THQ Thanks Korea for Helping to Sell Homefront

THQ Thanks Korea for Helping to Sell Homefront

image

In Homefront, America is invaded by a united Korea and a THQ executive jokingly thanked Kim Jong Il for being so creepy and selling the fiction of the game.

Who doesn't love a great fictional invasion a la Red Dawn? Homefront is set in 2027 where the Greater Korean Republic is united under the North's rule and has nuclear capabilities. The Korean People's Army invades a United States weakened by a failing economy and political unrest, and generally makes everything crappy for us Americans. We fight back though, and Homefront focuses on guerilla warfare against the invaders. Current events makes this speculative plot seem possible, perhaps even plausible, and THQ would like to thank the acts of North Korean leader Kim Jong Il for helping sell the audience on the idea of the game.

"We really appreciate the regime in North Korea for supporting Homefront the way they have," THQ Core Games VP Danny Bilson said. What with their nuclear testing and membership in George Bush's "Axis of Evil," Bilson wanted to thank Kim Jong Il personally for being "really cooperative."

While Bilson was just trying to be funny, I think that this game looks pretty interesting, if only because it's written by John Milius. What? You don't know who John Milius is? Shame on you. He wrote the screenplay and directed Red Dawn (the old one, not the remake) and contributed some of the greatest lines in cinematic history including "I love the smell of napalm in the morning" from Apocalypse Now and the monologue about the shark attack on the crew of the USS Indianapolis in Jaws. You might know him better as John Goodman's character in The Big Lebowski, as the Coen brothers based Walter on their friend Milius.

I honestly can't think of a better guy to write a plot like Homefront. Developed by Kaos Studios and published by THQ, Homefront is due out in March 2011 on Xbox 360, PS3 and PCs.

Source: VG247

Permalink

Isn't he dead yet? I thought assassins were capable.

Didn't know about Milius' involvement. Might give it a second look once it is out.

Could it be? Finally a spiritual successor to Freedom Fighters? I doubt it. But I can dream.

I was reading John Milius's biography and got a chuckle from his quote about drug traffickers in Mexico.

John Milius on drug traffickers:
We need to go down there, kill them all, flatten the place with bulldozers so when you wake up in the morning, there's nothing there. I do believe if you have a military, you use it.

I think that I am going to enjoy this game.

I love the smell of napalm in the morning as well :3

On a side note someone will probably use this game as fuel (lolnapalm) for the Videos games are bad herpderp 'fight'

Hrm... John Milius seems like Tom Clancy's cousin... I wouldn't have high hopes for the plot of this game...

Game reminds me of Freedom Fighters. I loved the setting since it was unique. USA being occupied for once? Fuck yeah!

Homefront definitly sounds like a good title.

Broken Orange:
I was reading John Milius's biography and got a chuckle from his quote about drug traffickers in Mexico.

John Milius on drug traffickers:
We need to go down there, kill them all, flatten the place with bulldozers so when you wake up in the morning, there's nothing there. I do believe if you have a military, you use it.

I think that I am going to enjoy this game.

I think I'm going to enjoy it as well.

On a side note; YOUR AVATAR! It's seizure inducing...

I will defiantly be checking this game out.

Let's hope they pull it off.

"Current events makes this speculative plot seem possible, perhaps even plausible..."

wait what? how can a country that is completely broke even take over South Korea, let alone the US. Even if we are broke, there's still the logistics of invading the US across the Pacific. i presume the premise of the game is based off the invasion of Alaska and Canada first.

Sounds awesome. Do want.

In before THQ gets angry letter from the DPRK banning all employees from the country under penalty of death.

DTWolfwood:
"Current events makes this speculative plot seem possible, perhaps even plausible..."

wait what? how can a country that is completely broke even take over South Korea, let alone the US. Even if we are broke, there's still the logistics of invading the US across the Pacific. i presume the premise of the game is based off the invasion of Alaska and Canada first.

Actually, Hawaii first then San Francisco. I admit it sounds difficult, but I think the game world has the United States military decimated by a bad economy and long term political unrest.

