Army of Two PlayStation 3

User Score
7.3

Mixed or average reviews- based on 118 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 58 out of 118
  2. Negative: 14 out of 118
Buy On

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. ThisThis 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. DavidL.
    Mar 10, 2008
    0
    Another PS3 game ported from the 360 version that is very crappy. The framerate and graphics are ugly compared to the 360 version and it's just a disgrace.
  3. LeeS.
    May 7, 2008
    3
    Bought it for the PS3 and sold it to EB games a week later. The controls were very clunky and I had bad camera problems. It looks very good, but great graphics don't make a great game. I'll stick with Call of Duty 4. It does laps around army of 2.
  4. JasonTang
    Oct 1, 2008
    1
    I have been playing this game with a friend for about a week now. I'm a guy used to playing FPS games on the PC, and thought it would be cool to try a split screen FPS with a friend.

    This is the worst gaming experience I've ever had. I'm so frustrated that I had to write this. The controls make effective looking, aiming, grenade throwing, clunky and unsatisfying. I
    I have been playing this game with a friend for about a week now. I'm a guy used to playing FPS games on the PC, and thought it would be cool to try a split screen FPS with a friend.

    This is the worst gaming experience I've ever had. I'm so frustrated that I had to write this. The controls make effective looking, aiming, grenade throwing, clunky and unsatisfying. I feel like a retard not being able to kill a moving target even at close range. I find myself running up to enemies to melee them because it's more enjoyable and efficient than aiming slowly, waiting for them to peek out of cover, and then shooting and taking off a little health, all while getting hit by 5 other guys shooting you with perfect aim.

    The combat is tedious and repetitive. Every encounter is a game of manage the aggro because you can't really have satisfying FPS experience because it's too hard to aim with the stick. The co-op features feel gimmicky and doesn't add to gameplay. They are all scripted.

    GTA IV wasn't bad because it had auto-aim. RE4 was great because it was well designed. This game tries to be cool but delivers a very frustrating experience.
    I have a nice PC so the graphics don't impress me at all. It does get 1 point for cool cinematics. All the guns sound the same. I don't think I will be trying a console FPS ever again.
    Expand
  5. ChrisH.
    Apr 21, 2008
    3
    Bought, played and sold within a week. Seriously the worst game I have bought in years. I'm usually a cautious buyer, and thanks to this wake up call I will remain so in the future. Dull, repetitive and frankly boring. The characters are loud and unpleasant, one whiny, the other complaining at the state of the world whilst blowing big holes in everything. The add on mode in Splinter Bought, played and sold within a week. Seriously the worst game I have bought in years. I'm usually a cautious buyer, and thanks to this wake up call I will remain so in the future. Dull, repetitive and frankly boring. The characters are loud and unpleasant, one whiny, the other complaining at the state of the world whilst blowing big holes in everything. The add on mode in Splinter Cell chaos theory spies mode obliterated this pathetic effort and that was and add on mode on a last gen system game. Expand
  6. 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 withThis 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.