Is it the most playable RTS we've seen on a console? Absolutely. Does that mean it's any good? ...not so much.
Well... Yes and no.
EA has developed a control scheme that is superior to any console RTS that preceeded it, and yet it still suffers from some basic flaws. Selecting individual units is never as simple as it would be on a PC. Actually, doing anything is never as simple as it would be on a PC. I guess that's the major flaw with the controls - despite being better than any other console RTS controls, they're still nowhere near as user friendly as a keyboard and mouse are.
Controls aside, BFME2 suffers from a host of other problems - some related to it's console confines and some not. The units themselves are too hard to distinguish from one another. Graphically speaking, this title is far from next-gen and the lack of detail in your teeny-tiny troops shows this more than anywhere else. Also, the camera controls (although providing a zoom and rotate option) lack the ability to change the angle at which you view you troops, and the default angle leaves alot to be desired.
The biggest problem with this title, outside of the detail and control issues, is in the single player campaigns. The goals and story put forth are a little too simple, and often result in endlessly repetitive gameplay. Make troops, walk, fight. Make troops, walk, fight. You get the picture - very little strategy.
Thankfully, this title really shines in it's multiplayer. So much so that it warrants a buy despite all these problems. BFME2 offers classic RTS multiplayer gameplay at it's finest, with some games taking hours to complete.
In summary, despite it's numerous flaws and poor single player campaign, Battle for Middle Earth II is a must-own title for any fan of multiplayer RTS action.