DTWolfwood:
"Current events makes this speculative plot seem possible, perhaps even plausible..."

wait what? how can a country that is completely broke even take over South Korea, let alone the US. Even if we are broke, there's still the logistics of invading the US across the Pacific. i presume the premise of the game is based off the invasion of Alaska and Canada first.

Watch the "Backstory" trailer. Says that Kim Jong Ils son unites North and South, annexes Japan and the rest of South East Asia, while the US economy and government degrades. Then a supposed "communications" satellite launched by Korea activates an EMP over US. Hawaii goes first, the San Fran and so on.

Then again its just a story you know, a well thought out one.

This game looks really interesting. I think it will have a good story and be quite fun, much like Metro 2033 was, also from THQ.

As if I couldn't wait for this game before, now I'm gonna reserve it. Another game from the studio that made the excellent Frontlines: Fuel of War written by the guy who wrote Red Dawn? Fuck. Yes. :3

Luftwaffles:

DTWolfwood:
"Current events makes this speculative plot seem possible, perhaps even plausible..."

wait what? how can a country that is completely broke even take over South Korea, let alone the US. Even if we are broke, there's still the logistics of invading the US across the Pacific. i presume the premise of the game is based off the invasion of Alaska and Canada first.

Watch the "Backstory" trailer. Says that Kim Jong Ils son unites North and South, annexes Japan and the rest of South East Asia, while the US economy and government degrades. Then a supposed "communications" satellite launched by Korea activates an EMP over US. Hawaii goes first, the San Fran and so on.

Then again its just a story you know, a well thought out one.


I don't know how well thought out this story can be tho. I mean for Greg to say its plausible looking at the current political/economical climate, is too far fetched for me. maybe in 2127 but not 2027 XD

I was already on board to pick up this title already, but this has put it over the top for me. Crazy alternate futures (in this case, definitely worst-case scenario) sound like a nice change after all the damn contemporary war titles.

The only thing that would sell this plot is an airport bookstore. Heading off the inevitable comparison, I think MW2 was written as an over the top parody, whereas Homefront demands to be taken seriously, while being even more far-fetched.

Mysnomer:
The only thing that would sell this plot is an airport bookstore. Heading off the inevitable comparison, I think MW2 was written as an over the top parody, whereas Homefront demands to be taken seriously, while being even more far-fetched.

Funny, I always thought that, if anything, it was the other way around. That, or that they both want to be taken seriously.

Of course, being serious isn't always a good thing...

I love it that they had to carefully engineer a scenario where the U.S. is the scrappy underdog for once, instead of using one of the multitudes and multitudes of real countries-resisting-a-foreign-oppressor-through-guerrilla-warfare stories.

The Critic:

Mysnomer:
The only thing that would sell this plot is an airport bookstore. Heading off the inevitable comparison, I think MW2 was written as an over the top parody, whereas Homefront demands to be taken seriously, while being even more far-fetched.

Funny, I always thought that, if anything, it was the other way around. That, or that they both want to be taken seriously.

Of course, being serious isn't always a good thing...

I look at it this way, examine the differences between Modern Warfare and it's sequel. MW featured one player character death, and it was meaningful. The plot was well within suspension of disbelief. On the otherhand, MW2 kills the player several times, involves crazy action sequences and a convoluted plot that ultimately resolves little. If you look behind the scenes, Infinity Ward did not want to make a sequel to Modern Warfare, were pressured into it by Activision, and had a whole bunch of BS going on during development. Thus, I think the ridiculous plot and design was an act of sabotage, and that we aren't supposed to take it seriously.

On the other hand, Homefront promotes itself with live action footage trying to hammer home the point, "This could happen" or "This is realistic". And here this guy is, talking about how the ineffectual regime of North Korea has helped sell the game? I don't know, maybe he's never tuned in to the news, and only knows about North Korea from the alarmist rantings of some crazy far-right blogger (the kind that give normal Republicans a bad name).

I hate to disappoint Bilson, but the DPRK's image isn't going to help sell Homefront.

The reason why the Soviets make for such compelling antagonists in various media, besides their strongly characterised iconography and ideology, is beacuse they were a powerful force and a plausible threat in real life as well. In comparison, DPRK just comes off as an old henchman of a now gone popular kid in school, throwing a tantrum in an attempt to seem important even though everyone realises he is completely powerless and irrelevant now.

