Something went wrong. Try again later

Giant Bomb Review

120 Comments

Red Faction: Armageddon Review

3
  • X360
  • PS3

A few physics-based weapons and destructible environments can't elevate this strictly average third-person shooter.

Darius Mason: Short on character development, and hair.
Darius Mason: Short on character development, and hair.

Red Faction: Armageddon marginalizes, or outright ignores, some of the best qualities of its predecessor, the gleefully destructive Marsbox Red Faction: Guerilla. In place of that game's open world and its boundless opportunities for completely wrecking everything in sight, Armageddon constrains your freedom to an unflinchingly linear corridor crawl. The destructible environments are still here, but they're largely reduced to window dressing, except when they're actively getting in the way of your progress. There's a handful of neat weapons and vehicle sequences over the course of the campaign, but they aren't enough to redeem Armageddon's functional but bland and often repetitive third-person shooting.

The game casts you as scrappy, bald gun-for-hire Darius Mason, a descendant of Guerilla's revolutionary hero Alec Mason. But instead of an evil interplanetary corporation, you're up against...giant space bugs. Mason unwittingly releases a Mars-wide infestation of creepy crawlies at the behest of some crazy cultists, then spends the rest of the game fighting endless numbers of the bugs (and the occasional cultist) to squelch the outbreak and restore some semblance of order to Mars. There are a few attempts to connect this game up to the existing Red Faction back story--with the appearance of the last game's amazing sledgehammer, and references to the EDF and the deranged scientist Capek, for example--but otherwise, this game could be shoehorned into any franchise that accommodates the act of shooting at monsters with futuristic weaponry.

Repairing destroyed stuff is kind of fun... the first few times.
Repairing destroyed stuff is kind of fun... the first few times.

An early-game environmental disaster drives the human populace underground, so you'll spend the majority of the game fighting the same monsters ad nauseam in seemingly endless subterranean cave systems and industrial complexes. The shooting itself feels fine; it's just that two or three hours of doing it over and over reveals how unthreatening and rote the enemies' behavior is, removing any sense of danger or tension as you move into new combat scenarios. The handful of enemy types generally either cling to walls and shoot at you, or charge straight at you on the ground, and some careful observation will reveal them basically doing the exact things over and over, to the point that the wall-hangers will actually jump between the same points on the walls repeatedly. The hours and hours of combat are broken up by a few superficial and highly destructive vehicle sequences that are fun for a few minutes but really don't give you much more than a brief arcade thrill.

It's too bad the enemies aren't a stiffer and more dynamic challenge, because a few of the game's weapons are pretty good. The clear standout is the magnet gun, which lets you attach one node to an enemy or breakable surface, then a second node anywhere else, causing whatever the first node is stuck on to rocket toward the second node and go splat. The singularity launcher is also satisfying, as it creates a little gravity well that causes everything--enemies and scenery alike--to swirl around in the air for a few seconds before it explodes and does huge damage.

Both of these weapons, and more mundane destructive implements like a rocket launcher, can also be used to take apart structures the game designates as breakable. Tearing down buildings with abandon can be a lot of fun--that was inarguably the cornerstone of Guerrilla, in fact--but outside the rare objective to take down an infested building, Armageddon doesn't give you a lot of reasons, or even opportunities, to meaningfully destroy things. There are plenty of cases where you and some of the burlier enemies will actually end up destroying sets of stairs and walkways that you need to traverse to get to the next objective, and while the game arms you with a handheld device that can restore destroyed surfaces to their original state, it gets to be a chore rebuilding the level around you repeatedly just so you can move on. That repair device trips a glowing visual effect that looks neat the first few times you use it, but ultimately this mechanic doesn't add much to the campaign.

You will kill so, so many of these guys.
You will kill so, so many of these guys.

