User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 219 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 38 out of 219

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Apr 13, 2014
    Really fun and complete game.
    I have to say I didn't play the previous Red Faction games, so I don't know how they are, but this game its very nice for me.
    I really recommend it!
  2. Apr 6, 2014
    RF:A is a generic corridor shooter with story and gameplay elements shallowly borrowed from classics like Doom and Dead Space, and heavily dumbed-down and easied-up for console gamers. On PC, the game is buggy and crashes constantly with no fixes in sight. Save points are frustratingly placed based on the goofy narrative, rather than at user-determined spots that would allow the skipping of a lot of garbage. The graphics are modern but unspectacular, yet require a ton of resources to render. The default FOV is stupidly narrow - for the sake of consolers, obviously - and isn't easily modifiable. This is yet another console port where PC gamers are given short shrift despite simple solutions being relatively easy to utilize.
    It's a shame. I enjoyed Guerrilla, but this is nothing like that - and that would have been OK if they had been even a little bit clever and creative with the storyline or gameplay, but they weren't. Devs should have done playtesting with fans of their previous title and listened to what they said instead of churning out a characterless and generic ball of brown corporate game-industry ooze.
  3. Dec 4, 2013
    Okay to start back to linear is regress and story line sucks so that isn't an excuse. The graphics are meh. So again no excuse. This game is rinse and repeat over and over. Wish I could get a refund for this game. Even buying this in a bundle with all red faction games for 30$... I already own RF:G but steam sucks and wont take the retail license, so had to buy it again to get it to install correctly on new rig. Definitely nto worth the money until under 5$. Man they were making good game play experience progress all the way p to RF:G. Then this garbage. Linear is for junk systems. In short they are saying console is junk and fools that buy them piss away their money on junk. It should not have been ported to PC it isn't worthy of being a PC title. Maybe a cell phone title or eve psp original but not PC. Expand
  4. Nov 27, 2013
    A game that almost perfectly sums up 'meh'. It does nothing really badly but neither does it do anything particularly well.

    My biggest gripe is that the terrain destruction mechanic, unlike the original Red Faction is a gimmick rather than a gameplay changer.

    Don't avoid this game but don't buy it unless you're bored or it's on sale.
  5. Nov 26, 2013
    Red faction Armageddon is the first red faction game I've played. I was drawn into the game because a) it’s on mars and b) it showed destructible environments. The whole concept sounded very cool, interesting and fun, which is why I picked Armageddon and Guerilla up on a steam sale.

    The story is classic sci-fi fare and it doesn't really stand out. The alien monsters aren't scary like
    in deadspace and the other parts of the story are relatively forgettable. This isn't a bad thing, not every game has to have an incredible story or a really well fleshed out world, so long as it is fun. Unfortunately the game falls a little short here too. The enemies are incredibly easy and I found myself using the maul/gravity gun over and over for almost every enemy encounter. It's not a bad game mind you but it is not a game I would have wanted to spend 60 on. 10 to 15 on sale is a fair price for how much game play value you will get out of Red Faction Armageddon. Expand
  6. Nov 22, 2013
    Not a bad FPS/Third Person shooter that with out the Red Faction tag may be considered a little better than it is. The problem is that it does nothing to get you overly interested. It has a solid story with slightly repetitive combat and same old destructible physics while being a bit linear.

    Like the games apart from the first struggles with being a port and not sure exactly what the
    series wants to be Expand
  7. Nov 19, 2013
    Single Player/Multi Player (0/2) (If the single player is better than the multiplayer, review this section as if it had no multplayer) (If the multiplayer is better than the multiplayer, review this section as if it had no single player) Gameplay (2/2) Visuals/Story (1/2) (If the visuals are better than the story, review this section as if it had no story) (If the story is better than the visuals, review this section as if the visuals didn’t matter)

    Accessibility/Longevity (0/2)

    (Review this section only on Accessibility if the game has no longevity) (Review this section only on longevity if the game isn’t accessible)

    Pricing (1/2)

    Wildcard (0)

    This is a guideline for how to properly review games. Many reviewers like to get a “feel” for a game, and arbitrarily give a game a score that they believe it deserves. This results in wildly different scores between different reviewers, and vastly different scores between similar games. This guideline addresses these problems and scores games fairly and consistently. This guideline also gives scores that are usually similar to the metacritic score.

    The review score is based out of 10 points. There are no “half” or 0.5 increments. It is impossible to have a score above 10 or below 0. The review score will change as the game gets new dlc, drops in price, or if more secrets are found through the game increasing its appeal.

    The scoring is split into 6 sections. The first five sections can add a possible 2 points to the final score. The first 5 sections are Single Player/Multi Player, Gameplay, Visuals/Story, Accessibility/Longevity, and Pricing.

    Notice that 3 of these sections have two parts. These particular sections will be scored based on the stronger part of the game of the two. For example, if a game has a lousy single player campaign, but an excellent multiplayer component, that section will be based solely on the multiplayer as if the single player did not exist. This allows games to be based on their own merits, as many unnecessary features are shoehorned into video games by publishers to reach a “feature quota”. Games that excel in both areas of a section don’t receive should be noted in the written review, but cannot increase the score past 2 in that section. However, it can be taken into account in the final section

    The final section can add 1, add 0, or subtract 1 to the final score. This final section is the “wildcard” section. This section is for how the reviewer “feels” about the game, but limits this only to this section, rather than the entire 10 point review. This section can include any positive or negative point that was not covered in the previous 5 sections.
  8. Oct 28, 2013
    Another bad Red Faction game. If Guerrilla was bland and disappointing, Armageddon certainly delivers on the downward trend. Were the landscapes repetitive in Guerrilla? Get rid of free-roaming altogether. Was the AI bad in Guerrilla? Lets make enemies that can't hit you. Was Guerrilla too easy? Let's make you invincible. Was Guerrilla's physics engine bad? Let's scale it down so that damage is even worse and less realistic.

    Admittedly, some of the touted features sound cool; exploring an underground world, piloting huge machines. But who has the patience to wade through all of those enemies who can't hit anything, or to listen to the horrible storyline progression?

    The Ruin mode is sad, disappointing small, and restrictive, but at least they give you a 'freeplay' mode this time.

    Infestation has you running around, hunting monsters which can't kill you unless they hit you with an explosive.

    The best thing about the game I've seen so far is the Magnet gun. Everything else seems like a step down from a step down from a step down. If only they'd put some effort into a RF game instead of blowing all the budget on advertising.
  9. Oct 11, 2013
    Yes this game is excellent, then why do I give it such a bad score? It is because of the massive disappointment that it brought. Red Faction: Guerrilla brought new meaning to a dead series, and this sequel unfortunately completely killed the series.
  10. Sep 30, 2013
    Whoever played Red FAction: Guerrilla then decided that, HEY you know all those cool destructo coq around physics combined with a big open landscape with a bunch of buildings that are just begging to be pounded till they cant stand up that make this game so fun to just dick around and enjoy? Well lets just still players in a tunnel with like one or two buildings and turn the game into a basic 3rd person shooter!!! I really and truely enjoyed Guerrilla, but Amegeddon takes away all the good parts of that and jsut leaves you with samey shooter wallpaste, boring and consistent. Expand
  11. Aug 18, 2013
    Better than I expected it to be. The destructible environment is used pretty well and the game is overall quite fun. But it's not as good as Guerrilla.

    Also, if playing on PC you will need the FOV fix. 45 degrees is just not enough.
  12. Aug 11, 2013
    The first thing you will notice is that this game has many things in common with Deadspace. Except the terror element. Red Faction puts more and more enemies instead.
    The game has a good UI, good weapons management system, good skills system, highly satisfiying weapons, new game plus, multiplayer mode, quite a few different enemies, but the most important thing is: Destructible scenarios.
    I've had lots of fun destroying everything and dropping bridges on the heads of the enemies. The magnetic gun may not be the best weapon (the firing ratio leaves it a bit behind of more powerful weapons), but tearing towers apart is certainly a refreshing experience.

