Speaking with CVG, Kaos’ GM David Votypka acknowledges that gamers might feel a little cheated by a game that can be completed in one sitting. Of course, when creating the first game in a proposed franchise, it’s difficult to find the right balance between what gamers want and what will make the developer feel satisfied.
Ultimately, Kaos Studios was looking to appeal to players’ emotions with the single player campaign, and to make a multiplayer mode with some fairly detailed customization the icing on the cake. Had Homefront been only a single player experience, Votypka states it might have clocked in at around 20 hours.
Though it’s difficult to please every kind of player, Homefront needed to have the right amount of content on both fronts, and it might have dropped the ball a little. Fortunately, Votypka explains how the team will approach Homefront 2, and his ideas should make everyone (single and multiplayer fans) happy.
Still, even though Kaos might vow to increase the length of Homefront 2’s single player campaign, they aren’t going to take their focus off of multiplayer. Not stating it from the outset might have been a bit misleading to those gamers interested in Homefront’s plot, but Kaos clearly places a large focus on multiplayer.
Perhaps Homefront got lost in a split marketing campaign — one that tried to show off how the title is different and one that made it seem like a traditional shooter — but going forward the team at Kaos aren’t going to rest on their laurels. Sure, Homefront is already showing strong sales numbers despite already receiving price cuts, but Homefront 2 is going to need to blow those out of the water to make this a franchise.
Do you think that somewhere around a 10-hour campaign would have been much more agreeable to gamers? Which do you prefer: a longer single player experience or a more in-depth multiplayer offering?
Homefront is out now for the PS3, Xbox 360, PC, and OnLive.
Source: CVG