Armageddon lacks any sort of competitive multiplayer, but it's got Infestation, a wave-based survival mode for four players that's reasonably entertaining if you haven't burned out on the combat in the campaign yet. The nicest thing about Infestation is that the currency you earn there--and you earn it a lot faster than in the story--can be carried back over to your character for campaign play. So there's a good incentive to take a break from the single-player and boost your upgrades before you resume fighting for the salvation of Mars. But since the look and feel of the combat, enemies, and maps in Infestation are identical to that of the campaign, I had no desire to keep playing the multiplayer once I'd finished the story. There's also a timed Ruin mode for players who buy the game new. This one lets you destroy small maps under a time limit for maximum score, but the score requirements here are so stringent that it's not much fun to actually try to unlock each subsequent map (though there is a free mode that lets you truly run amok).

There's nothing wrong with a good linear third-person shooter, but Red Faction: Armageddon is merely a passable one. Its mechanics are sound but its design uninspired, failing to do any one thing better than the standout entries in the genre. And the few unique tricks it does have, its predecessor did better. After Guerrilla made such a resounding impact, it's a shame that the best you can say about this latest Red Faction is that it's just OK.

Brad Shoemaker on Google+

120 Comments

Avatar image for lind_l_taylor
Lind_L_Taylor

4125

Forum Posts

6

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

Edited By Lind_L_Taylor

I knew this was going to suck.  So much for producing
a great game in a great (Martian) setting.

Avatar image for lacke
lacke

384

Forum Posts

56

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By lacke
@TadThuggish: Totally agree. I think they are very conscious of the impact on Meta-Critic.  I don't think mechanics should affect the review if they didn't affect the enjoyment. The score should reflect how "fun" you had with the game, imo. 
 
Maybe I'm just tainted by Jeff's opinion where he straight out said that he thought the game was boring in the QL. This is Brad's review after all.
Avatar image for shinluis
shinluis

518

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By shinluis

At least the box art is pretty cool.

Avatar image for napalm
napalm

9227

Forum Posts

162

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By napalm

As long as the shooting is satisfying, and the destruction is cool, I'll be buying this. I mean fuck, it's already out, isn't it? Man, this is a review-ass review.

Avatar image for beard_of_zeus
beard_of_zeus

2021

Forum Posts

4665

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 37

Edited By beard_of_zeus

It's a bummer that this turned out so average, it was one of my most anticipated games for this year. I'd love to know how all the design decisions in this game got made, it all seems so backwards.

Avatar image for enigma777
Enigma777

6285

Forum Posts

696

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

Edited By Enigma777
Shame. I wasn't planning on buying it at launch, but I think I'll skip it altogether now.
Avatar image for ladnar
ladnar

218

Forum Posts

27

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By ladnar

Man why would they go and screw up a good thing. I was really looking forward to this game so was avoiding coverage because I like to go into games I like without knowing.  Had to click on the review when I saw it though and may have to hold off until after Infamous 2.   
 
This sucks. 
 
@Deathpooky
: Don't even joke about such a thing in Just Cause 3, I imagine the developers of that game have one of those Pledge Drive Thermometers that they fill up with Open World Jank donations.

Avatar image for stackboy
stackboy

752

Forum Posts

166

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 3

Edited By stackboy

I was going to buy this Day One, but I might wait for a price drop down the track. Too many lukewarm reviews.

Avatar image for olivaw
Olivaw

1309

Forum Posts

6

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Olivaw
@TadThuggish said:
I get the impression that Giant Bomb, including Whiskey in general, loves to write honest, passionate reviews for products...and then give them one more star than the words intended.  (See: Kinect Sports, Motorstorm Apocalypse, Homefront, etc.) That doesn't mean I don't love this site or its personalities but that seems like an odd problem to have.  3/5 is still in the middle: still good, still fine, still acceptable.  How do you justify a "good" score if the last paragraph is all about shitting over a game?  I don't care if the mechanics work to their intended functions.  I'm reading this because I want to know if Brad Shoemaker liked it.
It's not "shitting all over a game" if he's saying it's okay.
 
It sounds like he was just quite disappointed.
 
Which can sound worse than outright vitriol sometimes, in that parental "I'm not mad, just disappointed" way.
Avatar image for pillclinton
PillClinton

3604

Forum Posts

210

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By PillClinton

Can't say I'm surprised.  

