Comments on: Army of Two or R6 Vegas 2?

By: Hoferman

Hoferman — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 11:36:02 +0000

I think you should get army of two. i have got it. online isnt very good and sometimes doesnt work but the offline game is awesome. i have seen many images and videos of Vegas and i cant see enough difference or improvement on the first vegas. So i wondered which one to get as well and i chose army of two. I am pleased with my decision.

By: Nando Redrum

Nando Redrum — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 21:37:33 +0000

Dude, find a way to get both. Army of Two is fun as hell, and R6:V2 will be even better than the first. Rainbow definitely has more longevity than any other shooter I’ve played, including COD4.

By: MetalProxy

MetalProxy — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 16:44:21 +0000

Army of Two is a solid Meh. I wish I would have rented it. RSV2 is going to rock…hopefully.

By: HachiRoku

HachiRoku — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 16:01:03 +0000

After having a blast with Rainbow Six Vegas online co-op, I will DEFINITELY be picking up R6V2. I am not even considering Army of Two, because it is strictly 2 players, whereas R6V is up to 4 players co-op. I’m hoping the maps in R6V2 will be bigger, and missions longer. My biggest gripe with GRAW2 and R6V was the online co-op missions only lasted about 5-10minutes! That’s crazy…
At least R6V had *lots* of maps to play through. GRAW2 was a real let down.
Jason, with regards to your framerate issue, comparing CoD4 to R6V… yeah, I know nothing out there is really as slick as CoD4, but then again, all the Rainbow6/Ghost Recon games always had that ‘slow feel’ to them. It’s about tactics and one-shot kills. Whereas CoD4 can be played almost as a run-and-gun, ala Quake style. So it may not be fair to compare the two…
(don’t get me wrong, I LOVE CoD4 to death. But will only start playing online again when the MUTE feature patch comes out)

By: macdumpy

macdumpy — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 15:43:43 +0000

Army Of Two deserves the 78% it’s been getting in the press as of late (ranging from 85-70%). Assuming 50% is ‘baseline’ – the game is definitely better than a baseline game, just not outstanding.

However, I should note that CoD4 has ruined me for many games — that is the new benchmark for me. Because of games like CoD4, Army of Two now has a ‘budget’ feel to it graphically. Heavy aliasing, and lack of effects, just don’t make me say ‘wow’ — that is not to say they are BAD, just not great.

The co-op game-play isn’t as complex as I would have liked — again my ‘bar’ would be Splinter Cell for co-op. Army of Two falls short of that. It’s not very complex, if you could imagine – Quake or 4 player Co-op Doom would be closer. It’s a fun ‘arcade’ shooter – no where near the depth seen in other games, but the upside is that it’s very friendly for playing co-op with less experienced gamers (I get split screen gaming time with my gaming-illerate brother).

Online, the nature of pure-coop play isn’t very conducive to ‘pickup’ games – i.e. you need to know your peer in order to play competitively. For example, in CoD4 if one player on your 6 player isn’t very good, it has a small (17%) impact on the team. But in Army of Two, a poor player, has 50% impact.

In conclusion – graphically, complexity, and online are all passable, just not A+. With a dedicated friend to play (split/online) with, the game definitely gains ground, but stays short of an A title. I don’t think this game will have legs though, as co-op vs. computer replay value is low, and the lack of good pickup games online, makes it a little risky for a single game purchase. As an addition to an existing collection, it’s solid, it just can’t stand on it’s own. I strongly suggest waiting. Wait and see what the reviews of RB6V2 say.

It’s not an A title, but a solid B.