    The story is standard, but the characters are better than in many other games. Overall, a game very well worth the money.
  13. Jul 28, 2013
    Bad game, avoid this!
    The worst game i had bought at steam. The playing this game i dont have any feeling.
    Is like a game without reason, pointless... I dont know.
  14. Jun 26, 2013
    If you go into this expecting Red Faction Guerrilla 2, you will be disappointed. This is much more of a sequel to Red Faction 1 and 2 than it is to Guerrilla. Even some of the aliens resemble those from Red Faction 1, and many allusions to events in its story are made.

    First, the game is not open world, as about 100% of the internet knows already. This is a bad thing, but not nearly as
    bad as I thought it would be. The saving grace of becoming linear is that it allows the player to use destruction as a dynamic puzzle. In Guerrilla, it didn't matter whether or not you blew up any specific building, because if it broke you could just walk around it. In Armageddon, you're funneled directly through collapsing buildings. This means you have a real reason to create chaos to crush enemy swarms, and you have a method to rebuild when necessary.

    One feature I loved in Guerrilla were the randomized real-time objectives. Courier intercepts were my favorite. Unfortunately, nothing like this exists in Armageddon.

    Physics have improved in Armageddon. Though each structure falls in roughly the style as in Guerrilla, each chunk of material is now heavier and falls more quickly, and causes more damage to surrounding structures. This means that collapsing a building can create a chain reaction and topple nearby structures, or kill many enemies at once. There is now less focus on triggering a full building to collapse based on a predetermined amount of structural damage, and more of a focus on pulling down each portion of building individually.

    Graphics have improved in Armageddon. Some players have trouble with DX10 and DX11, just like in Guerrilla. That makes sense, given that they use an upgraded version of the same engine. However, you do NOT need to activate DX9 to fix the problem. There are a few methods of fixing the issue that do not require you to disable graphical effects, especially on Nvidia cards. On a GTX 660, I run Armageddon at ultra settings at 55-60 fps. DX10 and DX11 work fine for me in Armageddon, probably because I fixed my system for it during Red Faction Guerrilla. Textures are markedly higher resolution in Armageddon, with higher quality specular maps and less compressed diffuse maps. Ambient occlusion and shadow filtering has increased in quality, decreasing the grainy appearance of Guerrilla. There's a lot more clutter in the environments, and the character models and weapons are much more realistic. Running DX11 does not change graphics much. The only notable improvements are a slight increase in ambient occlusion quality and an increase in texture clarity. Global lighting also changes format slightly from DX9 to DX11, but that's more a matter of taste than realism.

    The story is superior in Armageddon. Characters tend to have more personality, and events have a more personal impact. I liked the rebellion setting in Guerrilla more, but the story is better executed in Armageddon and ultimately is more fun to experience. It's worth noting that I don't like competitive multiplayer, so I don't miss it from Guerilla.

    The story in Armageddon is short-ish. It's longer than Call of Duty, for example, but shorter than Dark Souls. I didn't time myself all the time on my first playthrough of Armageddon, but I would estimate about 11 hours of gameplay, assuming you don't rush and get it done as fast as possible. What really saves it, however, is the addition of a New Game It makes up for the lack of a free play mode, imo.

    On to more positive features, you can now repair anything at any time. This is a feature that had to be modded into Guerrilla, and I'm glad it's already in Armageddon.

    The magnet gun in Armageddon struck me as a gimmick. I didn't want to use it while watching Youtube videos, and I was certain I'd just ignore it. After playing the game myself, I can say that the magnet gun is much more fun to use than it is to watch. It's a very intuitive method of pulling down buildings and wiping out swarms of bugs, and it's now a fixture in my inventory.

    Another positive change in Armageddon is the style. It's NOT the same style as Guerrilla. Guerrilla had a pure industrial style, befitting a society focused on mining and construction. Armageddon has a few more scifi influences, but it's tempered by a very cool dystopian/industrial style more similar to Killzone 2 than Guerrilla. The aliens themselves are characterized by fleshy growths on caves and buildings, and red crystals.

    Over all, Armageddon is not a pure sequel to Guerrilla. It's like a sequel to the original Red Faction. Graphics are good, the gameplay is great, and the story is okay. As usual for Volition games, dynamic physics are the main draw, and they're better than ever, not just on destructible buildings, but also on dynamic cloth, NPCs, and particles. I like Armageddon more than Guerrilla, even though the return to linear levels is a mixed blessing.
  15. May 19, 2013
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is a game i found to be a bit disappointing for a number of reasons for one thing there is no more free roam just linear levels secondly the story of the game wasn't even noticeable and thirdly it had a boring start but don't be alarmed those are really the negatives to this game.
    the positives the geo mod engine is almost breathtaking destruction looks realistic and also sounds like a real building is coming down the weapons in this game pack a punch and look in a word..... awesome and there is also a weapon which is really a horse that farts seriously im not kidding.
    the new alien enemies look very menacing overall this is a game what really relies on your choice to get the game.
  16. May 15, 2013
    I played Guerilla for about 5 hours before I said "This feels too repetitive". I played through all of Armageddon and said "While I wish I could've destroyed more buildings, I wouldn't have changed much". The weapons are fantastic and varied, so feel free to mix them up during different missions. The storyline is okay, but there is definitely some solid writing at various points in the game. I enjoyed the more linear style because it kept me focused on one thing at a time, instead of getting distracted by sidequests, but that's just a personal preference. Expand
  17. Apr 30, 2013
    I guess if this game had nothing to live up to, no Red Faction: Guerrilla having paved the way with ecstatic anticipation, it would have earned double the score. You see, RFA is, indisputably, a pretty damned good looking game with a bucketload of potential which, I'm truly sorry to say, remains nothing more than that. The sad part is that the developers clearly went out of their way to improve everything that made the previous game so entertaining and did a great job at that, but somewhere along the lines, someone made the terrible suggestion that the entire game be held pretty much strictly linear, oh, and while were at it, play it out in the murky depths of some bland, martian caverns. Every checkpoint you reach, you will become more and more frustrated with the complete lack of options to jerk around with your magnificent tools of destruction in an environment that physically feels wonderfully realistic, until you realize that it's not going to change. You're never going to have the fun you want in a great, open world or, for that matter, playing against your friends in competitive MP like in Guerrilla, because both those elements have, apparently, been excised right out of the franchise. The whole game feels like one big dud. Expand
  18. Apr 17, 2013
    What a confusing mess. The story is confusing, the gameplay is linear. It was hard to pull myself to play this game and people should not do that. Don't ever force yourself to play a game. If the game is good from the get go it would have been better, but it flopped, right at the beginning.
  19. Apr 1, 2013
    People who gave this game a negative review seem to be upset because it is not like the other Red Faction games. Which, I will admit, it's not. It's not an open world, but to me it's more like Dead Space style meets Mass Effect game play, and I love both of those games. In Guerilla, I would find myself randomly running around this open space fighting the same guys and mining the same stuff over and over. Although many people like that, I personally appreciate the flow of the story line in this game. I think it's a great story. The upgrade system, controls, ui, art style, and graphics are all amazing. Probably my favorite Red Faction game. I liked Guerilla a lot, don't get me wrong, but the PC port was just yeah. This game is good, if it's on sale buy it. Expand
  20. Jan 29, 2013
    Ill start with the good, then the bad. I had played red faction guerrilla before this and knew I liked the type of game. Pros: Graphics, Destruction, varied weapons, decent story, coop multiplayer, nano tech abilities!. First off the weapons are pretty awesome, varied in just about every way imaginable and in fact the only thing I can think of to make them better would be customizations like scopes etc but minor detail. (not there are some upbraids you can get that pertain to weapons such as larger clip, less recoil etc). The graphics are awesome even though it is a pretty demanding game on your computer. My computer can run all games out to date but I had to edit the graphics on this game since there is often so much going on in a field and the whole destructible environments run heavy I think. Thats another awesome part is all buildings are destructible and thanks to your nano tech re-build able too. Used a rocket to destroy a bridge with a big enemy on it sending him to the lava? No problem you can rebuild it! The story is nothing ground breaking but there are certainly many worse ones out there so no complaints there but also not kudos. The nano tech you carry with you is pretty cool, my favorite was the shield it allows you to generate ( and can upgraid things like its duration and eventually you can make it repel projectiles back at the attacker in addition to attackers coming inside the shell being eaten away by nanites)
    Cons: Short (my play through on normal was 9 hours), no competitive multiplayer, some fights are slightly tedious but not bad. The biggest complaint I see from negative reviewers is the lack of competitive multiplayer. I never played a siege mode on red faction I just played it for the story so this diddnt bother me at all but quite a few people seem to be ranting and raving over it. The way I see it is if you go into it for the single player experience than you wont be disappointed! Now it DOES have a coop multiplayer ( very similar to mass effect 3's or dawn of war's the last stand where a squad of players tries to survive an onslaught of enemy waves which seems very popular these days). The last thing to mention is that the campaign is short, but it is fun while you play it and it does have a New game plus mode that has some special (one silly) unlock and "cheats" available to spice up the gameplay a second time around. Overall 9/10 definitely worth playing through, especially if you get it on steam for a bargain!
  21. Jan 4, 2013
    Not bad, not great. I haven't played any of the previous Red Faction games, so I do not know much of the background and I'm considering Armageddon in itself and not as a part of a franchise. There isn't a particular area in which it excels, but it's an enjoyable game. It has its fair share of problems, it's quite short (8 hours on normal), it has a dull plot and there really isn't anything particularly innovative to be found, but the fights are sufficiently entertaining, despite getting a bit repetitive towards the end, it's fast paced, the vehicles are a nice diversion to break the monotony and the magnet gun it's a really nice weapon, that will give you a smile here and there, although it could have been used better.
    In the end, it's a fun game. I surely wouldn't buy it at full price, but it's definitely worth a try if you can get it for cheap.
  22. Jan 3, 2013
    Short (10 hours tops) campaign, no multiplayer (co-op only; this is a huge minus because all RF games have had MP), a ridiculously bad storyline, and has very little to do with previous RF games. I had to force myself to beat this because I wanted to see just how much worse the game could get. I loved the previous RF games and this is a real disgrace to the series. Yes, there are unique weapons and the destruction is still fantastic, but the whole game is a funneled corridor third person shooter and couldn't be blander if it tried. Obvious console port that is a disgrace to the series and huge step down from Guerrilla. Expand
  23. Jan 1, 2013
    There are not many games with that much KPM (kaboom per minute ;) ). It's really fun to play this game. Things blow up left and right. Masses of nasty alien bugs await to be terminated. The graphics in the game are simply superb (I'm playing on maxed out settings). This game is also the best evidence you don't need Nvidia PhysX for a good (physically correct) destructive environment.
  24. Dec 24, 2012
    honestly this is my first time i playe this game maybe first series i thought this game are really good i was play this game about 3 hour,
    i find a great thing on this game,,destructable building and object,,many kind of weapon (maybe)
    and a few beast monster.

