Got news?   tips@destructoid.com  |  Never miss a story:   RSS + Twitter + YouTube
Hey! New here? Destructoid is a gaming discussion community, updated nearly every 20 minutes. Make a quick avatar to comment and enter our contests. Take the tour!

 


Home Xbox 360 updates

Destructoid review: Army of Two

8:53 PM on 03.08.2008, Anthony Burch 79 comments

     Xbox 360

erere

Why aren't there more co-op games? Why are so many modern titles focused either on only singleplayer campaigns and multiplayer deathmatches, with multiplayer co-op often acting as nothing more than an afterthought? The act of going through an entire campaign with the help of a close friend or online stranger can, in theory, combine the best aspects of both single- and multiplayer modes; the player still gets an interesting story and level design catered specifically for the players' enjoyment, but with all the fun social networking that a pleasant multiplayer game can afford (when played with friends, that is).

Because of this, I was reasonably excited for Army of Two. This third-person shooter was built from the ground up with cooperative multiplayer in mind, and only cooperative multiplayer in mind. Many other reviewers have docked points from the game's score simply because the singleplayer is bland, but that's not the goddamn point. Army of Two is a multiplayer cooperative game, and should only be played or judged as a multiplayer cooperative game. 

Still, though, does Army of Two succeed in what it sets out to do? Does it craft a fun, engaging cooperative experience in which teamwork is required rather than a gimmick?

No.

Army of Two (XBox 360 reviewed, PS3)
Developed by EA Montreal
Published by EA
Released on March 4, 2008

Army of Two is built on a really cute idea: design an entirely cooperative campaign where the two players are forced to symbiotically rely on one another at every turn, and wrap it around an intensely relevant story about private military groups and the commodification of war. 

Shame that it isn't very good

Without getting into the moral or political implications of the story -- that's for another day-- Army of Two's narrative is awfully boring considering the nature of the premise. Given all the horrible things we've heard about Blackwater from CNN and NBC over the past few months, one would expect Army of Two to make profound, disturbing, or at least mildly interesting statements about the privatization of the military. Instead, the game treats the premise as nothing more than an excuse for contemporary, globe-spanning warfare. I'd have been willing to accept the overall dullness of the plot were it not for the facts that every "twist" is telegraphed at least five missions in advance, both protagonists have exactly two character traits ("badass" and "compassionate" or "badass" and "selfish"), and the final boss is killed in a friggin' cut scene. And I don't mean you shoot him a bunch of times, only to watch him fall to his death or something in a noninteractive cut scene. I mean you don't even get to fight him at all. You run to the last area, and the game essentially beats the boss for you. Seriously.

erere

But story aside, is the co-op gameplay any good? Well, yes and no -- mostly, no.

Starting with the good, the guys at EA Montreal did a nice job of sprinkling a few moments throughout the campaign where both players are forced to completely rely on each other. For example, several times players will find themselves floating to the ground on a parachute; one player will control the direction of the parachute, while the other shoots at enemies below with a sniper rifle. Even cooler is the scripted Back to Back mode, where both players stand facing away from one another and must blow away dozens of surrounding enemies in slow-mo.

In moments like these, players must cooperate with each other to survive: if the gunner doesn't tell the parachute controller where to move and when, they'll get cut down by gunfire, and if the players in Back to Back don't cover their own areas, then a stray suicide bomber might vey well blow the duo to kingdom come.

Indeed, Army of Two's best moments can be found in these scripted co-op setpieces; they channel the intrinsic fun of playing with a buddy by forcing co-dependence. At times, Army of Two feels like exactly what it should: a fun, cooperative experience.

Additionally, Army of Two has some pretty clever mechanics of its own. The visual aggro system is really helpful and interesting (an "aggrometer" at the top of the screen tracks who is drawing the most fire, while the most aggro-heavy player glows bright red), and the fact that objective completion earns players money which can then be spent on weapon upgrades adds a sense of persistent progress to the campaign. These mechanics feel fresh, fun, and mildly innovative.

It's just that everything else about Army of Two's campaign kind of blows.

erere

Most notably, the controls are abysmal. The pause menu only allows three freelook sensitivity settings instead of a slider, and even on the highest setting the controls are still sluggish as heck. There's a definite delay between the time a player turns in a direction and when their onscreen avatar actually begins to move -- given the high-octane nature of the game, this is almost totally inexcusable.