Avatar image for ssully
SSully

5753

Forum Posts

315

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By SSully

The way Jeff talked about it on the quick look made me  think that he would give it a 2 stars, but brad was kind of defending it. So while I think it sounds like a 2 game, I am not that surprised he gave it a 3. 

Avatar image for drmadhatten
drmadhatten

139

Forum Posts

15

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 1

Edited By drmadhatten

To be honest, I thought this game was going to be amazing. Like a bad company 2 style of growing on what was great. I wish they would talk about why they made these decisions in the next Bombcast, but E3...

Avatar image for egocheck616
EgoCheck616

820

Forum Posts

37

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By EgoCheck616

Now I am worried about Saints Row 3.

Avatar image for brendan
Brendan

9414

Forum Posts

533

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

Edited By Brendan

Reads like a one thing, but has a different amount of another thing.   
 
Feel free to just copy and paste that to every other review you will ever comment on to save time.  

Avatar image for chaser324
chaser324

9415

Forum Posts

14945

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 15

Edited By chaser324  Moderator

I never understood why they thought taking the basic gameplay of Red Faction: Guerilla and turning it into more of a corridor crawl would be fun. Yo Volition, don't try to turn Red Faction into Dead Space. Work on improving the over-the-top open-world madness that made Guerilla great.

Avatar image for deactivated-5c7ea8553cb72
deactivated-5c7ea8553cb72

4753

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

Unfortunate that it's not as hilariously fun as Guerrilla, but I'll give it a try when I have time.

Avatar image for worlddude
WorldDude

235

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By WorldDude

I know Red Faction Guerrilla is praised a lot, but it was just some cool weapons and destruction wrapped in an awful game. The missions were repetitive and exploring Mars was boring. I guess if you love blowing shit up, it's cool, but even that got old after a while. The multiplayer was where the game really shined.
 
Armageddon seemed better to me because the campaign seemed more focused. The real bummer I see is the lack of any real competitive multiplayer. I liked the demo of the campaign though, but I can see that getting old pretty fast. This still seems better than Guerrilla to me, but not by much.
 
Either way, great review Brad!

Avatar image for brake
Brake

1301

Forum Posts

14420

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 15

Edited By Brake

Not to get all hindsight-y, but I kinda saw this coming when they revelaed that it was gonna be linear and underground. Kept hoping they could make it work on the account of how much I liked the previous one, though.

Avatar image for justinaquarius
JustinAquarius

319

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By JustinAquarius

A shame how linear this game is. RF:G had it right. open world + SMASH HAMMER = hours of fun

Avatar image for mustachedpagoda
MustachedPagoda

57

Forum Posts

985

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By MustachedPagoda

The demo I played on Xbox made it seem like the gameplay would get repetitive as it went on

Avatar image for spudbug
SpudBug

713

Forum Posts

663

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 3

Edited By SpudBug

Too bad.
 
I guess i saw it coming though - I didn't even finish the demo before turning it off in boredom and I fell asleep in the middle of the quick look while watching it today.. lol.
 
Shame, I loved Guerilla. Why did they have to go make a linear boring underground shooter??

Avatar image for insidioustuna
InsidiousTuna

577

Forum Posts

122

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By InsidiousTuna

That's some really nice boxart. Hadn't looked closely at it before. 

Avatar image for fox01313
fox01313

5256

Forum Posts

2246

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 19

Edited By fox01313

Think that if this was a linear 3rd person game but using the setting of RFG it might have worked. Great review Brad & can't wait to get my hands on the game to give it a whirl as it still looks fun, just not something to rush out & buy day 1.

Avatar image for csl316
csl316

17004

Forum Posts

765

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

Edited By csl316

Is it better on higher difficulties? In Guerilla it elevated the game from stupid fun to tactical bad assery.

