Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2 Review

By Kristan Reed Published 9 March, 2007

Give the people what they want.

Version tested: Xbox 360

You can say what you like about GRAW. Admire the lovely visuals, wax about the intuitive control system, or the tense duck and cover squad-based gameplay, but you can't say the single player portion was exactly polished. It had some of the most infuriating, sofa-punching difficulty spikes of any of the big games of 2006, with inconsistent checkpoint spacing, the worst night vision system of any game ever (seriously), ridiculous health issues, ammo problems, graphical glitches, you name it. There was a real feeling of the game being so close to greatness, but being rushed out before it was ready. Happily, almost every single thing that we complained bitterly about last year's version has been fixed. In many respects, GRAW 2 is the game that last year's version could and perhaps should have been - though this is an admittedly shorter game than last year's.

In the 'fixed' column there are an extraordinary number of improvements which make a vast difference to the enjoyment levels over the course of the game. For a kick off, the game now looks superb all the way through, with not a single hint of a glitch, bug, or any of the general craziness that seemed to routinely affect the original. Not only that, Ubisoft's Paris studio has gone even further in terms of creating the kind of gritty visual opulence that you expect from a next generation system. The general standard of the lighting and effects adds a host of subtle improvements to what was already one of the show-piece next generation titles. This isn't a title that will inspire moans about v-sync tearing or frame rate glitches - it's very much a sign of next generation game development moving to the next phase. Flying over entire cities, watching plumes of smoke billow out of ruined buildings has never looked so good.

Your feedback has been accepted

'Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2' Screenshot 1

Duck and cover, team.

More significantly, Ubi has really listened to a whole host of complaints. Perhaps our chief bugbear about the original was the check pointing, and the fact that sometimes it'd expect the player to wage war for an obscene amount of time before deigning to save your progress. Hand in hand with that is the fact that you now have a medic on hand to help you out on a limited number of occasions when the battle turns up the heat. Previously, you would be able to heal others an unlimited number of times, but not yourself, which meant you'd often find yourself facing the last portion of the battle with next to no health - making thing unnecessarily tough for you. This simple gameplay tweak has eliminated this needless frustration at a stroke, and instead allowed Ubi to deliver a game that's both challenging and fair.

Night vision, as well, has been completely overhauled, and makes a dramatic difference to the playability during the phases of the game when you're playing in gloomy lighting. Despite the events of the game taking place a day after last year's Mexican adventure (which, for the record was set in 2014), the Ghosts' Cross Com 2.0 system utilises a sort of brightened negative effect when flicking to night vision. Like a clearer version of the system we're used to in the Splinter Cell games, it gives you an instant advantage in the dark and makes the darker portions of the game thoroughly enjoyable.

Ubi has also ensured that downed enemies stick around for longer, allowing you to scavenge for ammo when you need to, though they still vanish once you get far enough away from them, On the other hand, we'd still like to know why the corpses disappear from the battlefield at all, when it's pretty obvious that their dropped weaponry might come in useful at some point. Clearly it's a memory saving trick that developers like to use, but if Doom (from 1994) can do it, why the bleedin' hell can't this one? Maybe next year they'll get around to fixing this little quibble. In the meantime, though, the presence of a mobile ammo/health unit called a 'Mule' can be called upon now and then to follow you around - but it's not something you can always rely upon.

No going back

'Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2' Screenshot 2

Does anyone know CPR?

Strangely, Ubi still doesn't believe in allowing you to load in a previous checkpoint if you want to, meaning that you have to go back and play through a level from the beginning if you've missed a secondary objective. A small, but significant point if you're keen to gain all the achievements that the game offers.

On the whole, though, the game plays magnificently. Offering more variety and tactical depth than Gears of War, a more intuitive control system and more open-ended levels, it deserves warm applause for taking a linear approach while letting the player think for themselves. On the surface, the duck and cover gameplay shares more than a few similarities to Epic's huge-selling shooter, but scratch the surface and there are more than enough differences that allow GRAW 2 to stand out in its own right.

The general premise is pretty consistent throughout: simply head in the general direction of an objective marker (displayed as a yellow square on the tactical map, and as a position relative arrow on the screen) and take out any enemies you come across on your travels. Sometimes you might have to do this on your own, but mostly you're accompanied by up to three squad members who you can direct as you see fit. Sometimes you might just want to have them following you, while other times you might want to send them off to cover a particular area while you outflank your unwary foe. By simply issuing basic 'go to' or 'attack' commands with the dpad and pointing your reticule at what or where you want them to go, it's a system that hasn't really been bettered by a console game.

