Metascore
70 out of 100

Mixed or average reviews - based on 5 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 5
  2. Negative: 0 out of 5
  1. 84
    This is a shooter that's more intelligent than most and that requires more teamwork and coordination, but that makes the rewards of success that much more enjoyable.
  2. America's Army 3 can be really good if you have a good connection to the server and if you can find other motivated and cooperative players. But it can take hours until you are able to find that combination. The US army should fix the problems if they want to make a good impression.
  3. A decent online FPS - provided you can find a player slot, that is. [Issue#23, p.57]
  4. Lovers of real-world ballistics, cautious tactics and persistent stats will be eager recruits. [Nov 2009, p.80]
  5. A realistic, but relatively bland title that's part recruitment poster and part tame FPS. [Sept 2009, p.62]
User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 347 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 52 out of 85
  2. Negative: 22 out of 85
  1. JustinW
    10
    As a game designer I know that I have higher standards than that which is cost effective. I rated the game's gameplay, realism, physics, graphics, sound, interface and player-base. I scored each area compared to other popular fps titles. Overall it came in first-place. But when I broke it down certain aspects could definitely be worked on. The scores I see by critics and by other users appear to extremely biased. Their scoring only shows lack of knowledge of the game and how to play it. The training and a few other features are designed to give people a feel for what to expect from joining the army. It also is a great way to intro the controls and weapon systems. If you pay attention to the training you can actually learn something. The new AA3 training system scored 1st place compared to other games with similar systems. Now for many people coming into America's Army they are used to the run faster with a knife tactic. Yes, you would run faster armed with a knife than an assault rifle. But, the fact remains that you got all the rest of your gear equiped at the same time. Also, just because you technically could run faster with all that gear on doesn't make it strategic to. The running system is designed to match that of a trained soldier. They use realistic distant that an average soldier could repeat throughout a battle without becoming unctrollably winded. The tactics required for maximum affectiveness in the game are applicable for real-world combat situations. Due to this, AA3 ranked 1st in realism. Gameplay typically relates to how the game is played out. With AA I focused alot on its 1 life per round, team tactics, scenarios, and communication system. The run and gun tactic will quickly annoy the victims and afflictor. 1 life makes staying alive more precious. Depending on the skill of the server and your personal ability to fight as a soldier you can be spectating up to 90% of the time. For people like this, the game is quickly discarded. To survive you must understand proper team tactics. The game is designed to create as many tactical scenerios as possible. The gameplay allows a squad to pin and create confusion among OpFor. This allows for teams to flank the position. The game provides a battle planner that the squad leader is able to coordinate attacks among the fire teams. Although AA3 has quite a realistic gameplay it a few titles had better system for increasing playing time for everyone. It came in 3rd with related FPS styled games. The graphics are great. It is hard to determine opfor from friendlies. It takes a trained eye to identify threats and neutralize them. Other games you can lower the graphics and easily identify and target enemies. The graphics received 1st place. Through UT3 and few other titles receive honorable mention due to the artistic details visible in the gameplay. While AA2 had become overwhelmed with hackers and everyone got mad at everyone. AA3 has a revolutionary system to forgive unattentional Friendly Fire. This system creates alot more peace among players and people are most readily available to provide medical aid to fallen comrades. Going from Army of One to Army strong takes a change of mindset. But, once you learn the concept the game is alot more rewarding and enjoyable. I hope everyone learns how to play the game. and I hope to see you all on the battlefield. Hooah! Full Review »
  2. When a friend of mine suggested AA3 to me, I was like "Meh, I'll try it, just to see what it was like." At first, I didn't understand the game much, and it was very complex. However, with such complexity and realism, it gives you a wide range of control that lets you adapt well. It reminds me of counterstrike, but smaller, slower, and free. The only issue I have with this is on a particularly uncrowded server you can be sitting out for a VERY long time, waiting to spawn. There are also only 2 or 3 guns in the game, but last I heard the developers were planning on adding more (Shotguns, smg's, etc) The game has very good graphics, and is an incredible deal. You usual don't expect to see quality in a FTP game. Allover great game, but very confusing and slow-paced. Full Review »
  3. Lots of teamwork (even on public servers), decent graphics, intelligent level design (steep learning curve - immersive environments), weapons feel realistic (you're forced to use iron sights and control your breathing if wish to hit anything that isn't close range), realistic damage/medic system... I love this game; I've been playing AA since 2004. Sure, it took a little getting use to (I miss SF Hospital, Urban Assault, bunny hopping, the ragdoll effects, the perceived straight-forwardness of AA2), but once you get use to the new feel of AA3, you'll be rewarded with an amazing experience. Full Review »