    in this game we able use a robot ( dont know it's call find it yourself ) who help us trough mission,,nice navigation
    system,,and maybe a good graphic too ( i gave scorre 7 for graphic )

    so my conculsion this game its worthed to be play.
  25. Dec 22, 2012
    It's alright. Short, slightly repetitive and quite easy to beat. The destruction is nice but there usually isn't much point in it and sometimes it becomes more frustrating than cool. Gets kinda dull by the end of the game. Multiplayer is quite bland and really not worth any time. Overall it's pretty average.
  26. Dec 21, 2012
    This game could be a lot more, but instead it's pretty linear as compared to Red Faction: Guerrilla, an open world-sandbox game where you blow everything up, I mean, overthrow a tyrannical government.

    While there are many destructible entities in Armageddon, it's not as significant as it was in the previous game, and while it did distract from the main plot, god, it was just so fun!
  27. Dec 20, 2012
    Armaggedon is by no means bad or unworthy of a player's time. However, your time could be better spent on a number of other games. It's a generic FPS; well executed but completely bland. Where the previous title laid forth some revolutionary physics, this one replaces sand box destruction with linear cave levels. The overall polish, as well as the shooting and alien mechanics are its strong points. The story is horrible like any red faction game to date but there were many high quality cut-scenes. Like many players I am divided about this game, which isn't bad enough to warrant bashing but isn't good enough to warrant praise. Expand
  28. Oct 17, 2012
    This game is the very definition of a 6. It is functionally sound, it has a story to drive you to each set piece that inspires no excitement whatsoever, while not offending anyone either. It is reasonable enjoyable to play, but after it ends, I can't remember anything about the events or plot. So not a rousing was 5 bucks on steam, I bought it and got my money's worth. That's all that can be said, really. KCCO. Expand
  29. Sep 25, 2012
    I haven't played Red Faction since the original. This is an "ok" third person shooter. The destructible environment doesn't lend well to frames per second. But at 2560x1440 with everything maxed and 2xAA The game looks pretty good. Only buy this game if it is on sale for $10 don't pay any more.
  30. Jul 24, 2012
    A fine game, i enjoyed it quite a bit, its quite different from the other 3 but still really fun. The story isnt complicated which is nice for a change, not all games need some kinda conspiracy involved to make it interesting, the guns are cool especially the magnet gun, ive never seen that kind of thing implemented in any game ever (if there is, ive never played it), really neat idea, basically you can shoot 1 "anchor" on to anything and the next shot pulls anything the first shot hit across to it, so u can shoot it at an enemy across the room, then tag another far away and slam them into eachother killing them both usually, really cool. Or u can use the anchor to drag debris or building pieces to kill enemys, or use it just to trash things for salvage (best part is theres no ammo involved in it). Another aspect is the nano thing u can use to rebuilding anything thats destroyed which you have to use alot of the time since sometimes you destroy the only ramp to go to where u need to go. The voice acting is well done, gameplay is good, upgrades are based on salvage to buy with, and give a wide variety to choose from. The only bad thing i can find about this game is that its to short and easy (on normal atleast) but its not way to short like some games, its definately not a 40 hour rpg or anything but should get about 10 hours of gameplay in atleast. Other than that great game in the series. Expand
  31. May 28, 2012
    I find myself wanting to love this game, the gunplay is fun and the ability to destroy doesn't feel over the top like it did in the last red faction, mainly because of the enclosed cave environments. Unfortunately these same environments feel incredibly small and restrictive - you may say, 'of course, they're caves!' But this isnt the case. A decent map maker could have created intricate cave systems that allow the player the ability to explore the game and also engage in mission gunplay that feels tight and intensive. There is no ability to explore, instead, you the player are moved from one mission to the next with almost no chance to investigate the very limited environment you have just waded through ... imagine a large corridor that twists and turns to give the impression of freedom when there actually isn't any. For example, try to leave the mission area and return back up said corridor and you will be informed of the amount of time (seconds) you have to return to the mission area before penalty occurs.

    Really, Red Faction: Armageddon feels like it was written by the smart guy we all know who has brilliant ideas but can't apply themselves to fully realise any of them. Instead they take one good concept and layer it with averageness. The campaign itself is short although if you work it will probably take you a week of short, nightly gameplay to finish.

