops S&S (short and shitty) campaign got praised for how good it was. Yeah, nothing beat facing a horde of endless guys every other stage, wow, what excitement.

Edit: I sound bitter, and I'm really not. But, I hate the horrible double standards regarding this genre of game.

Please don't let this drive THQ down. I don't want to see Relic without a publisher. Shame about Kaos Studios as well, they tried to do something and it didn't pan out the way they hoped.

DaHero:

hem dazon 90:
Well that sucks for THQ.

There is only one single reason why this game was hit bad.

It didn't have "Call of Duty" in the name, so the fanboys didn't buy it and instead bombed it because it could have been what Modern Warfare 2 and BlackOps will never be.

This right here.

People complain it had a 5 hour campaign? I blasted through black ops in 4 and that was apparently wonderful.

Marketing, they do their job well in Activision

What a shame. I was watching a playthrough, and yes, it's more or less a CoD game with a different story and enemies. But the story is so important that it's like saying water is just oxygen with two hydrogen molecules.

Baresark:

DaHero:

hem dazon 90:
Well that sucks for THQ.

There is only one single reason why this game was hit bad.

It didn't have "Call of Duty" in the name, so the fanboys didn't buy it and instead bombed it because it could have been what Modern Warfare 2 and BlackOps will never be.

You're absolutely right. $10 says the next CoD game gets stellar reviews, even though it won't be any different than the last two iterations. I love how the campaign was criticized for its length when it's no shorter than any campaign lengths from the last 4 CoD games. In the review it says, "it felt short", well so did that last CoD games, but no one was there to criticize them for it. No, CoDBlops S&S (short and shitty) campaign got praised for how good it was. Yeah, nothing beat facing a horde of endless guys every other stage, wow, what excitement.

Edit: I sound bitter, and I'm really not. But, I hate the horrible double standards regarding this genre of game.

Well I'm bitter about it so watch out and grab a trench shovel.

I actually think THQ is going about it like a dick. "Oh, Kaos Studios didn't make the game good enough. It was their own fault, and now they're going to have to be exiled. Tough break."

Your marketing, dear THQ, was appalling, and this is nobody's fault but your own.

I wonder how this will impact the UFC license, now that they've acquired Strikeforce and all its assets including their legal obligations--I had assumed they'd just dump EA but this, coupled with how not great the second UFC game did is giving me second thoughts. Perhaps they could make a switch to EA now that THQ is struggling bad?

Well, sorry to hear the developers will have to be moved to Canada. Who knows, maybe sales will pick up after a while.

After all, Medal of Honor was painfully average, and that sold well.

Baresark:

DaHero:

hem dazon 90:
Well that sucks for THQ.

There is only one single reason why this game was hit bad.

It didn't have "Call of Duty" in the name, so the fanboys didn't buy it and instead bombed it because it could have been what Modern Warfare 2 and BlackOps will never be.

You're absolutely right. $10 says the next CoD game gets stellar reviews, even though it won't be any different than the last two iterations. I love how the campaign was criticized for its length when it's no shorter than any campaign lengths from the last 4 CoD games. In the review it says, "it felt short", well so did that last CoD games, but no one was there to criticize them for it. No, CoDBlops S&S (short and shitty) campaign got praised for how good it was. Yeah, nothing beat facing a horde of endless guys every other stage, wow, what excitement.

Just because CoD had 8 hour long campaign doesn't mean we should get used to it.

I find it amusing that 73 is considered mediocre...

I find it interesting that every review for Homefront has been 50% or above, with an average of 72%. Shouldn't that mean for the most part the game is above average?

Unless of course... our most trusted reviewers give artificially inflated review scores. Could it... could it be true?

i saw this coming form so far away. i have an idea don't advertise a special story then have a normal length story. i mean if they wanted to do something special they should have made a 16 hour story that would have made people talk and maybe encouraged people to buy instead of rent.

Video games are in a sad state if an average score of 73 is bad whilst an average score of 80 is good.

Traun:

Baresark:

DaHero:

There is only one single reason why this game was hit bad.

It didn't have "Call of Duty" in the name, so the fanboys didn't buy it and instead bombed it because it could have been what Modern Warfare 2 and BlackOps will never be.

You're absolutely right. $10 says the next CoD game gets stellar reviews, even though it won't be any different than the last two iterations. I love how the campaign was criticized for its length when it's no shorter than any campaign lengths from the last 4 CoD games. In the review it says, "it felt short", well so did that last CoD games, but no one was there to criticize them for it. No, CoDBlops S&S (short and shitty) campaign got praised for how good it was. Yeah, nothing beat facing a horde of endless guys every other stage, wow, what excitement.

Just because CoD had 8 hour long campaign doesn't mean we should get used to it.

I've never taken 8 hours to beat a CoD campaign. So, I'm not used to it, haha.

I'm loving the game, actually. But the whole "the campaign is 5 hours if you're really good" thing was a load of shit. I died probably 4-6 times each level, and was looking for the newspapers and still managed to beat it in about 3 hours. Multiplayer is pretty awesome...

Traun:
Just because CoD had 8 hour long campaign doesn't mean we should get used to it.

Which one was that? I haven't seen them pass the 6 hour mark since CoD2...

GiantRaven:
Video games are in a sad state if an average score of 73 is bad whilst an average score of 80 is good.

Apparently we went from the 1-100 scale, to the 50-100 scale and now we use the 70-100 scale. Sooner or later reviews are going to split like stock in a good company, otherwise we are going to be using the 97-100 scale come 2015.

