User Score
7.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 215 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 24 out of 215

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. May 29, 2013
    6
    Army of Two isn't the best 3rd person shooter I've played, but it is worth 5 dollars or so. The bland story aside, the game play, gun customization and characters are all really good. I might've given it a better score if the online servers (for the Xbox 360 at least) were still up, really hurting it's replay value, but if you can get a friend to come over and play this with you, it makesArmy of Two isn't the best 3rd person shooter I've played, but it is worth 5 dollars or so. The bland story aside, the game play, gun customization and characters are all really good. I might've given it a better score if the online servers (for the Xbox 360 at least) were still up, really hurting it's replay value, but if you can get a friend to come over and play this with you, it makes for a fun experience. Overall, it's not the worse I've seen, but it's still not great. Expand
  2. May 16, 2013
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. One thing that stands out with Army of Two are the visuals, which look incredible. Both Salem and Rios come across with huge character models and sharp details, from the top of their protective face masks to the tattoos and scarred battle armor. Expand
  3. Mar 13, 2013
    7
    I thought the game was amazing, but the weapon customization and overpowered AI were a pain in the ass. But the in-game cutscenes looked impressive and the round the world campaign of betrayal and fame/fortune made it worth while.
  4. Nov 5, 2012
    6
    EA's "Army of Two" is like a poor man's "Gears of War". While it looks gritty and great, the final product is anything but. It's more like a cheesy satire of Michael Bay movies with some good ideas that are poorly implemented. This game lacks the superb gameplay found in both "Gears of War" and Infinity Ward's "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare". At times, the campaign feels like anEA's "Army of Two" is like a poor man's "Gears of War". While it looks gritty and great, the final product is anything but. It's more like a cheesy satire of Michael Bay movies with some good ideas that are poorly implemented. This game lacks the superb gameplay found in both "Gears of War" and Infinity Ward's "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare". At times, the campaign feels like an arcade-version of "Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas". Two players can play it simultaneously as heroes Salem & Rios, but the wonky controls and poorly designed levels make "Army of Two" a sub-par affair. The "agro" system is just a cheap way of exploiting the terrible enemy A.I. and certain co-op moves can only be performed in certain parts of the game (making them sort of pointless). This short-lengthed actioner has some fun little moments, but it doesn't hold up against the best of the genre. Not even close. Expand
  5. Jan 19, 2012
    5
    The gameplay is fun and weapon customization is good but there is no replay value to the game. It features a very short campaign and lame multiplayer. It lacks content as well. Yet its still a decent and somewhat challenging shooter.
  6. Dec 11, 2011
    6
    I'm a fan of shooters, but this game is not that great. The graphics aren't appealing, and the mechanics are fairly shoddy. The game lacks any kind of charm or personality. Really cheesy dialogue and a lackluster plot. I didn't have much fun with this game at all. If you want a good co-op shooter then get r6v2.
  7. Aug 25, 2010
    6
    A simplistic and generic shooter. The unique things that the game attempts to do aren't done very well, and its main gimmick is just that enemies choose to attack the bigger threat when attacked by multiple players. This is something that has been done before in much better games, like Gears of War for example. The Locust will attack whichever enemy they see first, but if the other playerA simplistic and generic shooter. The unique things that the game attempts to do aren't done very well, and its main gimmick is just that enemies choose to attack the bigger threat when attacked by multiple players. This is something that has been done before in much better games, like Gears of War for example. The Locust will attack whichever enemy they see first, but if the other player starts firing at them, they will return the shots. However, Gears of War has better things going for it than just that. In Army of Two, well, that's the entire game. The concept of "turning invisible" when one player has the attention of the enemies is just stupid also, because one player having a big gun would never make trained soldiers forget entirely about the other. And don't get me started on the story and characters (annoying).
    Rent if it seems like it would be your thing, but don't buy if you expect great things.
    Expand
  8. ReidB.
    Apr 9, 2008
    6
    Army of Two is great if you have a friend and play split-screen. Once you venture online, playing with anyone but a friend will be a chore. If the player pauses, hits the Guide button, the screen will tell you "Waiting for other player" and just sit there. Playing alone still gives you and Army of One Point Five feel. You tell your AI buddy what to do and he does it just as you would Army of Two is great if you have a friend and play split-screen. Once you venture online, playing with anyone but a friend will be a chore. If the player pauses, hits the Guide button, the screen will tell you "Waiting for other player" and just sit there. Playing alone still gives you and Army of One Point Five feel. You tell your AI buddy what to do and he does it just as you would expect the AI in a modern game to act. He will bug out and get stuck, and I can if you get injured, he will drive you insane by pulling you into some of the worst locations or dragging you in a circle trying to make up his mind. The story was entertaining. The addition of characters you can somewhat connect with and witty humor help a lot. Overall an entertaining game. Definitely a rent, not a buy though. Collapse
  9. ToddP.
    Apr 8, 2008
    6
    Ok graphics, controls felt sloppy. didn't know where or who was shooting me half of the time. Skip buying this one, only rent.
  10. AndyK.
    Mar 27, 2008
    6
    Lame singleplayer, multiplayer is funny but not for long...AoT is just a simple copy of GoW.
  11. PatrickW.
    Mar 25, 2008
    7
    This game is really fun on multi-player, but just OK on single player. On medium difficulty, the AI partner is OK, but if you go to the hardest difficulty, the AI play gets messy. I can't even count the times I've been knocked down and the AI drags me TOWARDS the enemy! This is a must-have if you like playing co-op with your friends, but I wouldn't buy it otherwise.
  12. TerdF.
    Mar 20, 2008
    6
    Short, unrealistic, online play is disappointing, ai bot is retarded, repetitive. EA is seriously disappointing, stick to madden.
