Wait, goats were what I needed to be sacrificing? Fuck, what am I supposed to do with all these chickens now?

lol only because the game did not end up like the first one it does not mean it is bad.

Jaqua Brown the first one was Good yes, but this game aint bad. People overhyped to much

DarkKing009 k

@@seiban8455 Congratulations, you got several chicken dinners you can make for your efforts!

Late, but the development of HTR was sad. After their showcases in 2014, Crytek started having financial troubles and stopped paying the Crytek UK team who were forced to stop developing the game as a result which resulted in 3/4ths of the Crytek UK team being laid off. They then sold the title and Crytek UK to Deep Silver who then renamed them to Dambuster Studios. After that, there were lots of rumors that HTR had been scrapped, but around that December, DS announced that they were restarting the development and extending the release date to allow for the remaining team to finish it. The original release date was Q1 2015, then it was pushed back to Q2 2015, and then they finally pushed it back to Q2 2016. A team of around 25~ devs had to finish a AAA game which shows in the release state of the game, but that small team continued to pour their heart and soul into the game. I was active in the HTR forums on their website, and the devs were just awesome. Normally on forums, a dev team/ the publisher has mods they give out and rely on them to hunt through the threads, but with DSDB, the first three responses to a thread were from devs. They took every feedback and checked every thread they could. I became friends with a lot of the devs with how active they were. Basically, everything Noah said about what he feels the dev team cares about is 100% true from both my experience with interacting with him and your experience from their Gamescon showcase. While nothing is confirmed yet, I do believe that DS is giving Dambuster a full chance at making a Homefront when they're at 100%. THQ Nordic recently bought Deep Silver and specifically noted DSDB and the Homefront IP in their announcement as well as saying they won't be halting any development. Talking with one of their devs on Twitter, he seemed positive when I joked about a H3 once. 2019 would be 3 years since HTR released and that was the original development plan for HTR, 3 year cycle, so we could see a reveal at E3 around the corner. Something also interesting is that there was a third game type being hinted at E3 2014 before all that crap started. They already announced the campaign and coop mode, and a lot of the devs were hinting at a third game type that they couldn't reveal "without being killed by the rest of the team." I believe it was a PVP mode similar to the original Homefront's multiplayer. They ignored questions about pvp until after development was restarted when they announced the campaign and coop were the only modes so I believe the development struggle caused them to abandon it. There was also leaked multiplayer gameplay a while before their announcement trailer showing vehicles and weapons as well as uniforms that look exactly like those from HTR in a pvp environment that looked similar to the OG Homefront. So if a H3 is in development with DSDB at full strength, I think an OG Homefront multiplayer would definitely be in the books. Also, there were lots of talks on the forums with the community wanting the OG Homefront remastered, but envisioned with the rebooted storyline and open world mechanics of HTR which would be amazing.

@@SeaGLGaming I really hope a third homefront comes to fruition. Aaa studios that have genuine passion for the games they put out deserve support.

@@TheSaint491 Yeah, I really hope we see a reveal this year from Dambuster. They're either working on a new Homefront or a new Timesplitters game. THQ Nordic bought the Timesplitters franchise around the same time as buying Deep Silver and all its subsidies. Nordic also bought another of Dambuster's previous titles called Second Sight. I doubt they'll be the next titles from Dambuster though if Nordic said they weren't going to be changing any of the current projects at Deep Silver. But I'm hyped no matter what we see from Dambuster. It a dev studio with such a rich history from Timesplitters and Crisis to even the canceled Star Wars Battlefront 3 game.

Another great example of this is Nioh. Each patch adds new features to the game.

And then there's Paradox's grand strategy games...

As someone in the industy, "patch culture" is a shitty thing and nobody should stand up for it. If the developer was not rushed to release the game, it would have launched at it's finest - AKA /after/ the patches. Consumers shouldn't accept half-cooked things, that's how this predicament began. Instead, we should put the blame where it lies: publishers. Corporate deadlines push most games like this out before they're ready, and that's why patch culture is garbage. It's unfair to developers who have to live under an oppressively close deadline and have to crunch to meet release and /then/ crunch for weeks and weeks afterwards with bugfixes while being yelled at to do so. It's also unfair to them because of reputation. Look at how H:TR was received because it got pushed out the gate early, staining a product of passion, manpower, and love with ridiculing memes because of something they were unable to help. The developers of H:TR don't necessarily put value on post-releases fixes, in my opinion, but they show how passionate and well-managed the team was, or how a publisher took a step back and realized they made a mistake.

And wouldn't it had been possible to not release it until now that it's ready? Instead of becoming meme material, it would had got praises all over the place.

Kerbal Space Center. Prison architekt, Rimworld. all of them would not exsist without Pre release Patches. i know this list could be continued until infinity.. but these ones are special for me.

