User Score
7.3

Mixed or average reviews- based on 99 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 71 out of 99
  2. Negative: 13 out of 99

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. Sep 1, 2012
    4
    This game should have been a lot more fun that the title promises. I felt like I was going to get a game that actually begs for a social life. You play with someone else all the time. You use their abilities and yours to achieve a goal. That sounds awesome. The problem is, the controls don't every seem to synch up. They want to. They just don't quite get there. That's okay. This game is one of a kind. Games that start up ideas or notions or principles of gaming always show their flaws more than a game in a tried and true genre. I guess the subject material should make you more involved. It just doesn't. For having the kind of weaponry that you have, and the kind of partner that you have, you should be able to knock it down all the time. You just never get to, at least, not really. That is why I can't really be nice to this game. It is a great idea, and it gets better(army of two....2!). This one should have been a little more polished. It looks good, just not great. The rest of this thing is just a mess, the story dies right away, and the gameplay becomes more of a job and less of a fun immersive gaming experience. I recently read a review on this website in which the user said, "I just don't know what gamers expect anymore..."; this implies we expect too much. We do. We gamers do complain an awful lot. Can you blame us? It's $60 dollars for a game. Can you blame the developers? They're paying a huge overhead just to make these things. They can't guarantee all their product. I think it's fair to look at both sides in the manner that I explained. However, it validates why this game isn't the greatest. It promises $60 of fun. You get the equivalent to just-okay Sega Dreamcast experience. Expand
  2. Dec 13, 2011
    3
    This game has a good idea: A game that is designed for Co-op play. One problem here is that it isn't really fun to play (lacks gameplay,humor and is really repetitive). I tried with some friends I know but it stopped at few things: 1) Controls were hard to learn 2) Game is boring 3) There are better games out there. So I wouldn't recommend to play this with a friend who is unfamiliar with shooters. But the BIGGEST PROBLEM here is that when you buy this game you want co-op action. But this is only mediocre co-op actions - other games have a lot better and funnier co-op modes. You can try this game - but be warned - it can disappoint you. Expand
Metascore
74

Mixed or average reviews - based on 43 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 43
  2. Negative: 0 out of 43
  1. Army Of Two has even managed to innovate on a small scale - the non-magnetic cover system (which allows you to fire over and around walls without gluing you to them) makes combat feel fast and fluid, while the Aggro combat system (which draws the enemies towards the most dangerous player, making the other player effectively invisible) turns an MMORPG staple into a pretty effective combat mechanic.
  2. 80
    Army of Two is a dream come true for co-op enthusiasts. It doesn’t hit every note perfectly, but the campaign and team-based multiplayer modes are the perfect reasons to pester your old "Gears of War" buddy into picking it up.
  3. The missions are terrific, action-packed stages where something is always happening. More multiplayer maps would've been nice, and the challenge might be too much for rookies. Otherwise, these Two wholeheartedly entertain.