    I sadly recommend that you the player rent or buy this "could have been great" game only from bargain bins and not at full or even half the rrp price.
  32. Feb 16, 2012
    A large part of what made red faction gorilla so fun was being able to roam around a world and take down whatever you saw. This game makes improvements to the destruction, and graphics engine and then makes absolutely zero use of those improvements. It get's one of the major draws of the original, and then makes it a corridor shooter. The reason gorilla did not have ground destruction was so that it could support the open world objects structures being destroyed instead. This removes a lot of the structures and do not bring back the ability to tunnel. They made this mistake with red faction 2, and they have done it again here. The developers don't seem to understand the appeal of their own games in this case. Red faction gorilla could get away with being generic - however since you are limited to corridors in this one, a good story could at least make it tolerable. However it's story is even more generic and dull the gorillas. Leaving nothing of value in the entire package, besides of optimization and framerate improvements. Which mean zero when the game itself is garbage. Expand
  33. Dec 30, 2011
    The Red Faction series went back to its roots after the amazing Red Faction: Guerilla, and unfortunately that's a bad thing. As a 3rd person shooter Armageddon is fun and pretty enough, but it's short and the campaign is ultimately forgettable. You are no longer fighting tyranny and corruption but an annoying alien species that lives underground and spends most of its time jumping from rock to rock. The lack of competitive multiplayer is disappointing, and the 'destruction mode' and 'survival mode' do little to redeem it. Get this only if you are a Red Faction fanatic, or absolutely must play every shooting game there is... and make sure you get it on sale! If I had paid full price my score would be lower. Expand
  34. Dec 1, 2011
    What a great campaign--a solid 10+ hours! It's a cross between Aliens and Rambo. Darius Miles is one bad ass hombre kicking ass and taking names. I thought the move away from the sandbox play style of Guerrilla might make Armageddon less appealing, but Volition did a superb job keeping the destruction physics center stage. The story takes a detour from its traditional rebellious themed roots and focuses on bug extermination--they actually make it work pretty well. All of the great weapons from Guerrilla carry over plus they added a new repair feature and some special nano powers which are very cool. Include some cool vehicles with bad ass weapons, decent cut scenes, and it's a wrap. I thought the campaign was marketed as coop, but it is not. Instead coop is possible in an extremely entertaining survival mode called Infestation with up to 4 players. Expand
  35. Nov 9, 2011
    Best in the the magnet are very play will keep you on your toes! great destruction models.
    to bad..last in the series..get yours today..
  36. Oct 30, 2011
    A wonderful game. It took me about 12 hrs to beat the fun, action-packed singleplayer campaign. It may get a bit repetitive at some points, but every time the repetitiveness is mixed with a lot of fun, new, interesting twists and turns. You get to pilot a few vehicles, what is really exciting. You get to shoot a variety of awesome weapons, making every bit of gameplay extremely fun! The physics in this game are a blast, and all of the weapons will fit every gamers play style. The new introduced melee / nano forge mechanics are a great addition as well. The player upgrades are well balanced, making the playthrough even more fun. The only nuisance was with the ending. Don't take it wrong, the story is great, but the end result was a bit not what I was expecting. Oh well.. another Red Faction game upcoming? hehe
    After you finish the SP campaign, there is a 1 to 4 player survival mode, with enemies getting stronger every round. Not a new thing, but a welcome addition of course :)
    I don't know whether this game is worth a playthrough. I just uninstalled it, and it feels quite sad, I think I'm going to play this game on New Game Plus sometime :)
    Buy this game on the PC, it's great!
  37. Oct 27, 2011
    I was very surprised by how good this game is. Great graphics and a fluid well pace plotline. Nice visual style all come together. Elements of it do feel quite a bit like a console game but the graphics lift it above the usual run of the mill linear tunnel shooter format. Most importantly it is good fun!. I would have paid 50 Euro for it. (I got it in a sale on steam) but for the money I paid I am very happy indeed. 30 Euro with a DLC pack. To be completely fair this linear gameplay style where the main protagonist takes up screen space all the time is usually something I avoid but for a casual blast through over a weekend this is the cream of the casual gaming crap. Its like a console game, only much better and worth buying for you PC. Expand
  38. Oct 18, 2011
    This game is a perfect example of taking a creative, interesting, fun concept, and making it as boring and tedious as possible. If you are a fan, when you think of Red Faction, then first thing that should come to mind is the fantastic destruction physics the series is known for. It's hard not to be impressed the first time you see a towering structure come toppling down in a brilliant display wreckage, knowing that it was all because of your intervention, and not some silly orchestrated event triggered by being at the right place at the right time. Despite the criticism that I'm about to lay down, I will say that Armageddon does at least a few things very right. First, the weapons are a huge improvement over those found in Guerrilla, and the repair gun is now an integral tool in your arsenal instead of just a random pickup. By far my favorite toy of the bunch was the magnet gun. Shoot one magnet here, then attach the second somewhere else, then watch the carnage that ensues. This game reaches a level of epicness that few others can hope to achieve when you send a giant intimidating monster flying through wall after wall, letting the debris crush it into oblivion. That's what I call empowerment. However, that is where the fun stops. I'm not going to waste the time and energy it would take to list everything that I did not like about this game, so I'll just stick to the basics. Basically, all the fun bits of this game are far and few in between, and that's because 80% of the game is spent traversing caves shooting little hopping alien monsters. Nothing is more annoying than playing a game that uses obvious padding techniques. For example, all the aliens in this game, aside from the hulking large ones that are coincidentally bullet sponges, jump, jump, then jump, and for good measure, jump more. They are constantly moving out of your field of view to avoid your fire, while also annoyingly shooting you in the back with guns of their own. The damage done to the player by their shots is negligible (normal difficulty), which makes fighting the creatures more of a chore than anything else. Just as soon as you get good enough to clear areas of these vermin quickly though, out pops white colored reskinned versions that can not only go invisible, but also instantly teleport as soon as half of their health is down to ensure that you don't kill them too fast, or you might realize the game is incredibly short. Other lazy game design tactics are, but not limited to, spawning more enemies just as soon as you think you're done, spawning enemies directly behind you (not kidding), forcing you to kill everything in the area before you can move on, assigning arbitrary destruction targets, and also limiting how far you can sprint to just a few steps. I could forgive all of that if the game just had more of the things that I liked, but there are too many long stretches in the campaign where nothing interesting is happening. It also doesn't help that the story is so completely vapid and devoid of true character. Quickly, what is the main character's name? I have no idea, do you? What is the "love interest's" name? Again, I have no idea, and probably neither do you. Unfortunately everything is presented in such a background noise kind of way that I really did not care what happened. If I hadn't spent money on the game I wouldn't have finished it. Expand
  39. Oct 16, 2011
    Just finished campaign, loved it! Very thrilling ride, great story, great weapons and gameplay. I wish it was a bit longer, and it's too bad it's the last Red Faction game, but at least they went out with a bang.
  40. Oct 16, 2011
    Red Faction: Armageddon does exactly what it says on the box. It's fun! Just like its predecessor, Red Faction: Guerrilla, we're given a very destructible world. Even if this one is totally linear compared to the last installment, it's still every bit as fun. The real reason this game hits the spot for me is because the physics and world construction and reconstruction works so well. The magnet gun is gimmicky, gets a bit old later on in the game, but it's certainly useful for mayhem and destruction. Decent story, fun weapons, good animations and graphics, incredible physics, it's certainly above the average. Red Faction: Armageddon gets a 7/10 for me, it's nothing spectacular, but it wasn't claiming that it was in the first place. If it weren't for the physics and amazing destruction, this would be just another run of the mill 3rd person shooter. Good thing it isn't! Expand
  41. Sep 15, 2011
    Probably a step back considering its predecessor was a huge open-world action game but RFA still contains those great explosions, mayhem and destruction plus the addition of the magnet gun add a lot of fun to it.
  42. Sep 12, 2011
    I bought this not expecting a whole lot, but since i played the very first red faction way back when i figured i'd try this one on for size. And am i glad i did. After about 10 minutes of struggling trough the mandatory tutorial i really got caught up in the storyline and it held my attention to the very last second. the graphics are beautifull and the combat is brutal. was definatly worth every penny. Expand
  43. Sep 10, 2011
    I was a bit turned off by it's luke warm reception and its deviation from the original open world premise and held off getting this. I Have now just finished it and it was an absolutely excellent game. I wasn't really in it for the story (luckily) but everything else was just action packed and awesome. And then when I thought it couldn't get any better, I finished the game and got 'Mr Toots'... It's a sad day when a quality, fun game such as this isn't the massive success it should be. Expand
  44. Aug 30, 2011
    Fun, but short. Awesome gameplay and new unlocks that change the tide of battle make up for the repetitive fights. Story wasn't the best but it wasn't the worst. I am a little disappointed that I payed $60 for a short and linear game, but if this game drops in price, you should snatch it. Definitely worth a few hours of your time.
  45. Aug 15, 2011
    Initially I found it terribly boring, sparsely lit caves and the enemies behaving all the same, but in the later stages it grew on me as I found the gameplay more interesting with more abilities, weapons and strategies towards different foes. The gravity gun become one of my favorite weapons as to hurl enemies around or buildings upon them. It preserves ammo, and make the game a little more than just a shooter.

