Army of Two: The 40th Day will tone down the gratuitous bouts of fist-bumping and other high-octane manlove celebrations so liberally sprinkled throughout the first game, developers have told USA Today. The shoot-everything-then-chest-bump-each-other mechanic of the first game will receive less emphasis than moral choices, which will require you to make difficult decisions at certain intervals throughout the game.
It's a shame about all of the brolebrations, though, because we think they added a lot to the game. Well, okay, a lot for us to make fun of.
Reader Comments (33)
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 9:16PM The Bodyguard said
Oh come on. That was the best part. I want my bromance
Reply
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 10:45PM darkinchworm said
Achievement unlocked: You're One Hell of a Dork - 0 G
Reply
Posted: Jun 18th 2009 4:15AM Jimmyjames said
You clearly didn't see "Requiem for a Dream". Anyone who did would surely remember the repulsively disgusting yet oddly arousing "ASS to ASS" scene.
Reply
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 9:35PM JXCGunrunna said
Enjoyable. It was pretty short. The best way I can describe the gameplay is by making this comparison:
GTA4 --- Saints Row
Forza --- Midnight club
Call of Duty --- Halo
Rainbow six vegas --- Army of two
Reply
GTA4 --- Saints Row
Forza --- Midnight club
Call of Duty --- Halo
Rainbow six vegas --- Army of two
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 10:36PM (Unverified) said
Will that still be an option though? The friend that I played the first with and I thought it was hilarious and fun. That and putting platinum flames on our sniper rifles.
Reply
Posted: Jun 18th 2009 9:54AM (Unverified) said
LADIES LIFT YOUR SHIRTS
WANANANANOWNOW
it's funny cause they probably don't care about ladies
Reply
WANANANANOWNOW
it's funny cause they probably don't care about ladies
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 11:07PM Durr Durrington said
The first one was pretty fun as long as you had a friend to play through with. The main downside with the game was that it became fairly repetitive quickly since the enemies were all pretty much the same. The game only really had two types of enemies: standard units which used a variety of different weapons and boss types that required you to get behind them in order to kill them. The one exception to that (that I can remember) were suicide bombers but they were only in a single level of the game.
As far as guns went, I ended up getting a single, powerful gun early on and upgrading it fully. After that, all the money I earned just sat around since the secondary weapons and different masks weren't really anything special. I'm hoping the new game does a better job of handling the guns so that you have an incentive to collect multiple weapons.
On top of all that, the multiplayer was just terrible. The only game I can really compare it to would be Super Smash Bros. Brawl - which isn't a compliment.
If you have a friend that you wanted to play through it with, I'd suggest just renting the game unless you can find a cheap copy to buy. The game had a lot of potential but it just wasn't executed right. I'm hopeful that the developers will fix their mistakes this time around and deliver a great coop game.
Reply
As far as guns went, I ended up getting a single, powerful gun early on and upgrading it fully. After that, all the money I earned just sat around since the secondary weapons and different masks weren't really anything special. I'm hoping the new game does a better job of handling the guns so that you have an incentive to collect multiple weapons.
On top of all that, the multiplayer was just terrible. The only game I can really compare it to would be Super Smash Bros. Brawl - which isn't a compliment.
If you have a friend that you wanted to play through it with, I'd suggest just renting the game unless you can find a cheap copy to buy. The game had a lot of potential but it just wasn't executed right. I'm hopeful that the developers will fix their mistakes this time around and deliver a great coop game.
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 11:38PM (Unverified) said
Where does "crossing swords" fall into the whole bromance thing?
Reply
Posted: Jun 18th 2009 7:53AM (Unverified) said
To the above comment: You do mean Brawls online, right? because the online sucked. Offline, however... Possibly the best multiplayer game on the wii
Reply
Posted: Jun 18th 2009 1:51AM original fred said
Oh come on, that's what made the game so unique!
I WANT MY DOSE OF BROMANCE, DAMNIT.
Reply
I WANT MY DOSE OF BROMANCE, DAMNIT.
Posted: Jun 18th 2009 1:55AM ZEBRA NINER said
Less fist bumping? WTF?
I'm a red-blooded American, and violence and fist bumping is part of
our culture. Moral/emotional choices? If I wanted that crap I would
rent the notebook and gay it up.
Posted: Jun 18th 2009 3:53AM (Unverified) said
Fail. I'm officially not buying this game. At best it's a rental. The bromance was the one thing that really set the first game apart and made it fun to play co-op. Without that it's just another cover-based shooter with a lot of brown and some neat, but half-baked, ideas.
Reply
Posted: Jun 18th 2009 6:23AM ftank1 said
The "bromance" & frat boyish verbal abuse are a huge part of what distinguished it from any other shooter and made the game awesome in the first place so why abandon the formula? Or better yet, why not keep the bromance AND add the extra gunplay WIN/WIN
Reply
Posted: Jun 18th 2009 8:05AM Durr Durrington said
@connormoto
Yeah, I was referring to the online aspect. Brawl was fantastic when played with a few friends but the online multiplayer was just terrible.
Army of Two was the same way. The coop was fun if you had a friend to play through it with but the multiplayer fights were horrible. If a single person in the game had a bad connection, it was just unplayable. The game would literally just stop while it waited for them to reestablish a connection and people would typically leave if that happened more than once in the game.
Reply
Yeah, I was referring to the online aspect. Brawl was fantastic when played with a few friends but the online multiplayer was just terrible.
Army of Two was the same way. The coop was fun if you had a friend to play through it with but the multiplayer fights were horrible. If a single person in the game had a bad connection, it was just unplayable. The game would literally just stop while it waited for them to reestablish a connection and people would typically leave if that happened more than once in the game.
Posted: Jun 19th 2009 2:39PM Johnny Neat said
Half assed and weak. It was a disappointment on too many levels. Good idea, bad translation of such ideas unfortunately.
Reply
Posted: Jun 18th 2009 10:24AM Uncle Jesse said
Too bad. Instead of trying to make it more serious in tone, they should have went even more over the top with it. I think this game will just be put in the same category as all the other shooters. The bromance set it apart at least. They totally should have had them making ridiculous commentary throughout with touchdown celebrations, crazy action, huge explosions, chest bumps, head butts, break dancing, catchphrases (WHAMMY!) and high fives up high, down low, in the middle, TICKLE TICKLE BABY WOOOOO!
Reply
Posted: Jun 18th 2009 11:06AM (Unverified) said
Since when has a liberal gotten pissed at someone toeing the line? Last I checked, conservatives were the ones trying to conserve the family values.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.
Featured Stories
The most popular posts
in the last 7 days
- Vita 'UMD Passport' won't be offered in US 220 comments
- Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning review: A tempting fate 153 comments
- David Jaffe leaves Eat Sleep Play, layoffs hit developer [Update] 108 comments
- Don't call it a remake: Final Fantasy X is a 'remaster,' to be clear 95 comments
- Battleship movie adapted into FPS by Double Helix 93 comments