Not only are the slow aiming controls simply irritating on a surface level, but they make the guns far less useful. In the later levels of the game, as enemies stream from multiple directions simultaneously, I actually found it much easier and more effective to run straight at the baddies and melee them to death, thanks to a one-hit-kill physical attack mechanic. I don't begrudge EA Montreal for including the melee mechanic, but it has to be said: if your aiming system sucks so much that running directly into a hail of gunfire is a more strategically viable option that shooting at enemies from a medium distance, then your control scheme has some serious problems.

Better controls might have saved the campaign which, while it includes the aforementioned clever co-op moments, generally feels like a crappy Gears of War clone. From the hilariously beefy protagonists, to the bleed-out system, to the enemies who can take up to half a clip of bullets before dropping dead, the non-scripted aspects of Army of Two's campaign don't do anything that Gears of War's co-op campaign didn't do much, much better and much, much earlier. I don't fault Army of Two for being derivative of Gears of War; I fault it for being derivative and boring, with awful controls. Hell, cooperation isn't even necessary given how many bullets each soldier can take; once you get over the novelty of boosting your buddy up over a fence so he can snipe at baddies on the other side, you'll find the story mode irritatingly dull.

The co-op campaign itself is awfully short (I completed it in about six or seven hours), but this isn't necessarily a bad thing; the game already begins to wear out its welcome once the final level rolls around, and a few extra hours of repetitive playtime wouldn't necessarily have helped matters. 

erer

With an alternately original and irritating co-op campaign, one might assume the Versus multiplayer to fall into that same trap nearly all supposedly "next-gen" games do, where developers take the character models from the main game, plop them into deathmatch and CTF modes, and call it a multiplayer experience. Oddly -- and pleasantly -- this isn't the case in Army of Two. There's only one versus mode, but it's a real doozy. Up to four players, two on each team, fight on reasonably large maps wherein they complete objectives and earn money, which can then be used to purchase new weapons and gear.

A typical versus map won't just have one or two objectives, but around a dozen: players will race to one end of the map to blow up a fuel tank, then suddenly find themselves escorting an unarmed hostage to a helipad, then afterward rushing to kill a specific NPC. That's right -- in addition to the four human players, each versus map is populated with dozens of easier-to-kill NPCs who constantly keep all players on their toes and actually do a damn good job in replicating the feel of the regular co-op campaign. The controls still suck, of course, but the varied objectives, upgrade mechanics, and numerous NPCs make the versus mode a much more entertaining and substantial experience than I ever would have imagined.

Overall, Army of Two has many good ideas but ultimately falls flat on its promise. It's got some fun moments of cooperativity, some clever mechanics, and an unusually badass multiplayer mode, but its horrible controls and vanilla campaign mode prevent Army of Two from being even an above-average game. 

Score: 4.5

ere


Next page: More Reviews stories




Jayeugene's Avatar
Jayeugene at 03/08/2008 20:57
I would have given it an 8.. im really enjoying the gameplay!
jdub28's Avatar
jdub28 at 03/08/2008 21:00
also, why cant we get a regular buddy cop game? any one else think men in black could be the best co-op series ever
Jaren Face's Avatar
Jaren Face at 03/08/2008 21:00
Very nice write-up. I haven't been checking up on the game, but was interested in what little I saw. The review added to my decision to rent it just to check out that online versus mode. It picture it to be so chaotic, but one of the better online experiences out there. I hope the controls are at least good enough to carry me through that.
bovine's Avatar
bovine at 03/08/2008 21:04
dear rev,

you are amazing

-bovine
Kyousuke Nanbu's Avatar
Kyousuke Nanbu at 03/08/2008 21:05
Felt the same way when I played, the co-op campaign to me is the best co-op experience ever, but its so damn short :(
wardrox's Avatar
wardrox at 03/08/2008 21:06
Terrible review, you should do more critique type articles and stop putting them off. That's just my opinion... from reading the alt-text.