    Later on the vehicles make for a good treat, not really challenging bits, but it was ok by me to get a breather from the standard gameplay. I find the game to be sort of back to the origins, (being in caves and all), and I like how it's not hyper active fast like the predecessor, although I did enjoy the open world of RF Guerrilla, not sure which one I deem the best of the two. But as the end title showed up, I felt it was time well spent on a entertaining game.
  46. Aug 12, 2011
    the sad thing about this game is it was giving "average"-+ review scores from critics simply because it switched from a sandbox game to a linear third person shooter. I personally have never played any previous red faction games so was confused by the 7/10 review it was getting, having greatly enjoyed the game myself. what people have to realize about Red Faction: Armageddon is that it is a different game than it's predecessors, only based in the same universe. Knowing that going into this game you should enjoy yourself. Expand
  47. Aug 8, 2011
    I had very high expectation, Red Faction Guerrilla was just THE blast,
    but were is the exploring were is the multi-player? were is the Big world I could roam free in?
    they let me down...

  48. Jul 23, 2011
    This game is incredible. I think the bad reviews are from people disappointed that the game was different than other Red Faction iterations. Having not played them, I can't compare it to the previous versions, but as a gamer, I can tell you this game is excellent as a standalone. The destruction engine is unbelievable-- better than any I've seen elsewhere. It even makes BF:BC2's engine look last-gen. Not only would I buy a sandbox game that just had this destruction engine, but the campaign in this game is excellent too-- it's long, varied, and crazy fun. The weapons are imaginative and effective (once you use the magnet gun, you'll wish every game had one) and the vehicle combat sessions are a blast. I can't recommend this game enough. If you like action, seriously consider getting this game. Expand
  49. Jul 12, 2011
    /// If you're looking for a return to the single-player open-world gameplay and revolutionary vibe of Red Faction: Guerrilla, Armageddon will disappoint. The game is played on rails (sometimes literally), sending you from one shooting scene straight into another, using passably rendered FMV cut-scenes to fill in the gaps. Initially, these hands-off video portions work well, but there are several times in the mid and late game where the segues are disjointed from the action and the narrative seriously falters. By the end, the poor editing and lack of depth to the characters and story overall left me feeling that there was little point to the single player campaign.

    /// Even though GeoMod still lets you wreck the environment, this destructive potential only extends to structures and living things for the most part. The game takes you back beneath the surface of Mars, but there's no blasting away cave walls to find side passages or shortcuts in Armageddon. At least the Magnet Gun is a versatile tool and fun to play with, much like the tried and true remote charges in Guerrilla. RFG's Nano Forge is still around, now upgraded with a talking AI assistant and the ability to grant thinly-disguised magic abilities to Alec Mason's grandson Darius (the Impact ability, for example, is basically a Star Wars "Force push").

    /// Sadly, having hoped for another dozen hours or more in a sandbox, Armageddon turned out to be Star Wars: Rebel Assault II remade in the Red Faction setting with a sudden and unwarranted injection of aliens. Contrived story, little choice or excitement, and average action.
  50. Jul 8, 2011
    This game is one of the best Third Person Shooters created in my opinion. With the great storyline to the graphics to the weapons and a lot more.

    I am giving this lovely gave an Overall 9/10 for its variety of weapons, nice graphics, interesting monsters and fast paced action.

    Even though the monsters and environments area mostly the same It was still A great experience and fun to play.

    If you hate short campaigns, do not buy it. For A Professional like me it took me 3.5 hours to finish it on the hardest mode available.
  51. Jul 6, 2011
    Red Faction Armageddon really is a great game as long as you don't expect it to be Red Faction Guerrilla 2. Here's why: In Guerrilla you might have had really great fun in the open world, roaming around and doing random destruction. You got points for that which was fine at that point. But the missions were frankly quite boring ("go to X and destroy Y") and it never felt that you could directly make the environment interact with the enemies, you're only option was to shoot them or, with a bit of luck, crush them with whatever surrounded them. The Magnet Gun in Armageddon finally gives you the ability to truely utilize the possibilites of the Geo-Mod engine by pulling pieces of environment onto your enemies, pulling enemies through walls and metal sheets and blowing things up by smashing things into them or smashing them into things. And holy hell, it's really, really fun - as long as you expect it to be what it is instead of expecting it to be what it isn't. The corridors might be a bit linear, okay. But series like Jedi Knight, widely regarded some of the best action games ever, weren't any more open either and you were all okay with it. Plus it never feels boring thanks to the change in settings, from crystal caves to building structures to the surface and more (which I personally find really nice since most of Guerrilla was dusty hills and rocks), and also thanks to the vehicle stages which add a great deal of what are probably the most entertaining explosions and destructions this year so far. I'm a bit sad to see the multiplayer reduced to almost zero but the excellent singleplayer experience pretty much makes up for it. So again, if you don't expect RF Guerrilla 2 from it I wholeheartedly recommend you to try it out. Oh, and of course it looks good, too, and I myself love the soundtrack. Expand
  52. Jun 22, 2011
    just finished the game: here's my impressions.

    the game's good, damn good. the gameplay is fast, frenetic and really amusing, and most enemies and bosses are fun to kill. the graphics in dx11 are great and havok once more gives a SUPREME demonstration of how much nvidia physx sucks, as most of the environment is destructible with almost no impact on the performance of the game. the lights
    are awesome too, and the story is immersive even if the game is less than 8 hours long, and the characters are well designed. the level design is also really impressive and stylish.

    but now i should talk about the negative aspects: -the game is incredibly easy, but it is because they kept all the difficulty to the last level, which KICKED MY ASS for almost 2 hours. god itself never heard so many blasphemies since the times of superC and castlevania 3.
    -the checkpoints are spread out way too much, and are at inconvenient points, like in the middle of the battlefield
    -the enemies are a bit generic. i mean: aliens?? seriously? in 2011 i'm playing a game where i have to abort an alien invasion and kill huge alien bosses? i didn't play the previous games, but these enemies feel like they come from the 90s. i was expecting to hear duke nukem saying "your face, your ass: what's the difference?". it's fun, but it's so unrealistic and makes me wanna play mass effect, 'cause it's more believable (by the way, an enemy, some powers and a mission are a total ripoff of mass effect!)

    in conclusion, i give this game a 7.7, rounded up to a nice 8: a good game, but i'm not planning to replay it soon
  53. Jun 19, 2011
    How do you take an open world destruction game and make it better?

    If you answered "jam it into a cave" you probably work for Volition. Literally, if you wander slightly away from an objective it does the "get back here in ten seconds or die" thing.

    As a standalone game, Red Faction: Armageddon would probably deserve a 6. But when you compare it to the glory of Red Faction: Guerrilla
    it's hard to think of it so highly. They took a perfectly good system and changed its every aspect. And for the most part, made it considerably worse.

    The multiplayer is pathetic, like a slower, more boring version of Halo's Firefight. The gameplay is hardly different from any other shooter, with the occasional moment where you can blow up a building. (Usually you'll be running through indestructible caves.) The plot...don't even get me started on the plot.


    In the beginning of the game the terraformer that keeps Mars stable is blown up. Ignoring the fact that such an important target is so weakly defended, given you have the ability to literally repair anything, the fact you don't immediately repair it should confuse pretty much anyone. But fine. An easy author handwave is that the terraformer uses materials the nanoforge can't reproduce. the end of the game YOU DO ACTUALLY REPAIR IT in order to kill all the aliens you're fighting. Begging the question, why didn't you do that when the thing blew up, and why the HELL didn't you do that when the aliens showed up!?


    If you don't want the game spoiled for you, suffice to say the plot is a bad joke.

    So in the end the game is another generic third person shooter. There are some innovative ideas-the nanoforge ability to repair things, and the Force-like abilities it enables are awesome. But pretty much anything else you could see by copy-pasting something like Gears of War and changing all the names (and removing the chainsaw).

    Also, and here's the worst complaint, the game is dark. Not dark in the "this is kind of spooky" way. Dark in the "I just fell off another f***ing cliff? Really?" kind of way.

    The only redeeming quality is that this is probably the only game we're gonna see this year that at least attempts to be innovative.