Plankton kid

Better still, you can even effectively be in several places at once, thanks to the new ability to view a video feed from your various units by holding down the right bumper. This not only makes it strategically beneficial, but allows you to point at what you want them to attack, despite maybe being halfway across the map. The same applies to when you're guiding attack helicopters or tanks to their destination - you and your squad can sit tight from a safe distance while the big guns can take out all the APCs, tanks and other hazards that would otherwise prove impassable to a bunch of elite soldier. Like last year's version, this feeling of being in command of a cohesive war machine gives it a distinctly different feel to the Rainbow Six games - however similar they may look on the surface.

As always, Ubi mixes up the ground-based action by throwing in the occasional on-rails shooting section. Although such well-worn gaming clichés can feel done-to-death in most games (including the dreaded mine cart section in Gears), they provide a sense of light relief in GRAW 2. At no stage are they as perilously difficult as one or two were in the original, and certainly not a frustrating obstacle to learn your way through. If anything, they offer Ubi the chance to do those spectacular fly-throughs that make the game an incredible spectacle at times. The rumble is enough to rattle a pacemaker out of your chest, though, so watch out if you've got a dodgy ticker.

But as consistently entertaining as the game is this time around, you might want to reconsider which difficulty level you tackle the game on this time. With so much stinging criticism thrown at them (certainly from us, at any rate), Ubi has noticeably toned down the 'normal' difficulty to what we'd normally class as 'easy', and as a result most experienced players will rip through the campaign in little over eight hours. The AI is unquestionably more forgiving, and seems to react slower than usual. This allows you a crucial amount of leeway to get a bead on them before they fire back, while the targeting itself appears to be somewhat more generous than it used to be. For example, medium range shots with an average machine gun or assault rifle appear to pick off enemies much quicker than you might generally expect, meaning that you don't even have to zoom in to score a swift kill. Such decisions make progress through the main campaign fairly swift, but with many achievements to go for, it's the sort of game you'll happily play again on the hardest level - if only to extend the lifespan of the game.

Soldiers anonymous

Perhaps predictably, Ubisoft still hasn't really nailed the narrative side of the game to any great degree. It does a sterling job of seamlessly integrating the mission briefings into flythroughs, and patching video feed updates to your cross com, but there's still no sense of actually caring about the characters or the purpose of your missions. Once and for all, Ubi needs to go that final mile to really get under the skin of the players, and breathe life into the team you're in command of. From there we might start actually giving a toss about the cause we're fighting for, rather than seeing each Ghost Recon campaign as a series of anonymous shoot-outs. It's a small point, but these Tom Clancy games are crying out for an injection of personality.

'Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2' Screenshot 4

Grey day.

That said, Ubi does deserve a pat on the back for the subtle ways it communicates with the players these days. Team mates are constantly barking at you for straying into cover, and helpfully letting you know where enemy threats are emerging from. This kind of audio feedback might go unnoticed by many, but you'd be half as effective without their help.

As with last year's acclaimed version, the multiplayer is likely to be hugely popular again - if not more so, thanks to yet another example of the seriousness that Ubisoft places in online console gaming. For starters, the visual quality of the multiplayer modes now matches the single player campaign, which was something that was a bit jarring about last year's version. This fact in itself makes GRAW 2 one of the best looking online games ever, and given the sheer breadth and depth of options available, it ticks off practically every conceivable box in our wish list.

Team players

Top of that list is undoubtedly the new co-op campaign - probably our favourite element of last year's version. This time around, you can dive into a completely separate campaign storyline set in and around the Panama canal over six missions. With support for up to 16 players simultaneously, the action is ramped up considerably from the more closely associated single player mode where - at best - you've got help from about six or seven AI players at once. With a whole gang of players able to pitch in, the gameplay hinges on a series of dynamic objectives which require a fair bit of genuine team-work to accomplish. Thankfully, getting injured doesn't instantly result in instant death this time - and in both competitive and co-op modes, you've got a limited amount of time to call upon team mates to revive you, Gears style.

'Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2' Screenshot 3

Play third person or first person - up to you.

