Army of Two

All I can say is wow. Ive been a fan of your reviews since youve started but I really have to disagree with this. I know it's my opinion but I thought the story was great. Online co op is really fun, graphics are some of the best Ive seen and you didn't even mention the weapon buying in the game. I though it was really fun. Multiplayer is kinda dull but yes a crappy AI. This review makes it seem that you have it in for EA. I thought that they finally came out on top until I read your review. Truthfully I fully disagree. AI sucks but who plays with him. Your going search for some random guy on live and plus I haven't had a problem with the AI. I'm sorry but in my eyes Army of Two is 8 material.

I have to admit, getting used to the 3rd person shooting did take me a few minutes to get used, but over the game was what I expected to be. It's exactly what it was meant to do, make you work as a team. I only saw two minor faults. 1) The whole hiding behind a wall was sort of loosey goosey, it was sometimes hard to see if you were actually hiding behind the wall and if you were peeking around the corning I always re-adjusting my character to shoot around a corner. 2) which most people complaints was that of the A.I, a little sloppy, but with a litte tweakng the A.I can be top form to give all of us a good challenge.

Wow. I didn't think this game was COMPLETELY PERFECT, but really, a 5.5? I think this review is really too harsh. Army of Two at least deserves a 7 because of its co-op play.

Too bad. Still, I'm going to play it on co-op, so any bad elements shouldn't be a problem.

sigh... I love this game, why all the haters? I thought it was fun playing by myself... once you get used to the partner control he helps so much. Online co-op is virtually lag free(from my experience and i play with someone on the other side of the country). Versus is unique and fun, though i do wish that you could pick your guns and armor like in campaign, rather the whole "counter-strike" deal. I have 3 other good friends who have it so we make private matches and battle each other. Rock Band is only fun with others (IMO) so why criticize a game centered around co-op specifically? You are the man Dan, but i disagree with you on this one. I would say at least a solid 8 at least.
GT: Lady of Shalott

I think metacritic pretty much nailed it.

Critics: 72/100

Average Joe: 8.4

I though exactly the opposite of everyone else. I loved the campaign and I hate the online multiplayer. I wish it had a regular deathmatch gametype instead of the wierd objective based gametype. Yeah it's different from normal but I think deathmatch and team deathmatch would have been fun in this game as well. As for the A.I. yes it can be quirky at times but I've also seen my A.I. partner do some amazing things plus the achievements come easier than a lot of games. I haven't done all of them yet but they all seem possible.

While I agree with most i still found this game fun. I think a choas theory coop like game would have been better but this game isn't that bad. The AI partner is stupid but still helps out.The coop is insanly fun. I would say its a 7.5.

ok, Dan ... i forgive you ... you (OXM) and I certainly didn't see eye to eye on Rock Band ... which I sold to some guy a week after buying it ... utterly loathsome ... I love Army of 2 though!

personally, I enjoyed the singleplayer and the 2 v 2 isn't bad... if you are able to find a match you don't instantly lag out of.

Hm... Guess I won't be picking this up.

Yep, Darth, first thing I tried was the 2v2 online. In fact, the second screenshot of this review is from that session -- look closely at the HUD and you'll see it's the team interface.

This is the same text that will appear in the next issue, and I was working under the word count restriction, but here's the sentence that you're looking for: 2v2 was fun but wasn't the kind of thing that would pull me away from COD4 or other online options.

I know I'm on the low end of reviews on this one, but as usual, if the stuff that I specifically note as negative isn't the kind of stuff that bothers you, you still have the info you need to make a decision. As a staff, we discussed this score at length before deciding.

it's not THAT bad ... sheesh!

your AI buddy is ALOT smarter than the yahoos you're stuck with in ALOT of other games (brothers in arms? c'mon ... gears? how many times in a row does Dom get downed my Kryll?) ... AI Rios and I played very well together! I'm not sure you and I played the same game?!

Dan is one of, if not THE critic I trust the most - perhaps a rental is in order, here.

-- http://www.nukoda.com --
Gamertag: MitchyD88

This is one of those very few times I disagree with OXM on a game review. I enjoy the game a lot. I'd rather play with a friend, but that's fine... many of mine have it. It's no where near perfect, I freely admit that. But I have a ton of fun playing it.

I've never been one for online, multiplayer shooters. I seriously dislike them. I've always liked co-op games and this one may bring me back into shooters.

I disagree with the plot being silly and repetitive shooting galleries statement. I can name off several games that won awards and received much higher review scores, that fit that same pattern.

It was bound to happen though. We can't always agree on the same things. =]

I agree about the AI,but What about multiplayer? I think its good. Why not even mention the 2v2 combat WHILE fighting the AI natives? its fun,frenzied,and fast paced. Did you even try it?