    So yeah. It's a good rental game. But buy it? Hell. No.
  54. Jun 18, 2011
    Although it keeps the building destruction of Guerrilla, very little else is preserved. The hyper linear shooter is nothing more than a bug hunt. In the end it comes out as a disappointment when compared to its predecessor. Although you could do worse for a third person shooter I wouldn't recommend getting this game until it is fairly cheap.
  55. Jun 18, 2011
    Looks like Red Faction but doesn't always feel like Red Faction. The only really innovative thing Armageddon adds to the series are the perks you get through redeeming salvage. At first I was put off by the 3rd person perspective but I got used to it quick. The aliens are really pretty cliche (there's even a really lame romance) but I guess Red Faction did need a change of pace. I mean, how many revolutions can Mars handle? The story seemed like a good idea but this is where it stopped feeling like Red Faction at times. I really wish it explicitly explained where the bugs came from. You get their background through audio recording clips you find throughout the game. I also got really frustrated as to why there's ammo randomly all over the place. Where as in other Red Faction games you'd pick ammo up off of enemies, here it's strewn about in martian caves. It's a necessity since you'll need it when fighting the alien bug things. I felt it broke the immersion though. It has some replayability with a couple things unlocked after completing the game but you're required to start all over again. Definitely a rental, it's just not worth buying considering it's not all that great and short - I beat it in a day. If you really want to get a copy try to hold out until it goes on sale. I honestly don't think it will be too long before it's in the bargain bins. Expand
  56. Jun 17, 2011
    Overall this game is fantastic and would easily make it into my top 5 for this year. Im getting sick and tired of everyone expecting another sandbox and think that the linear game play was a turn in the right direction as a repeat of Guerilla would have been well dull. Although some levels were longer and sometimes a rependitive over all I had alot of fun with it. There is some great potential for some dlc and I would love to see some more exciting environments. This game was great and feels like it brings something different to the table of the ever growing fps genre. Expand
  57. Jun 14, 2011
    Gone is sandbox! Most people are WTF at the idea, and I was too. At first. Then I thought about it. The bugs... trying to fight them in sandbox gameplay would be... frustrating. They would be constantly getting in your way and bogging you down, or you would be outrunning them in some car... or you would be trapped in annoying to navigate cave systems. It overall would be a frustrating... annoying, or boring experience. Either the bugs would seem futile to anyone with a car, or they would be so monsteriously powerful to make the game stupid frustrating. So points for the balls to go Linear. It made it more interesting and fun overall. A tad curious why they didn't milk the horror cow more and just decided to go BALLS TO TH WALLS action; other than the fact it is Volition and they are nuts for action. Overall, they brought over good things from Guerilla, added stuff that's good for a linear gameplay, removed forcing a slot to a sledgehammer (Loved the weapon, but good lord sometimes you wanted an extra gun.), and a great co-op mode. If you own this game and aren't playing the infestation mode, you are losing money .It's an excellent and honestly? Amazing addition to the game overall that works really quite well with the new enemy types. The game itself? It's quite fun but it requires a want to play a fast placed arcadey game with deployable special abilities. Story is the only downpoint really, but on par for volition game. I don't play their games for story. I PLAY THEM FOR EXPLOSIONS! Expand
  58. op8
    Jun 14, 2011
    Over half way thru it, and so far i am really enjoying this.
    i honestly havent had this much fun in a game for years!.....i have to constantly remind myself there are other weapons available because the magnet rifle is just so much damn fun to use.
    dont listen to anyone giving this game less than an 8 as they are being daft and just pissed that its not the same sand box like in
    RF:G.......yeah its a linear shooter now,but its a damn fine shooter and better than any other shooters ive played for a LONG time......9.2/10 but i'm gonna rate a ten coz of the idiot who gave it a 2........ppl need to rate this game in its own right and not compare it to previous RF. Expand
  59. Jun 14, 2011
    They have taken Red Faction: Guerrilla, attempted to return it to its linear roots, and ended up stripping out absolutely everything good about Guerrilla, the sense of freedom, and joy of destroying large buildings and tackling situations in any way you wanted, then they took out everything that was enjoyable in Red Faction 1, the engaging story, the destructible tunnels, the ability to have some choice about how to tackle a situation. The good graghics and a few neat toys like the magnet gun can't save this terrible sequel that feels like a sad attempt to make another Dead Space. Expand
  60. Jun 13, 2011
    back in the oldschool gaming, when everything was linear and do NOT tried to be crysis (even crysis 2 don't want to be crysis and prefer call of duty style now. for the fun. it's hard to judge wrong - crysis failed, while CoD shaped industry). There you go - intensive action that last 8 hours, survival mode (sorry, there is no real coop as well as no real multiplayer - just a lil bit of it, so go for guerrilla) that last some more hours. Unimaginative design thou. Some story, you know. Nah, nevermind. RFA even had a freaking rail gun like in a days when we were kids! What's wrong with it? People don't get it right. It all comes from a wrong approach. It is good as linear oldschool action with physics. Without any frustration of previous part. Fun while it lasts. If you want guerilla 2 and... go buy guerilla for the second time. Red Faction: Armageddon is well designed and polished title. You just won't remember it the day after. Expand
  61. Jun 12, 2011
    I'm totally amazed with this game. I mean, this is seriously one of the best games i have played in 2011. I loved the new direction they took with this game, it's more linear but the storyline is much more detailed and interesting. Something i really liked about this game is the weapon arsenal, it's simply fantastic. Especially the magnet gun and the black hole gun. The level of destruction is huge and spectacular.
    You also have a free mode with no time limit where you can destroy stuff and rebuild it again.
    Infestation mode, team up with 1, 2 or 3 friends in a battle against bugs and other creepy crawlies where you have to protect structures from damage, or survival mode.

    This game is so well made that it allows you to change a lot of graphical settings. Port or not, it runs so perfect and smooth without a single problem.
    I'm running it fully maxed out + DX10/11 and god, it looks beautiful!!
    Another contender for game of the Year 2011..
    Thanks for such amazing game.
  62. Jun 11, 2011
    This game takes after the first 2 titles in the series a little more since it has a linear mission structure with only a little exploration during the missions and nothing in between missions (no walking around towns and stuff). It keeps the 3rd person action combat of the 3rd game in the series (Guerrilla) along with the building destruction (I mention that since the 1st game had destruction of terrain and was also underground for the most part). However many aspects of the game have been tweaked interface and control-wise.

    Many people who liked the free form aspects of the 3rd game (Guerrilla) will miss them in this game and will probably put themselves off it because it is no longer free form. However that doesn't make it a bad game (unless you only enjoy free form games), while it is a different game it is still a good action game and most will get enjoyment from this tile regardless.

    The story is a little cliché but well told and for fans of the series will enjoy going though the story which is told not only through in game cut scenes and dialog but also through optional scattered messages throughout the game.

    In summary: Its a good action game with a nice story, series fans will likely enjoy it but fans of free form games like Guerrilla may prefer something else. Sadly A demo for the game doesn't look like it will be released for PC (A sad trend in PC games these days) so people will have to just read differing reviews and check out footage on Youtube if they cant decided to buy.
  63. Jun 11, 2011
    If you are into having a very fun mindless action game, look no further. I knew what I was buying before I bought it. Read the PC Gamer review (84) it puts it better than I ever could. Bottom line is that this is definitely different from RF: G - but that's not entirely a bad thing. Yes, the previous game was a massive sandbox but to me, had a very incoherent story and was basically a game with a ton of challenges and quests that all revolved around blowing stuff up. But in the previous game you faced basically one enemy... the EDF. It was all the same. Yes, this game is more linear but it's also focused, you face tons of different every interesting enemies - you have truly the coolest gun ever created in any game. Besides MAYBE the gravity gun. Again, maybe. I know that is a big statement but the magnet gun for me, justifies this purchase all by itself. Seriously :) That all said, this isn't a game that if you are struggling with $50 and deciding how to spend it, definitely buy The Witcher 2. If you have some excess cash and love crazy action games - get this, you won't be dissapointed. Check out the Steam forums... lots of great feedback around this game. It has excellent re play value (new game+ mode) and as mentioned, is a mindless great time. If you're into that sort of thing.