Also, nice review.
Professor Pew's Avatar
Professor Pew at 03/08/2008 21:08
I agree with most of your points Rev, but didn't mind them too much; what with the lack of coop games around. Thing like the aiming for example are inexcusable for a shooter. Although after working around it a bit, I had a lot of fun while it lasted.
Probably a nice rental if you have a mate and a severe hunger for anything coop :)

Hopefully this and Left 4 Dead will at least invigorate the development of more coop games.
wardrox's Avatar
wardrox at 03/08/2008 21:11
Would it help with your disappointment of games if I sent you pictures of me poofing my cheeks out?
The Johnggernaut's Avatar
The Johnggernaut at 03/08/2008 21:19
Sounds like you expected too much rev. I mean, as far as story and all that goes. The gameplay mechanics were perfect and you can make every moment of the game co-op if you choose, but it is not forced. Leapfrogging from point ot point and using aggro and cover... I dunno, I can't agree with this review completely.

War related stories rarely have much story in them. The other guys need to die for whatever reason, go get 'em. The multiplayer is where the replay value comes in and as you pointed out it's a great and original system. I give this bad boy a 9...
McSnow's Avatar
McSnow at 03/08/2008 21:20
I've just been playing this at a friends for the last 5 hours, we didn't complete it but I felt we had got close to the end.
I have to agree with the rating, EA had all the right ingredients but they didn't know how to bake the cake.
The character interaction is great, the use of the (A) and R-Trigger as interaction between the two heroes is so simple but adds so much to the depth of the game.

I get great enjoyment out of dragging my downed team mate to safety, while he covers my back, so I can patch him up but this is the only of the many co-op interactions that I didn't find gimmicky.

You know that every time you see a broken stair, you will have to do a push-jump.Every time you come across a closed door they will rip it off its hinges (seriously, how the hell do they do that, are they superhuman?).

And whats with all the loading screens and cut scenes every time you reach a door? It completely ruins the flow of the game.
I enjoyed being able to upgrade and mess about with my guns, it fits in nicely with the mercenary theme, but don't badger me three times in every level if I want to go shopping. Sheesh.

As for the Aggro-meter, nice idea, but the only time we paid any attention to it at all was when we were forced to, such as those strange invincible-in-the-front but soft-and-squidgey-in-the-back soldiers who appear once or twice per level. Even the turrets were easily removed with an accurate grenade throw.

I will go back round my friends and complete it with him, but I will not be purchasing it for myself.
PsychosesMan's Avatar
PsychosesMan at 03/08/2008 21:22
So I guess you felt the whole "no local co-op" thing wasn't worth mentioning?
catsithx's Avatar
catsithx at 03/08/2008 21:23
It does sound nice I'll tell my freind to rent it
the GAMEGOBLIN's Avatar
the GAMEGOBLIN at 03/08/2008 21:26
@Heretic, Reaprar

I was disappointed, sure. But I think it's an above-average game. It deserves the rent, sure, and the single player is not that great. Overall it's a game worth your time, and in my opinion it deserves to be labeled more than an average game.
the GAMEGOBLIN's Avatar
the GAMEGOBLIN at 03/08/2008 21:27
@PsychosesMan

There IS local co-op. And you can take a guest with you on live, they just have to have gold which makes it not as helpful as it should.
bluexy's Avatar
bluexy at 03/08/2008 21:30
I agree with you on all points Rev, you might even have been too kind with your score. Below average game, especially considering the standards we hold shooters up to these days.
Wedge's Avatar
Wedge at 03/08/2008 21:37
Well hey, it's better than Zelda ;O
Dr Milkdad's Avatar
Dr Milkdad at 03/08/2008 21:38
I've enjoyed what I've played thus far. It's nothing incredible but I've enjoyed playing online a lot.

Good for a laugh, nothing spectacular. Wouldn't pay full price for this game though, I'd wait until the price goes down or just rent it.
emotaku's Avatar
emotaku at 03/08/2008 21:49
"Who's your favorite rapper in the Wu-Tang Clan?"

10/10
ceark's Avatar
ceark at 03/08/2008 22:16
that's a buzz kill. I just bought it. haven't had a chance to play coop but I'm not impressed with the single player though.
TheStripe's Avatar
TheStripe at 03/08/2008 22:27
Crackdown is definitely better.
HarassmentPanda's Avatar
HarassmentPanda at 03/08/2008 22:41
Nice review. I figured this game would be a little above average, but I have no desire to play it anyway.
vexed alex's Avatar
vexed alex at 03/08/2008 22:42
Great review, Rev. I was hoping this game wouldn't suck. Oh well.
Chocobo Knight's Avatar
Chocobo Knight at 03/08/2008 22:44
Thanks for the review. I guess it's another mediocre EA outing.
VWGTI's Avatar
VWGTI at 03/08/2008 22:48
I was interested in checking this game out, but with Condemned 2, Crisis Core, and Warriors Orochi(PSP) coming out in the next week or so, I'll pass on this until it sees a massive price drop. I could see myself picking it up when it hits $30.
kawitchate's Avatar
kawitchate at 03/08/2008 22:53
yeah, but what did you think of Brawl?
Netrat33's Avatar
Netrat33 at 03/08/2008 22:56
Although I haven't tried this game yet to put in my own 2 cents, I really think the Reverend doesn't like any games.