Termutis worth a buy doing it as well

Chubzdoomer is the freedom fighters bundle worth it then??

@@itsjordan4774 yeah, why not?

Sames goes for Destiny, Diablo 3 and Battlefield 4, and Slain from the indie side.

Same goes for Arkham Knight on PC, which got 100%, completely fixed after patches.

Lion of the North maybe they shouldn't charge a full $60 then. these games are supposed to be full games at launch, not a work in progress

a game with bugs isnt a work in progress if you think rainbow six siege is or was a unfinished game then you must be a member of the "it needs a single player to be counted as finished" camp the same camp that gave it meh scores when it came out

It's an old school notion that the game should be in pristine condition upon release, people think that issues on release will be permanent because that's how it used to be. Nowadays you can obviously tell the difference between a game on release and it's respective 1.6 patch. Games are also absolutely massive today, it's only natural that patches would be more common and that games would be completely fixed and even turned around some time after release. After watching this video, I'm honestly willing to give this game a chance, the notion was completely non-existent before.

had this since launch day, played with all the bugs.... nothing was game breaking just laggy. love the art style, love the no bullshit its war seriousness.. this is one of my all time favorites and go to games. much like killzone 1 was.

It used to be worse. It's part of the charm. Well, you get used to it... Well, it's worth it.

I know, there's a certain charm to his content

It's kinda sad, because there were a lot of videos that I just could not listen to. The Mass Effect one comes to mind. That one was pretty bad.

The Andromeda one? It was pretty horrible

ME1 actually. Haven't played Andromeda yet, so it will take a while for me to listen.

Not saying it's not him, but Markus Persson is a common name in Sweden.

yeah, didn't think about that, lol

most likely someone using that name, though to be fair notch would have a lot of disposable income...

Also sounded like author N.K. Jemisin, that's pretty cool.

Alec Price I have to agree but any video of his is something I want!

all the way across the sky

Brandon Breaker that was painfully un funny

Javier Alvarez go away before me and trump pop your cherry punk

Lucasg 1337 its gonna be painful when i power tap you!

Javier Alvarez yea go to timeout punk!

lawlessx9 it's always interesting and kind of makes me happy when I see developers still put effort even if it's not critically received or even financially

Yeah, I caught that too. How about that, eh? I wonder if Noah realized.

The game is way better than a year or 2 ago

Well, now he doesnt have to work 2 days making pizzas to pay for 3 hours of aditional content. That may have something to do with that.

倪传历 Gaming community in a nutshell.

Ethan Stapley hahahaha

"The DLC they released from all I've seen is just enough to capture what was promised, but not enough to truly make HF: Revolution groundbreaking or at all worth the price of admission." FPS games don't need to be groundbreaking. Dying Light is an excellent open world FPS games, and Homefront: TR's closest relative in terms of urban design, and it was a shameless retread of Dying Light mixed with gameplay elements from Far Cry 3. "Because the publisher needed a shooter to get into the fray with Battlefield, CoD, and Ubi's The Division and Ghost Recon." Why, though? Their intent was to make "open world Half-life". They weren't aiming to compete with Battlefield and CoD. In fact, they intentionally scrapped Homefront 2's CoD-style campaign and Battlefield-style MP. And Ghost Recon and The Division are co-op games. Homefront: TR doesn't have campaign co-op. "This game has a bad reputation, not because people are spoiled or because it was a well made game that got killed by word of mouth but because it was simply bland and not that well done." I can't disagree more. It's a solid game that had an absolute catastrophe of a launch. For some reason, audiences respond poorly to an FPS game that runs at 15fps on consoles, crashes constantly, and corrupts saves frequently. Homefront: TR does a number of things really, really well. The level/world design is superb. The storyline is solid. The music is excellent. The gunplay is top notch. And the general atmosphere of the game is really, really good. The combination of visuals, weather effects, the "living and breathing world" created by random NPCs wandering about and chatting, arguing, trading, and so on. "It faded easily into the tapestry of cookie cutter FPS titles. Revolution is the sequel nobody asked for for a game most people had forgotten about." HFTR isn't actually a sequel to Homefront. It started out as one, but Homefront 2 -- a linear FPS with PvP multiplayer modelled after the 2011 game was scrapped, and Homefront: TR was created in its place. Parallels can be drawn to Prey, Prey 2, and Prey 2017. Perhaps they should have abandoned the Homefront IP because there's a lot of brand confusion. But at the end of the day, how many open world FPS games set in urban environments can you count? If the genre is so cookie cutter? "Unfortunately passion only gets you so far, and I refuse to reward bad games just because the people that made them spent time, money, and their energy on it." Your premise is that it was a bad game, and not a really good -- if divisive -- game that launched in a completely broken state, and fell victim to the rapid "consensus" that forms in today's gaming communities. Homefront: TR received negative reviews from critics largely because it ran like shit and was comprehensively broken. It now runs beautifully and the bugs are more annoying than serious. To be clear, between May 2016 and September 2016, the game performed extremely poorly on consoles, and worse on PS4, of course. I think you're underestimating how much impact being completely broken and running like shit will have on an FPS game. "If you truly want to tell the tale of a developer who had passion but got royally screwed, go read up on Danger Close MoH 2010 / Warfighter. Both games that were ahead of their time but got screwed by bad EA marketing and a gaming populace on console and PC who weren't ready to accept hybrid shooters. Now you have games like Squad, Insurgency, and RS2: Vietnam making bank on the same premise." Those are interesting games, but from the sound of it you're talking about their multiplayer, not their campaigns. I don't think Noah does multiplayer stuff. His focus has always been on singleplayer. Medal of Honor 2010 was a success, but IMO Warfighter fell victim to the FPS/TPS bubble bursting where people began refusing to buy FPS games if they had a 5-8 hour campaign. Amy Hennig has argued that Uncharted 1 would never be released nowdays because it had no MP, was 10 hours long, and had no bonus modes. MP fanbases are extremely toxic. Every FPS game that gets a reasonably popular multiplayer ends up dominated by them.

