REVIEW: Spec Ops The Line

The thinking man's Call of Duty ...


I must say, I'm always dubious about war games that try to emulate Call of Duty but after playing the demo of this game, I found that it was a third person shooter that looked quite cool and was nothing like the Call of Duty games whatsoever. But now, after finishing the game, I found it to be quite a deep and somewhat profound study on war that is the complete antithesis to everything Call of Duty is about.

Firstly, on a completely aesthetic standpoint, the game looks pretty good - but not great. The haze of the sun and sand works well, but it's nothing to write home about. It does have its moments but never was I truly thinking it was a step up - it's definite proof that we need a new console to start pushing boundaries. However, some of the set pieces were impressive and I loved the design.

The control system though is somewhat irritating. Often, I find myself sprinting to standing and trying to find cover and trying not to die, it makes for a completely annoying, rough ride that could have done with being a bit more refined. Five years ago, I might have let a control system like this get by, but not nowadays. Also, the team squad based techniques are good, but somewhat pointless. It feels like an afterthought rather than an integral part of the game.

The AI had its moments but what was really annoying was when your AI team-mates would be dying asking for your help and they have run off ahead or stayed behind leaving you, through no fault of your own, to have to save them. It could be argued this is somewhat 'realistic' but, it's not, it's a mistake in my eyes I'm afraid.

That's the surface stuff, which can all be forgiven when it comes to the story and other nice little details that they've thought about. If you don't know already, The Line is set in a post-apocalyptic Dubai. The city had undergone a huge sandstorm and the 33rd battalion, under a General Conrad, were told to evacuate the city. However, there was no trace of the survivors or the 33rd. They then get a message saying that the evacuation was a failure and the losses heavy, so Walker and his two squad are told to recon the area and report back. But then, it all goes a bit wrong...

The game is loosely based on Heart of Darkness (Conrad being an obvious indicator) and therefore of course, more importantly, Apocalypse Now. Once you enter Dubai, you see that it's a complete war zone between the locals and the 33rd led by Conrad who have now taken over the city. You also see that the CIA have got involved to keep things under wraps so a full scale war between America and UAE doesn't break out and soon you find yourself being targeted by everyone in this crossfire.

The Line is essentially a commentary on the full horror of war. Your squad are not happy that they keep delving further when they should just leave and report back. They are, after all, killing American soldiers. After a traumatic event, events start to spiral out of control and, as a result, the game becomes a piece about Walker's fragile state of being. His actions, and ultimately your choices, soon put him on a path that he cannot recover from. This isn't a gun-ho ballsy Team America piece, in fact it's shows how disgusting, futile and ultimately evil war is - even by trying to become the hero you become the enemy. There is no such thing as a 'good guy' in war and, even as you battle your way through the game, by the end the city is in complete ruins. To justify war, you've had to destroy everything.

It's an introspective piece on Walker, a friend of Conrad's, who blames the General for all the evil that has occurred but as the game progresses you physically look worse and worse. Also, the little quips and in-game dialogue gets more heated and more desperate and it's a beautiful touch to the disintegration of Walker's mind. Even the menu appears different each time you turn it on, from the upside down flag, to a man keeping watch, to him dead with the city on fire, to an empty desolate space depending how far you have progressed in the campaign. Depending on what you do, you will get a certain ending of about five, none of which are 'good'. My one for instance ended with the city alight and completely destroyed - the result of me trying to do what was right.

All in all, The Line is about how far a man will go to prove his worth not only to other people, but more importantly to himself. We like to believe we are good people, but are we? Or do we just blame our bad decisions on other people? It's completely downbeat, it's horrific and no way do you ever feel like a hero. Instead you come away feeling slightly disgusted, slightly awkward and like you've just screwed everything up. It doesn't help that loading screens have strange messages like 'How many Americans have you killed today?' and 'You're still a good person.' I never got a chance to play the multiplayer mode but if you like a good action piece with a bit of gritty, harsh character assassination then it's definitely worth playing.

Rating: 7.5/10

REVIEW: Homefront

I would hazard a guess and say that this has had a lot of money thrown into it's marketing because I swear I can't get away from a poster or advert somewhere for this recently. But is it time for it to go home?


The main focus of this game was that it's post-apocalyptic future is based on a history that's happening right now and isn't outside the realms of possibility, it's in fact a real threat. America's economy is collapsing and North Korea are starting to get more and more ballsy with their weapons. It's revolutionary storyline even mimics what is going on in Libya and the Ivory Coast but when it comes down to it, can it incite enough emotion to engage the audience? By bringing the war to people's front yard, writer John Milius who co-wrote Apocalypse Now and Red Dawn, clearly hopes to do something different with a bloated FPS genre. However, didn't we see war-torn America in Modern Warfare? So if you're going to copy something, why you would think you can do it better than the most popular franchise on Earth is beyond me. But it's worth a try I guess ...

The game opens out in familiar territory - you're pummelled into a bus and you watch the horrors of war going on outside the window. Much like that intro bit on Modern Warfare remember? Okay, I'll stop comparing - but it's hard to do. Soon you're part of the resistance trying to win back America from the hands of the Koreans one step at a time. Plot wise, I thoroughly enjoyed it, it was quite engaging but I felt like each plot point was stretched out to involve the gameplay and really, it felt like an entertaining short story rather than a fleshed out game. 'Short' being the key word here as I must have completed the game in about 4 hours, maybe even quicker. What I played was good, but it felt like old hat. The AI was actually quite impressive, no longer waiting for people to pop up, they seemed to move around and try and second guess you a bit. The gameplay was quite smooth, almost too smooth that it felt unrealistic, throwing grenades for example held no weight and if someone was far from the explosion they would be thrown off their feet the same as if it went off right by them. Controls are the same as any FPS and there's a bit of helicopter action, a bit of gunner action and all that thrown in for good measure. It ticks every box needed for an FPS - so what's the issue?

The main issue is that it feels dated. Had this game been released a couple of years ago, and made a bit longer, I would have enjoyed it but the graphics felt a little old, the gameplay was just going through the motions and it seemed heavy on plot but light on character. This would have been mainly because you're running from one mission to another and there's not much reflection being had - everyone seems so bloody caught up in everything they don't have time to just let out their feelings. It's a shame since a lot of emotional scenes occur within the film, parents being shot in front of their children, Americans fighting each other and torturing Koreans, mass graves, self-sacrifice and all sorts but yet it doesn't seem to have the gloss to keep up. Video games are unfortunately one of the few mediums where money, in theory, is very important to what makes a game good. You will literally see every dollar spent on the screen - it's not to say you can't make a simple, inexpensive game and it not be a success but these days the bar is so high that unless you've got a major studio behind you, you run the risk of being left behind.

Homefront is a game that has it all in the right places but can't deliver like Call of Duty can. It feels like it's little brother that has made a good effort but can't reach the heady heights. But then it's not that I have anything really bad to say about it, just there's nothing that stands out as being very good. Sure, fighting on normal American soil is cool, sure the action can be pretty good and the story quite engrossing but it's instantly forgettable. The multiplayer was surprisingly fun with large maps and large teams with standard necessary game modes but you couldn't help but think you'd rather be playing something else.

It was the moment I completed the game, opened my disk tray and inserted Crysis 2 when I realised how far behind the times Homefront is. Great effort guys and worth a weekend's playing, but nothing to write home about.

Rating: 6/10