  13. JohnD.
    Mar 9, 2008
    5
    This game is horrible and needs a lot of work. AI is terrible, coop moves are not even truly needed. many are scripted (back to back move). repetitive. multiplayer suffers frequent disconnects and terrible lag issues. this game could have been so much more, DO NOT BUY only six hours of campaign game and 3 multiplayer maps, RENT first and you will quickly want to return it.
  14. EugeneP.
    Mar 9, 2008
    5
    since this is a 1-10 rating system i gave it a 5,it was originally a 3 on a 1-5 system for me. But anyway this game gets old real fast. It has fun gameplay, great customizable guns. But when you play the same levels over and over again its so boring. The fun factor may go up with that 1 friend you play with. Now to the multiplayer (not the co-op). Theres only 4 or 5 maps that are very since this is a 1-10 rating system i gave it a 5,it was originally a 3 on a 1-5 system for me. But anyway this game gets old real fast. It has fun gameplay, great customizable guns. But when you play the same levels over and over again its so boring. The fun factor may go up with that 1 friend you play with. Now to the multiplayer (not the co-op). Theres only 4 or 5 maps that are very small. Whats the point of adding a tank when you cant shoot a 50 millimeter to blow someone to pieces. But hopefully they'll be down loadable content to make up for this game. The average rating for an average game 5 Expand
  15. RandalF.
    Mar 8, 2008
    5
    This game is absolutely average. From the average graphics, boring story, poor AI and average gameplay. I can see what the developers were going for but they didn't pull it off. I was hoping the multiplayer would save the mediocrity that was the story mode, but sadly, it didn't. All matches online are 2v2. The funny thing is the writers couldn't figure out what the two main This game is absolutely average. From the average graphics, boring story, poor AI and average gameplay. I can see what the developers were going for but they didn't pull it off. I was hoping the multiplayer would save the mediocrity that was the story mode, but sadly, it didn't. All matches online are 2v2. The funny thing is the writers couldn't figure out what the two main characters were, mercenaries or actual soldiers. At one point in the second level an NPC says "welcome to the army" but the characters are supposed to be mercenaries. Even the mercenary aspect of the story doesnt seem believable, because in reality, the government wouldn't hire out mercenaries to do a top secret mission. REAL mercenaries are hired by military contractors to perform bodyguard duties and escort missions, and by drug cartels to protect their products. If you want an average playing experience and mediocre gameplay, story and graphics, this game is for you. Expand
  16. Alex
    Mar 8, 2008
    7
    I'm a bit disappointed in Army of Two. i was really excited for it, but i started playing it, and it just started to feel too familiar too fast. think of it this way: its like Gears of War set in 2001, minus the xenophobic aliens and chainsaw machine guns. the AI isn't terribly brilliant, especially when it comes to your ally, but the ability to smack them around a bit is pretty I'm a bit disappointed in Army of Two. i was really excited for it, but i started playing it, and it just started to feel too familiar too fast. think of it this way: its like Gears of War set in 2001, minus the xenophobic aliens and chainsaw machine guns. the AI isn't terribly brilliant, especially when it comes to your ally, but the ability to smack them around a bit is pretty gratifying. now, that being said, Army of Two is still a fantastic game. it feels a lot like Gears of War, yes, but that isn't necessarily a totally bad thing. Gears was an awesome game, and this is too. although, I'm sure AoT would have been much more exciting had it been released before Gears. as a result, playing alone is REALLY boring. co-op is a blast though, especially on the higher difficulties. Overall: 7.5 out of 10. Expand
  17. RobS.
    Mar 6, 2008
    6
    The game is average at best. Once you go through the campaign once with a friend or AI you will see there is little reason to play again. You can't even use your unlocked and modified weapons in online matches unless its co-op. The Live portion outside of the co-op is broken and laggy. On gamemodes like Warzone you can't even tell whats going on half the time. The game can be The game is average at best. Once you go through the campaign once with a friend or AI you will see there is little reason to play again. You can't even use your unlocked and modified weapons in online matches unless its co-op. The Live portion outside of the co-op is broken and laggy. On gamemodes like Warzone you can't even tell whats going on half the time. The game can be beat in under 8 hours, just a rent if you ask me. Expand
  18. JorgeM.
    Mar 5, 2008
    7
    This game could of used some more polish. The cover system is OK at best. The graphics are really nice but not the best I've seen on either the PS3 or 360..Take a look at the water and the fact that nothing is destructable not even a PC on a dest...nothing (oh, i forgot the gas tanks blow up.) Still this game is a good time for the 5-6 hours it takes to beat it. But, after you beat This game could of used some more polish. The cover system is OK at best. The graphics are really nice but not the best I've seen on either the PS3 or 360..Take a look at the water and the fact that nothing is destructable not even a PC on a dest...nothing (oh, i forgot the gas tanks blow up.) Still this game is a good time for the 5-6 hours it takes to beat it. But, after you beat it you might not want to play it anymore than you have to..unless you need every achievement. Expand
Metascore
72

Mixed or average reviews - based on 76 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 35 out of 76
  2. Negative: 3 out of 76
  1. It has plenty of redeeming and rewarding features to offset its linear limitations, but it was designed to be played with a friend, so approach with caution if you don't have Xbox Live or a friend to partner up with.
  2. Calling Army of Two a poor mans Gears of War may be unfair, but the comparison is a reality as the game falls short on so many levels.
  3. Army of Two’s solo mission doesn’t match the firepower of its two-person co-op play, either in the offline game or online. But it does have plenty enough gun-filled action to satiate any violence-fans fill, and if the online gameplay is functionally free of lag or connectivity issues, Army of Two is one of the better recently released titles in regards to Xbox Live gaming.