Overall, I just don't think North Koreans as antagonists will resonate as well as THQ hopes. While the Chinese would be a more cliché choice, I think they would fill the role much better.

Mysnomer:

The Critic:

Mysnomer:
The only thing that would sell this plot is an airport bookstore. Heading off the inevitable comparison, I think MW2 was written as an over the top parody, whereas Homefront demands to be taken seriously, while being even more far-fetched.

Funny, I always thought that, if anything, it was the other way around. That, or that they both want to be taken seriously.

Of course, being serious isn't always a good thing...

I look at it this way, examine the differences between Modern Warfare and it's sequel. MW featured one player character death, and it was meaningful. The plot was well within suspension of disbelief. On the otherhand, MW2 kills the player several times, involves crazy action sequences and a convoluted plot that ultimately resolves little. If you look behind the scenes, Infinity Ward did not want to make a sequel to Modern Warfare, were pressured into it by Activision, and had a whole bunch of BS going on during development. Thus, I think the ridiculous plot and design was an act of sabotage, and that we aren't supposed to take it seriously.

On the other hand, Homefront promotes itself with live action footage trying to hammer home the point, "This could happen" or "This is realistic". And here this guy is, talking about how the ineffectual regime of North Korea has helped sell the game? I don't know, maybe he's never tuned in to the news, and only knows about North Korea from the alarmist rantings of some crazy far-right blogger (the kind that give normal Republicans a bad name).

Interesting Insight.

I always had it figured that MW2's plot was the logical extreme of where IW wanted to take their series. The first Modern Warfare had a much faster pace than previous CoD games, while still maintaining the clear plotline that comes with a single-focus narrative, and the character death was a great shocker to cap it off. MW2's plot simply took these concepts (if you'll pardon the Spinal Tap reference) "Up To Eleven", so to speak. It was an even bigger shot of adrenaline than the first game, the plot and set pieces moved even faster, and there was more and more effort going towards trying to shock the player (in the form of multiple character deaths and the infamous "No Russian" mission). The way I see it, the distinction of being an "Over-the-top Parody" and being just plain old "Over-the-top" is a blurry one, with probable overlap between the two groups.Just my view.

I agree that Homefront's plot does seem a little bit absurd, but I'll hold off on judging it untill I see more info, or untill I play (read: rent) it myself.

DTWolfwood:
"Current events makes this speculative plot seem possible, perhaps even plausible..."

wait what? how can a country that is completely broke even take over South Korea, let alone the US. Even if we are broke, there's still the logistics of invading the US across the Pacific. i presume the premise of the game is based off the invasion of Alaska and Canada first.

In one of the trailers N Korea absorbs S Korea japan and several other island nations and becomes quite a strong military nation.
but yes, I am most certainly interested in this game. Having a writer such as John Milius will hopefully make the game more entertaining/thrilling/whatever.
EDIT: for those who haven't seen it, here you go,

As someone else noted, for the same reason as Freedom Fighters I am for once genuinely intrigued by this premise. Though the ultimate revelation would have to be something like the Chinese standing behind North Korea's sudden expansion and technological leaps and bounds, otherwise heh...my suspension of disbelief is broken quite quickly.

Still...fair nuff alternate history I guess. Or paranoid vision of the future by right-wing extremists too I suppose.

Awesome!

A game about attacking North Korea!
Even if North Korea took over a large part of Asia in a way that could never happen period I will follow this game.

Now the title is misleading, in future could you please write North Korea? After all, there are two...

Gee, really? This game just got a LOT more credible. I always thought the premise was interesting(What MW2 should have been) but...The monologue in Jaws? Apocalypse Now? That's some pretty serious shit.

The Critic:
Interesting Insight.

I always had it figured that MW2's plot was the logical extreme of where IW wanted to take their series. The first Modern Warfare had a much faster pace than previous CoD games, while still maintaining the clear plotline that comes with a single-focus narrative, and the character death was a great shocker to cap it off. MW2's plot simply took these concepts (if you'll pardon the Spinal Tap reference) "Up To Eleven", so to speak. It was an even bigger shot of adrenaline than the first game, the plot and set pieces moved even faster, and there was more and more effort going towards trying to shock the player (in the form of multiple character deaths and the infamous "No Russian" mission). The way I see it, the distinction of being an "Over-the-top Parody" and being just plain old "Over-the-top" is a blurry one, with probable overlap between the two groups.Just my view.