But that's just the tip of the iceberg, with Solo, Team and Co-op variations of Territory, Objective, and Elimination modes, not to mention Team Mission and Team Battle. And then within those, there are specific variations and rules you can apply, such as Bounty Hunter, Last Man Standing, Seek and Destroy, Sharpshooter, Thief (for Elimination games), Hamburger Hill, Domination (for Territory games), Escort, Flag Carry (for Objective games), a new co-op Helicopter Hunt mode, co-op Firefight and tons of others. Within those, you can customise the match rules to the nth degree, from the usual time restrictions to the weapon set, and all manner of advanced settings to cater for even the most particular player requirements. And for the really dedicated player, you can even set up and manage your clan, giving you a chance to get your trueskill ranking up in the ranked matches. The more casual players are well catered for, though, with player matches easy to come by and the usual slick search engine.

Needless to say, the new maps are considerably more ambitious than last year's, which instantly makes trawling through the familiar modes that we know and love a more appealing prospect. There are 18 maps in total (with one 'exclusive' map downloadable if you link your Ubi.com account with your Xbox Live one), ranging from those suitable for smaller matches to the more expansive large scale affairs - and everything in between.

GRAW 2 is unquestionably a better game than last year's version in almost every respect, but will inevitably suffer in some people's eyes by 'merely' consolidating what was already on offer. It's apparent very early on that Ubisoft decided to stick with the same acclaimed formula, and make a more accessible version of what everyone already liked. In itself, that's fine, but Ubisoft has historically approached 'expansion' sequels to previous Ghost Recon (and Rainbow Six) console games by pricing them accordingly. Anyone who remembers Island Thunder and Summit Strike will remember that they, too, were better than their parent games, and put out at a sensible price. If Ubisoft was brave enough to admit that GRAW 2 is the same kind of offering, we'd insist that it was a must-have game for any strategic shooter fan; especially for those of you who spend a lot of time online. As a full-priced offering, though, the goal posts have moved, and it's hard not to feel a little short changed by the short-lived single player campaign and how similar the whole thing feels. In many ways, GRAW 2 is the classic quick-fire sequel - short on new ideas, but big on polishing what we know and love. But these days, isn't that what people want?

8 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Kristan.

About Kristan Reed

Kristan is a former editor of Eurogamer, dad, Stone Roses bore and Norwich City supporter who sometimes mutters optimistically about Team Silent getting back together.

Read more articles from Kristan by visiting the Kristan Reed archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (99) Latest comment 4 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • MoGamer2006 #1 5 years ago

    "Short on new ideas, but big on polishing what we know and love"

    Sounds like every game in the whole Xbox 360 library...

  • alpha-0ne #2 5 years ago

    /\ /\ /\ /\
    yawn..back in your cage grillbot

    Back to the review

    Nice, the clan support is excellent in the game now, essential for the 360 version
    Edited by 1 at 09/03/07 @ 14:11

  • Hunam #3 5 years ago

    Lol, we harrass EG for a GRAW review and they make us wait and give it 7/10 to a public uprising.

    They get the GRAW2 review out on time with a 8/10 of none of us really care :p

    EDIT: Thanks krudster, the old memory isn't so great these days...
    /heroes
    Edited by 1 at 09/03/07 @ 14:38

  • LOLLERS #4 5 years ago

    The demo was good, I liked being able to see the drones camera view full-screen

  • krudster #5 5 years ago

    Nah, GRAW got 7.

  • [maven] #6 5 years ago



    From what I've seen of the full game (tutorial + 1st mission, lonely multiplayer), I agree with the score; the graphics are nicely upgraded in many subtle ways that help "sell" the illusion quite a bit better than GRAW1 did.
    Looking forward to sniping the usual suspects... :D

    *Edited* Sorry about that, and thanks for pointing it out.
    Edited by 1 at 09/03/07 @ 14:28

  • kissthestick #7 5 years ago

    "Short on new ideas, but big on polishing what we know and love"

    Sounds like every game in the whole Xbox 360 library...


    lol

  • HairyArse #8 5 years ago

    Am I the only person that didn't notice any major graphical glitches in GRAW1 or have any problems with the night vision?

  • lennon #9 5 years ago

    Hmmm, I have Okami, Crackdown and Dragon Quest to finish. Tempting but I think it will have to wait! Good to see the devs have taken the feedback on board.

  • mazzl #10 5 years ago

    i think this is a great game, no glitches :) co-op in multiple ways a good team and online capabilitys. so we all know what graw is, we also all know what fifa, burnout, NFS, UT and others are like. this is a realy good (the benchmark game for me) in it's genre. i really loved it on the original xbox. the missle silo mission was a bit to hard for me though

    the only thing i would like to see more on 360 are more playfull games, like viva pin, but i guess those will come.

