It Takes Two Feature Scores
Explore all 55 feature scores for It Takes Two, organized into pros and cons.
Scores by Feature
Summary
55 reviewed features-
Very positive 4.5-5.037 (67%)
-
Positive 3.5-4.410 (18%)
-
Neutral 2.5-3.46 (11%)
-
Negative 1.5-2.42 (4%)
Pros
Sort
-
Co-op experience is the clearest strength, with every review praising how essential, joyful, collaborative, or unusually strong the cooperative play feels.
-
Fun factor is exceptionally strong, with most reviewers calling it joyful, blast-like, highly enjoyable, or one of their most fun recent games.
-
Content variety is one of the strongest consensus points, with reviewers praising constant new mechanics, tools, genres, settings, and minigames.
-
Reviewers overwhelmingly praise the mechanics as simple to grasp yet constantly inventive, with several genres and toolsets executed well.
-
Controls are widely praised as responsive, tight, natural, and accessible, with only the Switch Joy-Con feel drawing a mild caveat.
-
Interactive spaces are a major strength, with reviewers praising playful objects, rewarded curiosity, and dense environmental interactions.
-
Level design is consistently praised as creative, intricate, masterfully mapped out, and varied across imaginative environments.
-
Value for money is praised due to long runtime, Friend Pass, replay value, sale pricing, and perceived worth.
-
The soundtrack is usually praised as fitting, cinematic, and emotionally effective, though one reviewer found some music generic.
-
Movement is repeatedly described as freeing, smooth, delightful, and enjoyable across jumping, dashing, and traversal.
-
Sound design is repeatedly praised as outstanding, top-notch, rich, whimsical, and technically impressive.
-
Art direction is widely praised as remarkable, gorgeous, imaginative, and strong enough to survive Switch visual compromises.
-
Voice acting is strongly praised across reviews as fantastic, phenomenal, well acted, and top-tier.
-
The emotional impact is often strong, especially around relationship reflection, ending moments, and co-op connection, though divorce sensitivity is a caveat.
-
Checkpointing is praised as extremely generous or instant, making experimentation and deaths less punishing.
-
Frame rate stability is praised across PC/console/Switch coverage, with reviewers noting steady or smooth performance.
-
Innovation is strongly praised for its original, constantly changing co-op mechanics and creative approach.
-
Multiplayer design is praised as fully built around two players, with local, online, and cooperative structure central to the experience.
-
Platforming precision receives strong praise, with reviewers calling it responsive, precise, and effortless.
-
Pacing is mostly praised as breakneck, fantastic, and expertly paced, though one reviewer felt the game overstayed its welcome and another noted one section ran long.
-
Couch co-op is repeatedly praised as a natural or superior way to experience the game.
-
Polish is praised through comments about thoughtful production, virtual glitch-free execution, and masterful construction.
-
Puzzle design is praised for making both players collaborate, with tools and level setups creating satisfying shared problem solving.
-
The onboarding is praised for welcoming new or non-gamer partners without heavy-handed teaching.
-
Bosses are praised as fun, challenging, cinematic, and sometimes wonderful, with checkpoints supporting the tougher encounters.
-
The learning curve is viewed positively, especially for non-gamers, with gradual skill development and inclusive design.
-
Graphics are praised on stronger hardware but notably compromised on Switch, where reviewers describe rough visuals and graphical tradeoffs.
-
Animation is praised for Pixar-like presentation, squash-and-stretch style, and strong mocap-style character work.
-
Atmosphere is praised for wonder, warmth, and imaginative environmental mood.
-
Environmental detail is praised in both character materials and intricate level spaces.
-
Exploration is praised where reviewers emphasize that playful, interactive spaces reward looking around and traversing levels.
-
Immersion is praised through absorbing environments and gameplay that reinforces the couple/co-op premise.
-
Monetization fairness is praised because Friend Pass/pro-consumer ownership rules let two people play without both buying full copies.
-
Originality is praised through reviewers calling the game rare and among the most creative co-op experiences they have played.
-
Replay value is generally positive due to swapped characters and replayable minigames, though one reviewer personally had no desire to replay.
-
Side characters are generally praised for providing laughs and inventive background flavor.
-
Split-screen quality is praised for companionship and smooth two-window play, especially despite Switch limitations.
-
Competitive balance is mixed: core roles are praised as equal, but some minigames or character roles are described as one-sided.
-
Platform-specific support on Switch is praised for multiple play options, though practical compromises remain.
-
The core loop is described as a well-crafted platforming foundation that supports the game's cooperative variety.
-
World-building is praised for imagination and character shining through the whole adventure.
-
Handheld suitability is positive overall, with similar handheld and docked performance, though controller and visual compromises remain.
-
Camera behavior receives a positive note for keeping up with fast, dynamic action.
-
Online stability is mostly positive but not perfect, with rare rubberbanding or server drops not erasing much progress.
-
Bug frequency appears low in the evidence, with one review reporting only minor graphical bugs plus one checkpoint-reset issue.
-
Performance optimization is mostly positive in the cited review, with only occasional frame-rate dips in heavier scenes.
-
Server reliability is mixed in the Switch evidence because online play was mostly solid but had a couple of server drops.
Cons
Sort
-
Dialogue quality is mixed, with some humorous or realistic dialogue but repeated criticism of Dr. Hakim as cringy or uncomfortable.
-
Character development draws criticism from two reviews that felt May and Cody's marital issues were not explored deeply enough.
-
Protagonist appeal is polarized: some reviewers found Cody and May real or excellent, while others found them irritating, bitter, or unlikeable.
-
Age appropriateness is mixed-to-cautious: reviewers note mature themes, marriage metaphors, and challenge that may not fit younger children.
-
Family friendliness is limited by language and teen-rated content despite the otherwise loved cooperative experience.
-
Difficulty is mixed: several reviewers found it forgiving or not very challenging, while others noted frustration or a gradual, approachable curve.
-
Writing quality is split between praise for snappy, excellent writing and criticism that the tone is uneven or disappointing beside the gameplay.
-
Narrative quality is divisive: some reviewers found the relationship story moving or healthy, while others called it shallow, predictable, or poorly told.