I know I am! I swear, this game gets worse and worse the more times I play through the SP. The ONLY redeeming quality is the MP. I have yet to lose a match online. Too bad you can't play ranked with a guest. My highest total happened last night when I was playing with my friend splitscreen. I think it topped out at 3.6 million. The other team only had 600 thounsand something, can't really remember. Other then the MP, the game is junk. The team mate AI is useless. Thanks for dragging me INTO enemy fire, then heal me or letting us get flanked from your side. :roll:

Anyways, I know it's old news by now, but once I get the achievements there's no reason to really keep this game. I've already got half of achievements right now. I should have the rest by this weekend. Probably trade it in and help my friend pay off his copy of RSV2.

EnderSR388

The game was great fun on my first playthough. But that was it for me. I tried playing it again and I just can't get into it. It's a 1 pump chump game for me.

I already own a PS3 so I am good on that front...Squeets

Same here.

[QUOTE="gamingqueen"]Why? Aren't game developers doing the same by expressing their opinion in a medium as videogames? Why can't reviewers do the same thing? KoolEmpty

Because game reviewers are thought of as people who "review games" NOT give a social commentary, or try to sway other people beliefs about the world. Those people are called bloggers etc. There is/should be a very clear line between the two. I'm already sick of celebs voicing their s**t opinions, I don't care to hear some no-name game reviewer doing the same. Comparing gamespot reviewers to people who actually have talent probably isn't the best way to go about making whatever point you thought you had.

I agree. I don't care what these people think about current/world affairs. I come here to get game reviews, not some guys opinion of the Iraq war. If he doesn't like the game, fine. But I'd like it to be for reasons other than his conflicting political views.

[QUOTE="picard3399"]after playing the 360 version, no.Matt2556

Why would he want to buy the ps3 version when he already played the 360 version? I don't think that qualifies him for a fanboy spot.

IMO the review seemed more like an editorial than a game review. I can respect his opinions, even if I don't agree with them. But they shouldn't be in the review. If he wants to comment on current events he can blog it.

[QUOTE="cmpepper23"]

My 1st message: cmpepper23 wrote:CRAP is what you wrote. You clearly have a personal problem with the subject matter of the game, but that is something you should keep to yourself. Reviews are supposed to be unbiased, and it's clear you let your beliefs affect the review. Not everybody is offended by the story as you apparently are. I for one rather enjoyed the story, and felt like it gave an interesting look into the world of PMCs. This game had some of the best looking cutscenes ever in a game. I could respect your review if you gave valid points and solid reasoning behind them, but what you wrote was garbage. You are a professional or at least a hired writer so do your job like one. You are incompetent. I am very offended, not at the score, but at how your biasness is clearly portrayed in this review.

J_Dodson wrote:

Joe's 1st response: I'm not any more biased about Army of 2 than you are about my review of it. The game's trivial portrayal of something real and controversial offended my sensibilities, sensibilities you do not share. My review of it offended you, just like the game offended me.

My 2nd message: It's okay that you are offended by it, but your sensibilities should not get the way of the review. Some people are sensitive to things like gang violence or zombies, but no reviewers said the subject matter of a GTA, Yakuza, or RE was offensive or put that in their review. They are videogames. The war in Iraq is a sensitive subject, but even though, you have to remember this is a gaming website and not CNN. As a gamespot user, I don't want to see reviewers personal feelings get in the way of the review. Me not agreeing with your review is in no way the same as you letting your offended sensibilities get in the way of your work. Write it in your blog not a review. I am not biased against your review. I just think it was poorly done. I agree with some things you said about the gameplay and graphics. You have to remember this written for the public to get feel for the game, not read about your personal issues with the War or PMCs. I mean you said it would be ok if they made fun of another army but not ours. What if they get offended? You said this have taken place in the future. Why? We have all played WW2 shooters, but nobody complained about being offended by them. I liked the fact that developers are willing to push the envelope and give us somtething fresh. Thats what games are for. If anything take this as constructive criticism and learn from it. I assure I am not the only person to notice this.

From:J_Dodson Sent: Mar 11, 2008 1:16 am CT Subject: RE: Army of Two Review If something about a game bothers me, I tell you. If it doesn't bother you, then you can dismiss it. I can't try to pretend things don't bother me, just because I think they won't bother you. That's not how honesty works.

Joe's last response: Having said that, the subject matter isn't what bothers me about Army of Two. Private military and the Iraq war could be fine subjects for a video game. What bothered me was that Army of Two doesn't really address those subjects. It brings them up, and then turns them into total fantasy.

For instance, let's say this game and I had a conversation:

Army of Two: Hey Joe. Let's talk about private military contractors in Iraq.

Me: Okay, shoot.

Army of Two: They're super heroes, did you know that?

Me: WTF? Are you high?

Army of Two: No, they're high! Highly skilled at killing terrorists by the thousands. Not like the army. Which is stupid.

Me: You are completely insane. What about all the stuff in the news? What about the fact that they can't go to court for war crimes? What about the fear they must feel in Iraq? What about the civilians? Did they kill civilians?