    Lastly - if you have a good computer and can max this game out in it's DX11 glory... wow. It's impressive, changes the immersion factor greatly. That counts for me. I am self proclaimed graphics snob and have build a super computer that I like to push... I am thankful for devs that do that.
  64. Jun 11, 2011
    Great game. Take it for what it is and do not compare to the first two or Guerrilla. This is still a fantastic game that deserves to be played. Regarding those posts on graphics, who cares? Some may say it is good or bad, but it is all relative. Same with Crysis 2. Don't rate a game based on looks alone. Armageddon is a great shooter with guns that are fun to wield and use to blow s**t up!
  65. Jun 10, 2011
    First off, it's an obvious console port. They didn't even remove the auto-aiming "snap-to-target" features that console players have to have to do any good. Plus it starts up on console resolutions (720p) with a bunch of possible features turned off (over half) by default and no Advanced effects (aliasing). So first thing I did was to fix the resolutions, turn ON all of the eye candy, turn OFF the auto-aiming, set difficulty to "Insane" & go.

    It plays perfectly smooth on my system with every video option maxed out. This game does have one advantage over others of this flavor in that it did allow me to remap keys to separate multi-function buttons. I.E. Space is both jump and dodge... Common console trick to do with them having only so many buttons to work with. However the PC version at least let me select one for jump and another for dodge. Kudos for that!

    Nothing from this game is anything new. Personally, I have no problem with linear games... Especially should-be FPS games (more on that next). You're instructed to take a hill, capture someone, etc. In some form, that's always going to be a bit linear. This one has no large areas and almost always forces you 'down the hallway'.

    Anyhow, this is third-person. I personally HATE third-person! It takes the total game immersion effect of "playing as the character" away from the player and turns it into a puppet trick instead. Plus makes aiming around the right side of stuff a chore (or left, depending on your point of view). Not to mention just blocking 30-40% of the screen real-estate with the back of some supposed hero's head and body... Wee... If you're going to make a shooter, make it a first-person for goodness sake... Red Faction started out that way... Come-on...

    As far as realism in the video department... Not even close. Overly vivid colors (neon this and that) all the items you're hunting for are glowing red or blue with a pip over them... etc. No skill involved, just run to the light... Unrealistic (almost cartoonish) looking environments in many cases.

    The AI, even on Insane, is extremely stupid. They stand there. Don't even try to take cover. Sometimes jump around randomly. They just happen to be really accurate (ish). So far it REALLY feels like a third person shooter made for beginners... And it never gets harder... You can maul most anything but the biggest with one hit. Magnet gun is fun but, why bother?

    Vehicles still auto-aim, even with snap-to-target disabled. I did not take haul damage on any vehicle. They are seriously overkill. Same for the suits. I kept waiting for the game to get harder but it never did. No challenge what-so-ever.

    The story itself is so-so... Interesting but not believable... So many "What?" items like: You start out with an item that lets you rebuild anything from walls to complex machines at will. But then something breaks? (I do not want to get specific but you'll know it when it happens) The writers weren't paying any attention.

    Other problems also include minor issues with positional audio (using a 5.1 setup for testing).

    My Score (0-5):
    - Replay-ability = 0
    - Graphics = 3
    - Game Immersion = 1
    - Audio = 3.5
    - Difficulty = 0
    - Entertainment = 1.5
    - Engine = 4
    - AI = 1
    - Control = 4
    - Story & Common Sense = 1.5

    Personally, IMHO, this game is not deserving of the "Red Faction" name. Not that all of the others were all that phenomenal either but... If this is the best modern gaming has to offer, we're all doomed to infinite boredom and games only challenging for a wee child. The engine almost earned a better score until it crashed (memory leak) in the climb to the lair level. Other than that it ran pretty well; for a console port. Multi-player options were mildly more entertaining... Only...

    Honestly, this game is a joke. I'm getting very close to my 40's and it's a sleeper for me. I can't imagine any gamer today having any difficulty what-so-ever on the "Insane" setting and just walking right through the whole story. I guess those console people who want achievement points only could rent it for extremely fast points (got almost all achievements on one play-through without even trying).

    My last word is I don't see how these so-called critics can rate something like this so highly... Technologically, it's old news. Story, it's weak. Challenge it's NOT. It does have so much potential but the end result was horribly compiled. Perhaps they will improve the AI in some DLC or something making it at least mildly challenging.

    I wish someone would make a real revolutionary new engine instead of writing stuff focused for nearing 8 year old computer tech (modern consoles). Consoles and their limited controls and capabilities are destroying real gaming.
  66. Jun 10, 2011
    The game is more of what it isn't. It should be titled Red Faction: New Coke. What was wrong with original formula?

    Of all the reviews (if one should call them that) only a few even mention the fact that Armageddon does not have competitive multiplayer or real multiplayer. No death match, no SEIGE, none of the other competitive modes that made the game a blast. Seriously....would CoD
    without a multiplayer be so highly rated? If it were to happen, do you think 95 percent of "reviews" would forget to mention it?

    How sad that Red Faction Guerrilla is not just better, it's 100x better than Armageddon. If you like Red Faction series, you'll end up playing Guerrilla 10x more than Armageddon AFTER you finish playing Armageddon.

    Want revolutionary Multiplayer...especially Siege Mode? You'll have to pick up the 2 year old Guerrilla. There is NO real multiplayer (against other humans) in Armageddon. Sad, and it completely destroys Red Faction Armageddon. From 100's of hours of gameplay to 6-10. The idiots giving Armageddon a 95 or saying...dang near perfect with only minor complaints obviously have never played competitive multiplayer Siege mode, or they would indeed see a MAJOR FATAL flaw in Armageddon.

    They had a revolutionary idea in a game about a revolution. Instead they decided to ditch both competitive multiplayer and open world.

    When I saw the previews I said, oh great, looks like they are going to make it Gears of War on Mars, and poorly at that. Little did I know they were going to in addition to that, take away a multiplayer experience that was better than ANY CoD or Battlefield game (which are awesome fwiw) as well.

    This is a short, stripped down game, where the best parts were forgotten, and the ones that didn't matter, became center stage. Also, CoD has Single player, multiplayer, and horde mode. In Armageddon all you get is Single player, and horde, with an updated wrecking crew.

    So sad....because this game could have been great, but you take out the best parts of the previous game....while running the same (updated) engine, on the same consoles, and you have a major problem.

    If you're looking for hundreds of hours of game play, pick up Red Faction: Guerrilla. I just picked up a pc version (already had 360) for 5 bucks on steam. Guess which I've played more, Armageddon or Guerrilla since Armageddon came out? Guess what most Red Factions fans will be over time doing? Playing Guerrilla from this day forward more than Armageddon x10. That's a sign of a poorly designed game.

    Do yourself a favor, pick up RFG and play it's multiplayer, and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about.

    The question is....why didn't Volition.

    I give a 3, because I subtracted -5 (being nice) for no multiplayer (sorry co-op is co-op, not real multiplayer...against other humans)

    That leave 5 out of 10 left. -1 for length of game
    -1 because it without all those things wasn't a 10. This really could of been a 2. Enjoy Armageddon for a couple of hours, and the pop in Guerrilla for some multiplayer. Shame on the idiot professional reviewers for forgetting how great, or that it even had, competitive multiplayer when scoring and reviewing Armageddon. Way to show you are worth more than a McDonald's fry man.
  67. Jun 10, 2011
    This is definitely more fun than many other recently released shooters. I do agree with others though that there should have been more outdoor game play. I think they tried too hard to be different from the previous with realizing that there was nothing wrong with the previous...
  68. Jun 10, 2011
    RGA is quite a departure from RFG, swapping the open world setting for a cramped rail shooter environment the player is forced to follow a very linear path from start to finish. With RFG destroying the surrounding buildings was a joy and generally the best way forward but in RFA it can be a massive hindrance or lead directly to player death, the enemies infinitely respawn unless you destroy their spawn points (and did their best to annoy the hell out of me), all the while the player is pushed forward by a plot that isn't bad in theory but is extremely bad in execution (Character #2 gets 30 minutes of screen time before relationship with PC is developed, Character #2 dies 30 seconds later, Story carries on as before).