  • Paulanator #11 5 years ago

    I'll have to place this game on the 'to buy when cheaper pile'. As good as it looks, I don't think it justifies a full game price tag. Maybe at £20-25 I'll pick it up.

    In the meanwhile, I'm 45 hours into Okami and loving every minute.

  • Kiigan #12 5 years ago

    Probably the weirdest thing about GRAW2 is the right-shoulder-button camera option.

    When you view your team-mates' camera, you actually do see your team mates, meaning the camera must be hovering several feet above them, though you can't see it. Considering the lengths the game goes to in order to explain all the not-too-distant-future war tech in the game, that seems like a weird decision. Aiming is also quite difficult in that team-mate-camera mode. Also, why can you only view what the drone is seeing when it is descending to lower altitudes? Or is there a way to control it more fully?

  • skillian #13 5 years ago

    Well, I never got round to playing GRAW1 so its similarity isn't an issue for me.

    But PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE can we get a PC review when this comes out in a couple of weeks. Or at least a little feature. Us PC gamers count too. :'(

  • Xerx3s #14 5 years ago

    Sounds like every game in the whole Xbox 360 library...

    How would you know?

  • Hunam #15 5 years ago

    Not according to UBISUCK...

    hehe

    /shoddy pc ports for the lose

  • skillian #16 5 years ago

    /shoddy pc ports for the lose

    Exactly, this is why we should be kept informed! I'm still wondering if EG are gonna cover the abomination that is Resi Evil 4 PC.

  • Birchy #17 5 years ago

    I hope the floating Jesus special move is still in this game.

  • mkreku #18 5 years ago

    Hmm.. This may very well be my next Xbox 360 purchase. It sounded like a 9 in the review though. Bit surprised it got an 8, but that's definitely good enough for me.

  • MrFlintBlackman #19 5 years ago

    Why are war games so fucking brown and grey!?

    Even the characters look brown and grey, Long time players on this shit would have their eyes melted off if they ever played Okami.

  • gazareth #20 5 years ago

    Paulanator: It's region free and £27 delivered on play-asia.com

  • morriss #21 5 years ago

    Sounds great. I'm am teh graffix hore and this one fits the bill. Too manyu games to get, play and trade. Must. Finish. Crackdown and Zelda. Trade them for Sonic Rings and Ecite Truck. Complete those. Then play SotC and Okami. Complete those. Then get this.

    :)

  • Carrybagma #22 5 years ago

    @mkreku: Given their supposed policy of rewarding innovation, getting one more point than last time around for a v.2 is pretty good.

  • gaijin #23 5 years ago

    "these Tom Clancy games are crying out for an injection of personality."

    As are his novels.

  • kincaide #24 5 years ago

    Phew - enough to push me over the edge to *not* buy this

  • Introspectre #25 5 years ago

    Simple question:

    Can you see your own gun in first person mode?

  • urizen #26 5 years ago

    @HairyArse: nah, I thought GRAW looked pretty consistently superb too, and I don't recall major issues with night vision (though it was a common complaint, to be fair).

  • samk #27 5 years ago

    "Night vision, as well, has been completely overhauled ... it gives you an instant advantage in the dark and makes the darker portions of the game thoroughly enjoyable."

    Thank God for that. I recently completely GRAW1 and for me the night vision sections in that were the worst in the game by far.

    Using night vision is supposed to give you an advantage and empower the player while hapless enemies stumbled around in the dark getting picked off. Yet in GRAW1 I'd be creeping around in the shadows with night vision enabled yet STILL be getting fired at enemies before I could even see them. Clearly the AI troops had 'radar vision' or some other lame cheat method. :(

    That bloody "Mayday! Mayday!" mission which takes place at night without any soldiers helping out took me absolutely forever. Play for 20 minutes, get killed by someone out of my night vision range, get respawned about a mile back, repeat. :(

    If the night vision is much improved in GRAW2 I may well pick this up at the weekend.

  • quantumsheep #28 5 years ago

    Took back a couple of old DS games to GAME and got this for four british pounds.

    Awesome =)

  • Donny #29 5 years ago

    Can we have a PC version review? Please!

  • Introspectre #30 5 years ago

    Simple question:

    Can you see your own gun in first person mode?

  • Commodore75 #31 5 years ago

    So how is the couch co-op?

  • Darren #32 5 years ago

    The fact that the demos of GRAW 2 where so similar to the last game, a game I felt was disappointing and overrated, is the reason I decided not to buy this "sequel".

