Army of Two, the upcoming third-person shooter from EA, was built from the ground up to be a cooperative experience where you and a friend plow through hordes of enemy soldiers in the pursuit of mo-money. Since its delay Army of Two has stepped into the shadows, but assistant producer Matt Turner recently sat down with CVG and discussed how the game has improved since it slipped off the 2007 calendar and promised the game will deliver, "a new type of multiplayer." CVG scored video footage of the Xbox 360 version in all its co-op glory but considering what we've heard in the past, we'd like to get our hands on it to find out how the game is shaping up since the delay ourselves.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
2-11-2008 @ 4:57PM
AnOffday said...
Who cares what was said about it in the past. Everything they trashed it about it had nothing to do with the actual gameplay. It was all because the writer was an anti-war liberal. It was easy to tell by the things he said about it. Of course he was going to trash it. I'm more interested in the gameplay, then whether or not it agrees with my political views.
Reply
2-11-2008 @ 5:07PM
ZEBRA NINER said...
Yeah! McCain for President! w00t!
2-11-2008 @ 4:58PM
ZEBRA NINER said...
w00t! I can't wait for this one! Co-op FTW!
Reply
2-11-2008 @ 7:03PM
ccc said...
My intrest in this game is rising despite what that web site said about it being complete garbage, it just looks to good from what I see to suck. Still I will watch reviews for it. March is a busy month........
Dark Sector, Rainbow 6 Vegas 2, Condemed 2 and Army of 2....wow brings back painful 07 holiday memories.
Reply
2-11-2008 @ 7:58PM
Brianemone said...
We did a preview last week, not as fancy as the CVG one but a preview none the less
http://www.geekpulp.co.nz/2008/02/10/army-of-two-video-preview/
Reply
3-14-2008 @ 2:07AM
Kevin said...
The graffix are Stunning and Amazing, however I think they spent too much time developing how the game looks instead of generating good game play. The game forces you to use co-op strategy to complete missions and to advance down the field of battle. Sounds cool and would be if your tools for carrying out this "co-op" were slightly more intelligent than a 2 year old. In other words its impossible to play the game how its supposed to. For instance there is a few parts where you grab a shield and your partner is supposed to stay behind you and fire, but despite there being an enemy 5 feet in front of him completely in the open he still can't seem to kill him with his 60 round fully automatic weapon. And he feels the dying urge to keep running out of cover and into the open to get killed despite me giving him the hold position command. Any type of realistic tactics to use diversion and then advance down the field and flank your enemies wich is a huge part of how you are supposed to play the game is quickly destroyed by random enemies just running around out of cover and flanking you or coming up behind you. No matter how hard I try and stay in cover and slowly advance im soon surrounded and left with no options, so then I try and just run in and kill everyone. That doesnt work either. There isnt enough control over your AI to make for a good well develpoed co-op style game play. It seems as though there is no real strategy or way your supposed to play the game, its just random and incomplete. I wil giver this game a 2 out of 10for gameplay and an 11 out of 10 for cg.
Reply