Avatar image for drakeon
Drakeon

62

Forum Posts

47

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 21

Edited By Drakeon

Wished they hadn't messed with Guerrilla's formula and just tried to refine that instead of going this direction :\

Avatar image for legalbagel
LegalBagel

1955

Forum Posts

1590

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 7

Edited By LegalBagel
@Ladnar: I can only hope.  My ideal vision of Just Cause 3 is that the developers break out in song every time they let in another gravity defying ridiculous concept into their game.
Avatar image for physic
Physic

62

Forum Posts

435

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Physic

Why even call it Red Faction if you are gonna strip out the defining openness and hyper-destructability? Guerilla was one if my favorite games of this generation, disappointing to see this game stray from an incredibly fun and ridiculous formula.

Avatar image for tadthuggish
TadThuggish

1073

Forum Posts

334

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 41

Edited By TadThuggish
@lacke said:

@TadThuggish: Totally agree. I think they are very conscious of the impact on Meta-Critic.  I don't think mechanics should affect the review if they didn't affect the enjoyment. The score should reflect how "fun" you had with the game, imo.  Maybe I'm just tainted by Jeff's opinion where he straight out said that he thought the game was boring in the QL. This is Brad's review after all.

No, you're completely right.  As great as the Giant Bomb crew is, they sometimes get stuck in that old corporate journalism mindset where every game gets a 7/10 if it isn't completely broken.  Alex Navarro tweeted "I hate Motorstorm Apocalypse", then gave it a 3/5 because it didn't end up murdering him.  I'm not impressed with a game solely if you press a button and its respective action occurs on screen, and I don't want a fact sheet or checklist; I want to know what specifically they, as fellow human beings, feel.  
 
That train of thought's movie comparison is like a film review saying "it was poop but the lighting rigs worked appropriately, 4/5"
Avatar image for fjordson
fjordson

2571

Forum Posts

430

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By fjordson

Not terribly surprised, this game looks incredibly mediocre. I don't get why they ditched so much that made Guerilla fun. That was one of the most fun open world games ever to just mess around in. 

Avatar image for mormonwarrior
MormonWarrior

2945

Forum Posts

577

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 21

Edited By MormonWarrior

This is too bad. I enjoyed the demo but it seems like it didn't expand from there.

Avatar image for stingingvelvet
StingingVelvet

596

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

Edited By StingingVelvet

I'm pretty immune to "this game is not like the one before it" disease so I think I will keep my pre-order.  Still it does seem to be more of an average game than a good one by all accounts, which is a shame.
 
Thanks Brad for not acting like this series was always open world, which several other sites did.  As we all should know RF1 and RF2 were linear games.

Avatar image for hatking
hatking

7673

Forum Posts

82

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By hatking
@StingingVelvet said:

I'm pretty immune to "this game is not like the one before it" disease so I think I will keep my pre-order.  Still it does seem to be more of an average game than a good one by all accounts, which is a shame.  Thanks Brad for not acting like this series was always open world, which several other sites did.  As we all should know RF1 and RF2 were linear games.

Yes, but outside of name, Red Faction and Red Faction 2 were basically a different series, you know?  The story is pretty much entirely new, the developer is new and the gameplay is only vaguely reminiscent (deforming terrain~destructible buildings?). 
 
I think most people are shocked by this transition because it seems to be very much a step in the wrong direction.  A game like Red Faction Guerrilla was exactly the type that needed a sandbox environment.  It seems odd that they would see what people loved so much about that game and step away from it. 
Avatar image for floodiastus
floodiastus

1288

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 1

Edited By floodiastus

In the age of Minecraft, I am flabberghasted that they decided to make the game less destructible. Give us the whole planet to mold!!!!!

Avatar image for ahmadmetallic
AhmadMetallic

19300

Forum Posts

-1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 11

Edited By AhmadMetallic

that's a shame 
 
no purchase

Avatar image for cheesebob
cheesebob

1336

Forum Posts

6

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By cheesebob

Blimey, from the way that Brad was talking about this game on the quick look, it seemed like it was a 2 star game.

Avatar image for hearse
Hearse

31

Forum Posts

4

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

Edited By Hearse

I'm all for trying something new with a franchise but to take it in a more generic direction isn't the right way to go.