http://www.gamestats.com/objects/825/825894//articles.html

I've be constantly hearing it's a decent game. Nothing awarding no but fun. I'd say about 90% of the time the Reverend just seems to not like any game he plays. He's like Yatzee only not funny.
braulio09's Avatar
braulio09 at 03/08/2008 22:57
I think the Rev might've accidentally put his Brawl score on the Army of Two review.

lulz i so funny!
Netrat33's Avatar
Netrat33 at 03/08/2008 22:58
*award winning I meant to say. Nothing award winning. I just come in to see which game you hate next.
Wack's Avatar
Wack at 03/08/2008 23:09
Having just beat the game, I would agree. rent it, play it with a friend and bring it back. It is enjoyable, but has one of the most disappointing endings and anticlimaxes I have ever seen, and I use the word SEEN on purpose.
Clockwork's Avatar
Clockwork at 03/08/2008 23:23
Well I think I'm just going to go through it once through co-op and then be done with it.
Steel Squirrel's Avatar
Steel Squirrel at 03/08/2008 23:24
Sad. This game's been getting hyped for quite a while now, probably a good year and a half......

Hopefully Fable 2 brings the goods when it comes to some co-op action!
Sharpless's Avatar
Sharpless at 03/08/2008 23:37
In case anyone brings it up again, Tycho didn't mean that the game doesn't have local co-op. It doesn't allow for LANing, that's all. You can still play on splitscreen.
adultswim810's Avatar
adultswim810 at 03/08/2008 23:38
i was thinkin 7 but w/etwo things i would like to point out,
1. One thing about the controls i found interesting was the passive cover system it was looser than something like GOW but it still had blindfire and junk which you wont find in something like halo or cod 4. you dont feel locked into cover if you know what i mean.
2. fucking getting like both of you to go up to a door to rip it down or press buttons at the same time felt EXTREMELY gimmicky.

Rainbow 2 better be better co-op than this cus i loved the first.
thisissami's Avatar
thisissami at 03/08/2008 23:42
i think that the moral and political issues that you said is for another day is actually pretty important... that on it's own is worth dropping another point or two! seriously, the stereotypes they have in that game are disgusting! my roommates and i bought this game this morning, and wow, the way they portray arabs is simply appalling!

also, we have the PS3 version, and the online mode really sucks on that. i don't know if it's because of EA's servers or because everybody we played against had slow connections, but it was seriously the worst lag i've ever experienced on a game online. if you hit the right analog stick to get the camera to move to a certain direction, the actual camera would begin to move about 2.5 seconds later (in the extremely slow fashion that you explained in the review).

i agree with every point you have in the review though... nice job!
GutZ's Avatar
GutZ at 03/08/2008 23:55
I was horribly suprized that almost all other gaming sites gave this piece of crap game more then 7 points.

Is it just me, or is it time to give up on EA?
ZeroTolo's Avatar
ZeroTolo at 03/08/2008 23:55
I was expecting a little bit more, but I think that I'll still pick this up at some point. Like most people say, reviews are just opinions. Nice write up though.
Azeron's Avatar
Azeron at 03/09/2008 00:14
You forgot to mention the reason no European should buy this game: it's region locked so you can't play multiplayer with your friends in the US. Wtf?
Paul Soth's Avatar
Paul Soth at 03/09/2008 00:23
I still remember the preview a few months ago where the writer called the game "ugly" and the lead characters "douchebags."

Perhaps when this shows up at Big Lots for $5.00. Nah... I even skipped out on Bad Day LA for that much.
taumpytears's Avatar
taumpytears at 03/09/2008 00:39
I feel bad for you Rev. Find a good game.
Atlas's Avatar
Atlas at 03/09/2008 00:56
I bought this game, knowing it would not live up to the hype, and you know, it is actually pretty decent to play with my brother. Once I got the hang of it I was even having fun!
Wack's Avatar
Wack at 03/09/2008 03:06
The controls aren't bad at all, they aren't a fucking work of art, but they aren't how you describe them. I never found myself desiring to up the sensitivity.