This game was released today, as in within the last 24 hours. It is a bit too soon to judge the game based on review scores alone, if at all. At the end of the day the game's development staff, publisher, and stockholders don't care what X wrote in the review of the game in publication Y.

A game's success comes down to one thing, two words: units sold.
Not what numeral between one and ten it earned from someone who thinks they know everything about playing games. Money is what counts.

Granted, I haven't played the game and it may possibly be a piece of crap.
Do I plan on buying it? No.
Do I plan on renting it? Maybe.
So, yeah, the game's failure is primarily the marketing department's fault.

vrbtny:
That.... wasn't really unexpected... was it?

We all knew it was going to happen.

Sort of... but at the same time a lot of people were optimistic about it. I for one thought it would at least amount to an 8 or something.

Assassin Xaero:
I'm loving the game, actually. But the whole "the campaign is 5 hours if you're really good" thing was a load of shit. I died probably 4-6 times each level, and was looking for the newspapers and still managed to beat it in about 3 hours. Multiplayer is pretty awesome...

MP reminds me of Battlefield kinda, so I might like it. But the whole "It sucks because of a 5 hours campaign" is so stupid since all the CoD games are about that and I think the MP sucks, since everyone just runs around like it's Unreal tourny.

Kaos' future was in their own hands. They KNEW the game wasn't brilliant when it shipped. They hoped that THQ media peeps could sell it for more than it is, which failed.

Feel no sorrow for these peeps.

BTW: I havent bought Any newer COD because of the weak SP. 5 hours of gameplay? And I have to pay $50 for it? Bullshit.

Baresark:

DaHero:

hem dazon 90:
Well that sucks for THQ.

There is only one single reason why this game was hit bad.

It didn't have "Call of Duty" in the name, so the fanboys didn't buy it and instead bombed it because it could have been what Modern Warfare 2 and BlackOps will never be.

You're absolutely right. $10 says the next CoD game gets stellar reviews, even though it won't be any different than the last two iterations.

The last 4 CoD games have been rather different from each other. 3, if you take out WaW.

I love how the campaign was criticized for its length when it's no shorter than any campaign lengths from the last 4 CoD games.

Those actually are complained about.

In the review it says, "it felt short", well so did that last CoD games, but no one was there to criticize them for it.

You're...you're joking, right? I heard kvetching over Black Ops up until last month. Mostly people saying it was "generic" without actually specifying.

No, CoDBlops S&S (short and shitty) campaign got praised for how good it was. Yeah, nothing beat facing a horde of endless guys every other stage, wow, what excitement.

Edit: I sound bitter, and I'm really not. But, I hate the horrible double standards regarding this genre of game.

No, you are bitter, and it's either coloring your interpretation of the criticisms leveled against the CoD series, or you somehow managed to avoid them entirely.

Bretty:
Kaos' future was in their own hands. They KNEW the game wasn't brilliant when it shipped.

How could they have done better? Any ideas?

They hoped that THQ media peeps could sell it for more than it is, which failed.

It's marketing's job to do that for every game anyway.

BTW: I havent bought Any newer COD because of the weak SP. 5 hours of gameplay? And I have to pay $50 for it? Bullshit.

Remember that analogy about water with no hydrogen I used upthread? That's CoD without the multiplayer. If you don't think it's worth it with both, sure. But don't strawman.

If they only added another 3 hours to the campaign and charged $10 less they coulda scored 85+ and sold 4x the copies. Although we all know the next CoD is going to be a 1hr campaign and cost $70 and will score 11/10's and set all new sales records.

All we can hope is that the continued failure of these samey FPSes leads to developers trying new things instead.

Olol, who am I kidding? Bring on CoD 35: Homefront: Between the Lies!

DaHero:

hem dazon 90:
Well that sucks for THQ.

There is only one single reason why this game was hit bad.

It didn't have "Call of Duty" in the name, so the fanboys didn't buy it and instead bombed it because it could have been what Modern Warfare 2 and BlackOps will never be.

Sure blame it on the fans

Baresark:

DaHero:

hem dazon 90:
Well that sucks for THQ.

There is only one single reason why this game was hit bad.

It didn't have "Call of Duty" in the name, so the fanboys didn't buy it and instead bombed it because it could have been what Modern Warfare 2 and BlackOps will never be.

You're absolutely right. $10 says the next CoD game gets stellar reviews, even though it won't be any different than the last two iterations. I love how the campaign was criticized for its length when it's no shorter than any campaign lengths from the last 4 CoD games. In the review it says, "it felt short", well so did that last CoD games, but no one was there to criticize them for it. No, CoDBlops S&S (short and shitty) campaign got praised for how good it was. Yeah, nothing beat facing a horde of endless guys every other stage, wow, what excitement.

Edit: I sound bitter, and I'm really not. But, I hate the horrible double standards regarding this genre of game.

I don't think its a double standard. COD doesn't go around flaunting that it has an awesome storyline.. that it will rock your world. COD knows that its now mostly an online FPS these days and it plays to that angle only. It sells itself just no more then what it expects us to get out of it.

Homefront on the other hand.. over sold its worth. When it starting going on and on and on about its awesomely plausible futuristic storyline by the writer of Red Dawn was, unintentionally or not, they literally promised a worthy long campaign. What we got was 5-7 hours of "a brutal shock-value neo-con mental masturbatory snuff film"... er campaign.

So they [Kaos] starting talking shit like they could "hang" with the big boys.. so everybody shouldn't act shocked when they get scored as such for coming up short.

I'll wait for it to go bargain on steam, then.

If it really is this subpar, that's a shame...the multiplayer videos I've seen are quite interesting and seem to have more dynamic gameplay than MW2.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here