    RFA has played it safe in a gaming world dominated by FPS games, but the result is a soulless Frankensteins monster that would be entirely forgettable had I not paided full price for it.
  69. Jun 10, 2011
    Great game on PC. Technically stunning with some nice but subtle DX11 eye candy & runs very smoothly on PC's up to 3 years old yet still looks decent in places. If you liked RFG then RFA is more of the same but slightly better. Its more of the same mega destruction as RFG but that's not a bad thing & this has some great weapons & enemy designs. Only big downsides to me are: Dull colour choices in places they have gone for a realistic futuristic look. Uses Steamworks as THQ dropped GFWL which to me is a backward step & limits how often I will replay it as Steamworks achievements are worthless to me! Expand
  70. Jun 9, 2011
    Overall? Fun. Perhaps not as fun as RF: Guerrilla though.

    Pros: Maul makes you feel like a beast, lots of explosions, better writing than RF:G

    Cons: Too linear, GeoMod 2.0 does not seem to be that much of an improvement.
  71. Jun 9, 2011
    Red Faction: Armageddon is a tough game because it does not feel like a Red Faction game. The story is no longer the age old struggle of a people rising up against their aggressors to fight for freedom, it now takes a shift towards it's more sci-fi side and is a struggle against cultists and their pet aliens. But this isn't to say that is bad. It's not bad at all. Volition captured the ambiance of the game perfectly. The bleak setting captures the despair of the martians wonderfully. However, that bleak setting forces the game to take place underground and levels are linear, meaning no more free roam, leading fans of Guerrilla to be outraged and cry, "Bloody murder!" While this is disappointing, it isn't something to not by the game over, because the staple of Red Faction games returns: destruction! Destruction this time around is very fun thanks to new weapons, my favorite being the magnet gun. And this time around, destruction is reversible with the new tool the nano-forge. With the inclusion of these new elements to feel fresh. Now a major downside for PC gamers is the bugged DX 10-11. If you even try to play in these modes you are bound to run into several errors. While on the topic of graphics, this game is very taxing. I found myself being forced to play with minimum settings, which can at times detract from the overall experience. If you are looking for an atmospheric shooter with some neat features, Armageddon is a definite shoe-in for these hot summer months, but be ready for some technical hiccups. Expand
  72. Jun 8, 2011
    Disappointing is the best word to summarize the title; everything fun about Red Faction Guerilla is gone. RFA is a purely linear mission-based game that does not allow for open exploration like its predecessor. A "ruin" mode is included that allows some sandbox destruction, but the player is forced into a small controlled area with little to do and no reason to do it (honestly it almost feels as if we've been thrown a pathetic bone). A better variety of weapons but no reason to use different ones, you'll find what you like and have no reason to mix it up.

    The allure of being able to complete missions at-will and stop to destroy buildings at-will became the entire draw of the series thanks to Guerilla, and that has been entirely abolished here in favor of a very short story. Being given the affordance to repair resource pieces does not make up for there being very little to destroy during very small, narrow, generic levels.

    Everything that made the last game fun is not present in Armageddon. Worth renting and completing the story as its very well-polished, VO work is great, sound, look, and feel are all wonderful. It's a great looking game with very little to do that ultimately let me down after Guerilla gave me such a great play experience.
  73. Jun 8, 2011
    The game is good. Can't really complain. am a bit disappointed about the graphics that could have been better, even with the destruction system at least the lights in DX11 could have been worked out better. But the game overall is quite dynamic, which I didn't actually expect. It doesn't hold anything exceptional. Neither is it a game that will stay around for a long time. But it is was well worth the wait. Expand
  74. Jun 7, 2011
    Gone is the sandbox of RFG as Armageddon returns to it's roots with a more linear approach. The weapons, gameplay and Geo-mod 2.0 engine really shine in this 4th installment. I haven't finished the the SP campaign, but have been told that it clocks in around 6 hrs., having played online co-op in Infestation is a blast! Armageddon is highly recommended and is probably my front-runner for sleeper pick of 2011. Expand
  75. Jun 7, 2011
    Very disappointing game...Red Faction Guerrilla was much better in everything. Armageddon has a very poor gameplay, dull enemies, controversial level design. The only working aspect concerns world destructions but graphics is not that good and colours palette is awful. Moreover, dx10/11 is a broken feature. Characters are not charismatic, and the whole game isn't that fun. That's a shame for a game that could have been a masterpiece. Expand
  76. Jun 7, 2011
    Fun game, still working on it. wish they had a cover system that be fun. also being able to wreck the place is always a blast in my book. the story so far is really good, hope they make another red faction i remember playing the 1st on PlayStation 2.
  77. Jun 7, 2011
    The game play of Red Faction: Armageddon is over all great. The UI is simple and the guidance system is just very helpful. Graphics are great and the characters are well designed. Some parts of the game are really annoying like near the end of the game where enemy's constantly spawn and over whelm you. They surprised me after i beat it with new game +, which is great. Over all on amazing game.
  78. Jun 10, 2011
    The game is more of what it isn't. It should be titled Red Faction: New Coke. What was wrong with original formula?

    Of all the reviews (if one should call them that) only a few even mention the fact that Armageddon does not have competitive multiplayer or real multiplayer. No death match, no SEIGE, none of the other competitive modes that made the game a blast. Seriously....would CoD
    without a multiplayer be so highly rated? If it were to happen, do you think 95 percent of "reviews" would forget to mention it?

    How sad that Red Faction Guerrilla is not just better, it's 100x better than Armageddon. If you like Red Faction series, you'll end up playing Guerrilla 10x more than Armageddon AFTER you finish playing Armageddon.

    Want revolutionary Multiplayer...especially Siege Mode? You'll have to pick up the 2 year old Guerrilla. There is NO real multiplayer (against other humans) in Armageddon. Sad, and it completely destroys Red Faction Armageddon. From 100's of hours of gameplay to 6-10. The idiots giving Armageddon a 95 or saying...dang near perfect with only minor complaints obviously have never played competitive multiplayer Siege mode, or they would indeed see a MAJOR FATAL flaw in Armageddon.

    They had a revolutionary idea in a game about a revolution. Instead they decided to ditch both competitive multiplayer and open world.

    When I saw the previews I said, oh great, looks like they are going to make it Gears of War on Mars, and poorly at that. Little did I know they were going to in addition to that, take away a multiplayer experience that was better than ANY CoD or Battlefield game (which are awesome fwiw) as well.

    This is a short, stripped down game, where the best parts were forgotten, and the ones that didn't matter, became center stage. Also, CoD has Single player, multiplayer, and horde mode. In Armageddon all you get is Single player, and horde, with an updated wrecking crew.

    So sad....because this game could have been great, but you take out the best parts of the previous game....while running the same (updated) engine, on the same consoles, and you have a major problem.

    If you're looking for hundreds of hours of game play, pick up Red Faction: Guerrilla. I just picked up a pc version (already had 360) for 5 bucks on steam. Guess which I've played more, Armageddon or Guerrilla since Armageddon came out? Guess what most Red Factions fans will be over time doing? Playing Guerrilla from this day forward more than Armageddon x10. That's a sign of a poorly designed game.

    Do yourself a favor, pick up RFG and play it's multiplayer, and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about.

    The question is....why didn't Volition.

    I give a 3, because I subtracted -5 (being nice) for no multiplayer (sorry co-op is co-op, not real multiplayer...against other humans)

    That leave 5 out of 10 left. -1 for length of game
    -1 because it without all those things wasn't a 10. This really could of been a 2. Enjoy Armageddon for a couple of hours, and the pop in Guerrilla for some multiplayer. Shame on the idiot professional reviewers for forgetting how great, or that it even had, competitive multiplayer when scoring and reviewing Armageddon. Way to show you are worth more than a McDonald's fry man.

Generally favorable reviews - based on 29 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 29
  2. Negative: 0 out of 29
  1. Nov 1, 2011
    Red Faction: Armageddon to me is a good B movie.
  2. 80
    It was worth sacrificing free-form play for a linear story driven shooter. Armageddon is different than other pieces of the Red Faction series but it still brings all the fun of "mass" destruction. [July 2011]
  3. Jul 26, 2011
    Armageddon's visuals are borderline awful, but the primitive gameplay is what looks the worst.