UnHomeWorld Remaster

I see alot of complaints on the fourms, I hear alot of complaints from my clan.
So in simple terms, is HomeWorld Remaster a failure or not?

Oh hay, it’s this post. same one word for word, just a different game, different poster :stuck_out_tongue:

Plenty of copies sold, Modding is working great, first patch is already out and they’re working on the next one (soon as the normal launch issues are sorted they’re going to start balancing) No wide spread bugs preventing people form completing the campaigns and universally high review scores on every single review site I could find. 4.5/5, 9/10, 90%+, etc.

So you tell me, would you call that a success?

I mean sure there’s a handful of 'vets a little perturbed that it’s not HW1 with a fresh coat of paint (bleh) but I talked to a buddy who’s never played Homeworld before and he was having an absolute blast. About time we got some new blood in here.


There are features of homeworld 1, mainly ship AI/pathing, formations, tactics, and repairing, that are either non-functional or imperfect, but overall it is still an awesome way to bring the game back into this century. Newcomers will probably love it, old time vets will likely be dissapointed on the HW1 end.
But overall, fantastic visuals and still fun regardless.

1 Like

Most of the complaints Ihear Daily are HW1 complaints .

1 Like

The rest of your post is good and valid, especially the part about new players view of the game as apposed to those who have approached this from an existing player standpoint which I fully agree with, but do we really need this kind of snarkyness. It just plain rude to the O.P or any one posting don’t you think ?

To the O.P it all depends on your criteria for failure and where you yourself find value.

If you’ve never played Homeworld in any form, or perhaps have only played HW2 then there is a lot to like and a lot less to grumble about and as things are still in flux abit the odds are the game will only get better and should be considered a great success to my mind

However if you started with Homeworld and found the “game play” the driving force in what you find enjoyable about it then you previous experience will obviously colour your view of the current remastering and your going to find issues that put your back up throughout the game.

Its the very fact there is something to judge it directly against that opens it up to such scrutiny. which has been a double edged sword for Gearbox. The volume of presales have no doubt been directly effected by the desire of people who already owed this game it buy it again. Whilst singing its praises to any one who asked if it was worth buying or not.

My personal opinion is its been a qualified success a solid (B+), hardly anyone wails on the new version of HW2, and in time the tweaks and changes that are still being worked on could still raise the level of HW1 to a solid (A)

Best answer to give is ask this question again in a couple of month when some of the dust settles down and most of the fixes are in.


It is a success.

Plain and simple.

Why? Because I don’t find anything wrong with the game that makes it a failure. Any complaints by people that do make it a failure are being unreasonable.

@knowledgeseeker, Are you an existing HW1 player ? or is this game fresh to you. I’m interested to see how much the perceived issues are caused by this divide. and if you were an existing player, how does the gameplay changes colour your current view if you don’t mind me asking.

1 Like

The games need a few fixes and some fine tuning but otherwise they have never been better than they are right now. I’ve been playing them since '99.

1 Like

I’m an original player. I like the Remaster. I’m optimistic that given enough time they’ll improve on the HW1 experience. For now? It totally works and I’m happy with that. We’ve already got one patch, and more are coming soon. That’s huge, particularly given that HW2 had exactly one patch.


I made it halfway through mission two of HW-RM, before quitting and playing HW classic. As of now, I’m resigned to having bought a working version of the original game, and it’s that I’ll be playing until the modding community can shoehorn the improved graphics onto the original and find a way to play that in multiplayer.

After listening to everything the devs had said after purchasing the IP, I really thought that someone “Got it”. Apparently they really didn’t.

I hate bitching and moaning, but it really needs to be underlined, for all of those that feel like me, but just don’t want to voice their opinions here.


Classic Homeworld 1 player here.

I have had ZERO problems with HW1R aside from a few minor mission related bugs.

I love the remaster.

So…there ya go. I prefer the Remaster over the classic.

Note: this does not invalidate the arguments some are giving about the game, but it does make clear that the complaints are not universal.


I never hold back, only with constructive feedback can a developer understand your concerns.
If others gamers don’t like your feedback " tough" it’s your game and you purchased it, not them.

Hardcore hw1 multiplayer here

It is a success, BUT needs a lot of fixes on gameplay and balance, so far I’m seeing a lot of goodwill from gearbox, so I’m pretty sure they will get there.


Well I really do hope HW is successful, sales will tell the story, if Gearbox eats it financial wise, well…

Another hardcore hw1 player here and for me the game play is completely broken, I am still praying for atleast some resemblance to the original at some point.
hw2 seems to be working as intended, and I will say I am enjoying it considerably more than when it was originally released. But ultimately I came here for hw1 only, I will not truly be happy until they either fix hw1:R or atleast give us hw1 classic to play online.