Also, what difficulty were you playing in that you could run into a hail of bullets unscathed? On Contractor, you just can't do that, before you get to the guy you would be close to death.
Boolean's Avatar
Boolean at 03/09/2008 03:21
Holy shit, 4.5? HAHA!
Cyberxion's Avatar
Cyberxion at 03/09/2008 03:22
"Additionally, Army of Two has some pretty clever he visual aggro system is really helpful and interesting "

While I'm not one to point out errors in text and whatnot, not being grammatically inclined and all that, this makes no sense. I'm thinking that something probably got edited out accidentally.

No big deal, just wanted to give you a heads-up. ;)
Necros's Avatar
Necros at 03/09/2008 03:46
Ah, shame, I was hoping this would live up to its promise.
Usedtabe's Avatar
Usedtabe at 03/09/2008 05:23
@ThisisSami: Funny, I had no problems with there portayal of the Arab TERRORISTs you fight in the game. What, did you expect them and their cause to be made noble becuase they say it is?
I honestly did not see any stereotypes. I never heard a funny accent(as in making fun of) for the Arabs or the Asian terrorists. What did they stereotype? That they had guns, and were shooting?
3r0t1c n3rd's Avatar
3r0t1c n3rd at 03/09/2008 05:30
Let us now if you get any death threats, Rev.
DeusPayne's Avatar
DeusPayne at 03/09/2008 07:14
"thanks to a one-hit-kill physical attack mechanic"

WRONG. You clearly only played on easy. The only time melee is one-hit-kill is in the stealth mode of Overkill. In normal towards the end of the game, and hard right from the beginning, meleeing is 100x more bad than it is good. 99% of the time they will melee you first, and the other 1% of the time, you don't kill them, so while you're meleeing, you get shot by someone else.
DeusPayne's Avatar
DeusPayne at 03/09/2008 07:20
Oh, should also point out you didn't mention the hideous excuse for a cover system. No button to go in and out, so you don't end up being behind cover half the time. Plus, the inability to swap camera sides (like in GRAW) makes it so you aim at a wall on your right instead of harmlessly around it.
prev next 50 comments

Returning Dtoiders: login now to post a comment

Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just Create an avatar now - it's fast and free: PLUS you also get your own gaming blog and begin posting stories and uploading videos in our open community area that may also appear on our home page. Sign up and we'll guide you through it, it's easy and 100% anonymous.




 Original Videos

 Reviews
Mad Dog McCree Gunslinger Pack
Overlord II
Yosumin Live!
Let's Tap
Ghostbusters: The Video Game (Wii)
View all Game Reviews

 Community blogs -   39769 Dtoiders!

This month's theme: Untapped Potential

New to Dtoid? Read the survival guide


 Originals

How Pokemon Red is blatantly better than Pokemon Blue











more original Destructoid stories



 Popular now more













Destructoid is:
Nick Chester
Editor-in-Chief
Jim Sterling
Reviews Editor
Dale North
News Editor
Hamza Aziz
Community Manager
Anthony Burch
Features Editor
Rey Gutierrez
Video editor & director
Niero
Founder, publisher
Letters to the editors
tips@destructoid.com
Associate Editors
Ashley Davis Jonathan Holmes
Brad Nicholson Jonathan Ross
Brad Rice Jordan Devore
Chad Concelmo Matthew Razak
Colette Bennett Tom Fronczak
Conrad Zimmerman Topher Cantler
Dyson Samit Sarkar
Contributors
Adam Dork
Ben Perlee
Daniel Lingen
Joseph Leray
Joe Burling
Mikey
Will Maddock
Stella Wong




get involved

register or login
post a blog
post a forum
enter a contest
discuss a review
contribute a news tip
write a guest editorial
support

new member's guide
login assistance
tech support
report abuse
email our editors
read our dev blog
nuclear crisis?
keep in touch

RSS feed
Twitter
Facebook
Myspace
Flickr
Game nights
Meet-ups
seriously

about us
advertising
terms of use
privacy policy
jobs at MM
buy our crap
our network

Tomopop
Japanator




Destructoid is an independently-run publication forged by our love of video games and the gaming community's need of accountable enthusiast press
living the dream since March 16, 2006