Avatar image for stingingvelvet
StingingVelvet

596

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

Edited By StingingVelvet
@HatKing said:
Yes, but outside of name, Red Faction and Red Faction 2 were basically a different series, you know?  The story is pretty much entirely new, the developer is new and the gameplay is only vaguely reminiscent (deforming terrain~destructible buildings?).  I think most people are shocked by this transition because it seems to be very much a step in the wrong direction.  A game like Red Faction Guerrilla was exactly the type that needed a sandbox environment.  It seems odd that they would see what people loved so much about that game and step away from it. 
It's the same developer, but yes you are right the third game was very different.  This one seems different from all three really.  I'm just saying I personally am very good at taking each game on its own.  Deus Ex is my favorite game every and Invisible War is not a good sequel to it, but I still like Invisible War as a game.  Know what I mean?
 
It does sound like this game is just flat-out not as good as Guerrilla even without expectations though.
Avatar image for metal_mills
metal_mills

3604

Forum Posts

4049

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 3

Edited By metal_mills

If this had a bigger world with more stuff to destroy, I'd have bought it instantly. Too bad they went in the exact direction no one wanted.

Avatar image for bhhawks78
bhhawks78

1348

Forum Posts

18

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By bhhawks78

Such a bummer, best part about guerilla the open world destruction is gone, and the worst parts - shooting and enemy ai are in the forefront :((

Avatar image for rmanthorp
rmanthorp

4654

Forum Posts

3603

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 14

Edited By rmanthorp  Moderator

Nice review. 
 
Too many good games to pick this up anyway...

Avatar image for dropabombonit
dropabombonit

1543

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By dropabombonit

It's a shame that this game didn't turn out great, last game was so much fun

Avatar image for microshock
microshock

355

Forum Posts

259

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By microshock

Yeah, I was disappointed in the way they took the series right after Armageddon's trailer came out. How do you go from awesome open world destruction to linear underground cave shooter with barely anything to even blow up?! 
 
It's just sad. RFG needed a sequel, but this is crap.

Avatar image for cirdain
Cirdain

3796

Forum Posts

1645

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 6

Edited By Cirdain

FUCCCKKK!!! I'mcalling.it was down and I couldn't cancel my bet.... fuck

Avatar image for adamazing
adamazing

83

Forum Posts

592

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By adamazing

The first sentence of this review sums it all up (I did read the whole review though).  As I said in a comment on the "Quick Look" of RF:A, I hate to see people lose their jobs but people should pay for their mistakes.  Volition really screwed up here.  They went backwards.  To me, the most likely scenario of how this game was developed goes like this... 

 
- The boss's son got a job at Volition
- He was assigned as director/producer of RF:A
- He made a bunch of bad decisions because he didn't know what he was doing.
- The Volition team thought, "These are all terrible ideas, but we can't say anything... It's the boss's son! "
- RF:A was made, as is.

Avatar image for dougquaid
DougQuaid

1273

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By DougQuaid

I'm pretty surprised Brad gave this 3 stars. Considering how lukewarm the guys have been on this and how completely below average and uninspired this game seems to me, I can't help but think Brad was being pretty generous with the final score.

Avatar image for blacklab
blacklab

2025

Forum Posts

22

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By blacklab

Pretty much what I expected after playing the demo.

Avatar image for pieguy
PieGuy

332

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 1

Edited By PieGuy

I loved Red Faction 1, Red Faction 2 was great for the multiplayer and bots aspect. Didn't like the direction they took with Guerilla and this doesn't look great either.
 
Will THQ be giving GiantBomb a early review copy again I wonder =P

Avatar image for martdawg
Martdawg

46

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By Martdawg

Fable 3 and now this, I hope this isn't the year of terrible sequels.

Avatar image for hatking
hatking

7673

Forum Posts

82

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By hatking
@StingingVelvet: You're right.  I'm not sure why I was under the impression that Volition just bought the title.  I guess that goes to show you how different it really is. hah... And yes, I do understand that--I'm in the same boat too.  I really appreciate a sequel that departs from the original in some way (i.e.: art style, gameplay, story).  Red Dead Redemption might be an extreme case, but it's a good example.  I also enjoyed the Prince of Persia (reboot thing?) up until the last twenty minutes.