I bought this for HW1 being given love, instead I see a broken HW2 mod.



To be fair this was made abundantly clear before the pre-orders ended. There was like 6+ different new preview videos up the week before the game launched.

1 Like

Whether the game is a failure or not is really subjective beyond a few given points.

Objectively, to be “successful” the game needs to sell and recoup the costs of making it, and then some. If it doesn’t, then all of us that want to see more Homeworld lose. So far, I’m reasonably certain that HW:R has been successful according to this standard.

Now, beyond that all of us (especially those of us who played Classic Homeworld back in 1999) are going to have our own perspectives on what would make the game truly a “success.” For me, for the game to be a success it needs to be more than a retelling of the Homeworld story (which was great and was the real draw at first), but also a replication of Homeworld’s gameplay, which I always thought was much superior to HW 2’s gameplay.

From this perspective, so far HW:Remastered is a failure. The absence of meaningful changes in AI behavior depending on selected tactics (in part due to the decision to go with a percentage rather than a projectile mechanic for weapons) and the absence of formations represent, in my opinion, dramatic shifts in the feel of the way the game is played, and not for the better. (I don’t notice the absence of fuel too much except when I’m using cloaked fighters, which are disasters on a bunch of levels right now, or if I’m using captured swarmers, which I haven’t really done much as yet.)

Overall, though, it’s AI ship behavior that bothers me the most. When playing a campaign I find I can’t issue guard orders because ships don’t know how to guard without being excessively aggressive, and so I find I’m constantly telling ships to move back behind my line of capital ships because they’re running after enemies that will eat them for lunch. Then, in combat itself, ships don’t act in ways that actively utilize their abilities. Fighters and Corvettes adopt behaviors that actively diminish their capabilities.

For me, this makes the game a failure. It frustrates me beyond all measure because I try to take care of the people on those ships, I don’t like throwing away pilots or crews in huge bouts of attrition which means I want very precise control over what my ships are doing. Homeworld gave me fine control over my ships. Homeworld 2 took a lot of that fine control away. Homeworld:Remastered decided to take that fine control away as well, and there are times it drives me absolutely crazy. I much prefer Classic for this reason.


Now, for me there are a bunch of Quality of Life issues as well: balance (explained more below), specific ship animations (no spinning research vessel or Multi-Beam Frigate or probe), the frustration of properly using Support Frigates, and others, but those I see as problems with solutions and they don’t affect me too much. These don’t make the game a “failure”, but they do represent flaws that need to be corrected by Gearbox.

The game has balance problems (IMO) in the sense that ships that were vital to my historical gameplay: Ion Array Frigates, Multi-Beam Frigates, and Missile Corvettes, both when they’re attacking me and when I’m using captured ones, have been inexplicably nerfed into the ground. Plus Homeworld:Remastered now has the classic HW2 problem of frigates being way too fragile and battlecruisers being excessively dominant.

But while these things I really want to be better, they don’t mean that I subjectively considered Homeworld 1 Remastered a failure. They’re just flaws which, frankly, should be easy enough to fix with time and caring, and I have a full expectation that they will be.

The problems I addressed above, though, I’m not so sure because they represented flaws in Homeworld 2 which have now been exported to Homeworld. I don’t know that Gearbox can fix them. So it may be that I’m stuck with a game that I perpetually consider a (subjective) failure, because it lost the gameplay elements of the game I grew up loving to death that for me were the most vital. But at least I get to play Homeworld Classic again whenever I get too frustrated.

(On that note, please release Cataclysm for digital download?)


I first played Homeworld when I was 14, which was about 15 years ago. I’ve been playing the game for most of that time and tried hard to find players through Tunngle in the last couple of years. So no, the game is definitely not fresh to me.

You asked how the gameplay changes color my current view. I look at things from a realistic standpoint, not from a purist point of view. The undertaking to port everything from Homeworld 1 and Homeworld 2 into a single game is an exceptional amount of work. Considering how well it has come together, yes, it is a total success. Is it exactly what we remember? No. Do I think it should continue to be improved to be more like our original experiences? Yes; And I say that for only one reason - Gearbox has stated that they intend the game to be as close to the originals as they can get it. I do not think that the current state of the game is any reason to consider the game a failure, because so far it is awesome. I admit the Battlecruiser predicament is [unpleasant reference] incarnate. I also think the broken formations is [unpleasant reference unpleasant reference’s] kid brother. But has Remastered FAILED?

Hell no.

Stop to appreciate what is already here. Gratitude is the secret to success, happiness, and to spiritual awakening. Be grateful.

I applied some spiritual awakening to your post. Someone who can write like you can should be able to do better than ‘■■■■■■■■’.

Not a cool term, that. Please don’t use it here.

1 Like