The thing is, everything that TR has another game has done better. Fallout has that same living, breathing world without the random walls and funnels that push you towards a location. As far as story, it's decent. The campaign, though, is bland. It's a lot of the same, repetitive grind that we see often. And the co-op that was offered was just too lackluster to truly write home about. That coupled with the major bugs that it had killed this game, and with good reason. I'm not hating on this game because I heard it was bad. I am hating on it because I went into it wanting to love it. An open world co-op game with a sandbox SP? Awesome. The problem was just that it was a rushed title. And it showed. I hate Mass Effect: Andromeda for the same reason. As far as the rest of your points, I concur that it's biggest issue was the glitches and bugs, but I dont think you can totally discount the fact that this game just wasn't good enough without those to capture an audience. It wasn't amazingly done. It didn't capture anything that it's predecessor hadn't already done in terms of theme. The game, for me, just had no soul. It was the video game equivalent of the Red Dawn remake. As far as MoH goes, even if you focus on the SP, there's a lot there that EA missed the boat on. It was the only game in recent memory that had a story directly told to and inspired by real special operations soldiers. It faithfully retells the stories of Robert's Ridge/Takur Ghar, for example long before it became hugely popular in terms of story. Warfighter was the same way. But EA focused more on the MP element that they rushed Danger Close to develop and emulate other shooters that it lacked theme. Anyway, I think I'm mostly saying that I went into Homefront: The Revolution with really high hopes because I did enjoy the first game. I knew not a lot of people even care anymore, but I thought maybe it'd be decent and I didn't enjoy my time.

"Fallout has that same living, breathing world without the random walls and funnels that push you towards a location." That's kind of a fair point, although they were aiming to mimic HL2, not Fallout. And the existence of a game like Fallout 4 doesn't mean that people should just pack up and go home because they're unlikely to match it. "I am hating on it because I went into it wanting to love it. An open world co-op game with a sandbox SP? Awesome." That's kind of the problem. It's not an open world co-op game. People expecting something like Ubisoft's games were going to be sorely disappointed because the co-op is more like Syndicate 2012. "It's a lot of the same, repetitive grind that we see often." Yes and no. It stands in stark contrast to a game like Far Cry Primal because in Homefront: TR you don't have forced open world busywork. You can ignore about 90% of the strike points and side tasks. You're not forced to perform the same repetitive tasks over and over to progress through the storyline like you were in some of Ubisoft's older titles. The upgrade system uses money, so there's no hunting rare pelted animals to built a bigger bag to hold more pelts in. "As far as the rest of your points, I concur that it's biggest issue was the glitches and bugs, but I dont think you can totally discount the fact that this game just wasn't good enough without those to capture an audience." The game sold very well initially. It had no problem capturing an audience. It was surprisingly well marketed and had relatively high preorder numbers. The problem was KEEPING the audience when it took them five months to get the game to a "playable" state. And it wasn't until TEN MONTHS after release that the game was finally holding 30fps on consoles, which an increasing number of FPS gamers consider barely acceptable performance. The word of mouth around the game being completely broken and running at 15fps, paired with negative reviews about the game being completely broken and running at 15fps killed the game's legs. I cannot overstate just how screwed the game was on consoles at launch. Over on GameFAQs you see people, a month after release, talking about how they've restarted the campaign five times and keep running into the same game breaking bugs. We see a similar issue with Sniper Ghost Warrior 3, which launched with heaps of bugs including a very common save wipe issue, serious performance issues on consoles, and this caused a lot of people to adopt a "wait for patches" stance. That game will be fixed eventually, and we'll likely see renewed appreciation for it.