With each new goal achieved and the subsequent points earned, you will earn ammo for it as well, or you can use those points to activate your other perks, which could be anything from body armor to a UAV to an airstrike. If you have an RPG selected, you can only use it when you have done enough to earn the necessary points. Part of those points are experience, but part are for in-game purchases based on your load out. When you accomplish something in a game, whether it be killing an opponent, or capturing an objective, you will earn points. There are a wide selection of weapons and perks, and each player can choose their own killstreak, which leads to the biggest departure from Call of Duty (or any online shooter) and a feature that will likely define Homefront. The loadout screens will be familiar to all Call of Duty fans, and you are given your choice of options based on the level you have reached. But the online game itself almost plays more like Battlefield: Bad Company 2, with objectives that when reached expand the map rather than end the game. The Call of Duty control scheme is well honed and has been refined for several years, so it makes sense that other games would emulate it, and Homefront is far from alone in that regard. The controls are identical, and that is neither a bad thing, nor is it a defining trait. The multiplayer plays like Call of Duty-exactly like Call of Duty. And why not–who doesn’t want more bang for their buck? Homefront is no exception, and judging by what they have shown, the online play may be good enough to overshadow the much hyped single player campaign. Granted, that might not exactly hold up in court, but it feels like it is a law nonetheless as it is more or less expected that upcoming major releases offer some form of online component to increase the value. It is a law that all first-person shooters must have a multiplayer element.
0 kommentar(er)