Army of Two: I dunno. But did you know they have cool names, like Salem and Rio?

Me: ARGH!

That's how I felt playing Army of Two.

I know this ia a wall of text, but reading this guy's responses let's you see how ridiculous his thought process really is. I was a little harsh on him in my first message, but I feel I had the right to be after his poor review. I was going to message him back, but after that conversation he created, it became obvious that this guy is very close minded about the subject, and doesn't care to step outside his box and look at it from our pont of view. Who makes up conversations with games to justify theirselves?

ronniepage588

that was the lamest answer. he needs to get out more dude. ITS A VIDEOGAME- not the all-telling final verdict for every human on earths opinions and beliefs. a videogame!!!

yeah, i guess we all got offended by movies about mercs or even worse RAMBO!!! omg rambo is so offensive!!! hhahah, no its just cool not offensive. i gaurantee theres plenty of dudes in the army who would love to play this game. what a dork

Not to mention that it's a FICTIONAL senario. He says it brings up the subject and turns it into fantasy? Sure. It's not a documentary. When we start relying on video games for our history and current events we'll be in trouble. And how many other shooters make you feel like a super hero? All of them? How many bullets can you take in real life with out falling over and dying? In an average shooter I probably take dozens of bullets and keep on trucking. And in how many shooters do you play a soldier that gets charged with war crimes? None. So why point it out just for this game? It's not like the PMCs have the monopoly on doing bad things... Jeez!

My 1st message: cmpepper23 wrote:CRAP is what you wrote. You clearly have a personal problem with the subject matter of the game, but that is something you should keep to yourself. Reviews are supposed to be unbiased, and it's clear you let your beliefs affect the review. Not everybody is offended by the story as you apparently are. I for one rather enjoyed the story, and felt like it gave an interesting look into the world of PMCs. This game had some of the best looking cutscenes ever in a game. I could respect your review if you gave valid points and solid reasoning behind them, but what you wrote was garbage. You are a professional or at least a hired writer so do your job like one. You are incompetent. I am very offended, not at the score, but at how your biasness is clearly portrayed in this review.

J_Dodson wrote:

Joe's 1st response: I'm not any more biased about Army of 2 than you are about my review of it. The game's trivial portrayal of something real and controversial offended my sensibilities, sensibilities you do not share. My review of it offended you, just like the game offended me.

My 2nd message: It's okay that you are offended by it, but your sensibilities should not get the way of the review. Some people are sensitive to things like gang violence or zombies, but no reviewers said the subject matter of a GTA, Yakuza, or RE was offensive or put that in their review. They are videogames. The war in Iraq is a sensitive subject, but even though, you have to remember this is a gaming website and not CNN. As a gamespot user, I don't want to see reviewers personal feelings get in the way of the review. Me not agreeing with your review is in no way the same as you letting your offended sensibilities get in the way of your work. Write it in your blog not a review. I am not biased against your review. I just think it was poorly done. I agree with some things you said about the gameplay and graphics. You have to remember this written for the public to get feel for the game, not read about your personal issues with the War or PMCs. I mean you said it would be ok if they made fun of another army but not ours. What if they get offended? You said this have taken place in the future. Why? We have all played WW2 shooters, but nobody complained about being offended by them. I liked the fact that developers are willing to push the envelope and give us somtething fresh. Thats what games are for. If anything take this as constructive criticism and learn from it. I assure I am not the only person to notice this.

From:J_Dodson Sent: Mar 11, 2008 1:16 am CT Subject: RE: Army of Two Review If something about a game bothers me, I tell you. If it doesn't bother you, then you can dismiss it. I can't try to pretend things don't bother me, just because I think they won't bother you. That's not how honesty works.

Joe's last response: Having said that, the subject matter isn't what bothers me about Army of Two. Private military and the Iraq war could be fine subjects for a video game. What bothered me was that Army of Two doesn't really address those subjects. It brings them up, and then turns them into total fantasy.

For instance, let's say this game and I had a conversation:

Army of Two: Hey Joe. Let's talk about private military contractors in Iraq.

Me: Okay, shoot.

Army of Two: They're super heroes, did you know that?

Me: WTF? Are you high?

Army of Two: No, they're high! Highly skilled at killing terrorists by the thousands. Not like the army. Which is stupid.

Me: You are completely insane. What about all the stuff in the news? What about the fact that they can't go to court for war crimes? What about the fear they must feel in Iraq? What about the civilians? Did they kill civilians?

Army of Two: I dunno. But did you know they have cool names, like Salem and Rio?

Me: ARGH!

That's how I felt playing Army of Two.

I know this ia a wall of text, but reading this guy's responses let's you see how ridiculous his thought process really is. I was a little harsh on him in my first message, but I feel I had the right to be after his poor review. I was going to message him back, but after that conversation he created, it became obvious that this guy is very close minded about the subject, and doesn't care to step outside his box and look at it from our pont of view. Who makes up conversations with games to justify theirselves?

cmpepper23

LOL. Was that a real conversation between you two? That's just plain ridiculous.