I agree that Homefront's plot does seem a little bit absurd, but I'll hold off on judging it untill I see more info, or untill I play (read: rent) it myself.

Well, I could just be over-analyzing and coming up with something meaningful when what they did is say "Activision wants another Modern Warfare, but we don't want to make one. So we'll just recycle everything about the original and make it more spectacular." Essentially making a by-the-numbers sequel guaranteed to sell to get Activision off their backs.

And I'd like to clarify that I am not making any judgments about game itself, but I think the marketing is greatly flawed by trying to convince people that this is a realistic premise, as if this could be the future we're heading for.

Personally, I think they set out to make Red Dawn: the Game, but then MW2 and Bad Company 2 came out and they were like, "Oh snaps! Russians are soooo 1960's. Quick! We need a new antagonist." So they got one of those Russian fur caps (for what better hat to draw the names of communist/fascist/not-America-ist countries from?) and drew out North Korea. And they ran with it.

Just a heads up, but Millius didn't write the speech in Jaws, that was compiled from both Bencheley and the actors.

Mysnomer:

The Critic:
Interesting Insight.

I always had it figured that MW2's plot was the logical extreme of where IW wanted to take their series. The first Modern Warfare had a much faster pace than previous CoD games, while still maintaining the clear plotline that comes with a single-focus narrative, and the character death was a great shocker to cap it off. MW2's plot simply took these concepts (if you'll pardon the Spinal Tap reference) "Up To Eleven", so to speak. It was an even bigger shot of adrenaline than the first game, the plot and set pieces moved even faster, and there was more and more effort going towards trying to shock the player (in the form of multiple character deaths and the infamous "No Russian" mission). The way I see it, the distinction of being an "Over-the-top Parody" and being just plain old "Over-the-top" is a blurry one, with probable overlap between the two groups.Just my view.

I agree that Homefront's plot does seem a little bit absurd, but I'll hold off on judging it untill I see more info, or untill I play (read: rent) it myself.

Well, I could just be over-analyzing and coming up with something meaningful when what they did is say "Activision wants another Modern Warfare, but we don't want to make one. So we'll just recycle everything about the original and make it more spectacular." Essentially making a by-the-numbers sequel guaranteed to sell to get Activision off their backs.

And I'd like to clarify that I am not making any judgments about game itself, but I think the marketing is greatly flawed by trying to convince people that this is a realistic premise, as if this could be the future we're heading for.

Personally, I think they set out to make Red Dawn: the Game, but then MW2 and Bad Company 2 came out and they were like, "Oh snaps! Russians are soooo 1960's. Quick! We need a new antagonist." So they got one of those Russian fur caps (for what better hat to draw the names of communist/fascist/not-America-ist countries from?) and drew out North Korea. And they ran with it.

You're probably right on all counts, MW2 being a recycled product, the plot of Homefront being pretty out-there, and that original antagonist was probably someone else (I personally think that they were originally planning on using China, but then decided to chose a country that would be safer, with respect to business, to antagonize). Of course, this being Red Dawn: The Game wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, at least as far as action and gameplay would be concerned.

By the way, just out of curiosity, didn't MW2 have an achievment or two that referenced Red Dawn?

The Critic:
You're probably right on all counts, MW2 being a recycled product, the plot of Homefront being pretty out-there, and that original antagonist was probably someone else (I personally think that they were originally planning on using China, but then decided to chose a country that would be safer, with respect to business, to antagonize). Of course, this being Red Dawn: The Game wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, at least as far as action and gameplay would be concerned.

By the way, just out of curiosity, didn't MW2 have an achievment or two that referenced Red Dawn?

Actually, I remember two references to Red Dawn off the top of my head. The name of your ranger squad is the Wolverines, and there's an achievement named Red Dawn. I think there may have been a few more, but those are the ones that stand out in my mind. I forgot to add this earlier, but it was another point of reasoning towards thinking MW2 is parody.

 

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