    I much preferred the two Ghost Recon 2 games on the Xbox to be honest and felt the only things the new game had to offer was poorer A.I., teammates that you could literally walk through (well they are Ghosts!), v-sync tearing and prettier graphics. The multiplayer is pretty much the same as the last game and not a patch on the single player graphically or control wise.

  • krudster #33 5 years ago

    MM, you're troubled by *everything ever*. Be a nice pedant, if you have to be one.


    As for the gun in first person view. No, it's not there.

  • Pulsar_t #34 5 years ago

    Ghost Recon has mainly become a console franchise, live with it. I bet the PC port will be sluggish and unoptimised like the R6V one. Ubisoft is giving PC gamers the finger.

    What I detest the most about GRAW (and games of its ilk) is the lack of variety, samey environments and boring objectives.
    Edited by 1 at 09/03/07 @ 16:39

  • krudster #35 5 years ago

    The PC version of GRAW was horrible. Unoptimised, clunky, horrible to control.

  • heyyo #36 5 years ago

    I downloaded this and it was just like being in Iraq

  • heyyo #37 5 years ago

    I downloaded this and it was just liek being in Iraq.

    So I got scared and turned it off.

  • skillian #38 5 years ago

    The PC version of GRAW was horrible.

    Indeed. I guess it's too much to hope that they've done something about it this time, but I'm an old Ghost Recon fan and Godammit I wanna play the new one! With proper controls!

  • Introspectre #39 5 years ago

    Simple question:

    Can you see your own gun in first person mode?

  • skillian #40 5 years ago

    Read above you numbnuts.

    No, it's not there.

  • Introspectre #41 5 years ago

    k thx

  • amuR #42 5 years ago

    i've played it through and tbh it was too short. and the multiplayer partition is allmost a clone of graw so, i'm realy disapointed. it's a shame couse graw2 realy had a chance of beeing one of the best clancy games of all time.
    Edited by 1 at 09/03/07 @ 16:57

  • Darren #43 5 years ago

    How come GRAW doesn't have a first person view with a gun anyway? I mean the gun detail is already there as evidenced by the close up over the shoulder view so how difficult would it have been to have simply changed to viewpoint to include the gun? Let's face it with the game not having to draw your character, the gun would surely use less or the same amount of polygons anyway? Couldn't the view have been optional, after all the PC version has it?

    I find the gunless first person view odd even though it's probably realistic but as we all know realistic doesn't always work in a game.

  • kangarootoo #44 5 years ago

    I never really liked the first person game engine of GRAW. I thought the multiplayer one was much better. Is GRAW 2 based on two different engines as before?

  • krudster #45 5 years ago

    Same engine, but for some strange reason they've taken out the duck and cover controls for multiplayer again.

  • morriss #46 5 years ago

    For 'some reason'?! You're so unprofessional. A professional reviewer would know exactly why...;)

  • krudster #47 5 years ago

    /kills self.

  • morriss #48 5 years ago

    /attempts mouth to mouth

    ...

    /carries on anyway

  • brooza #49 5 years ago

    So... as good as Halo 2?

  • The-Bodybuilder #50 5 years ago

    No. As good as GOW.

    /prances off

  • morriss #51 5 years ago

    brooza, Halo 2 got a 9.

  • Xerx3s #52 5 years ago

    He meant halo. Only human. >:)

  • Feanor #53 5 years ago

    LOL. If you're gonna do that worn-out old joke, at least get it right.

  • smelly #54 5 years ago

    *snore*

    sounds dull

  • Curion #55 5 years ago

    More of same, yawn...................

  • Overlush #56 5 years ago

    "More of same, yawn................... "

    Indeed, but if one likes the same, then why not have more of the same? If you don't like it then fair enough, but I fail to believe that YOUR life is not peppered with instances of you indulging in MORE of what YOU like.

    Be gone, simple forumite

  • smelly #57 5 years ago

    Im not against sequels or re-using a brand. Im just against sequels which do nothing different.

    Am I the only one fed up with this type of thing? There's only a handful of different ways you can shoot things...

    Ho hum.. prolly just me again (like with finding oblivion dull)

  • Darren #58 5 years ago

    I'm confused about EG's implication in the review that GRAW 2 has no v-sync issues as I noticed that the single player demo was rife with it (and I wasn't looking for it either... honest).

    So does the final game have v-sync issues or not? (I'd be very surprised if it doesn't as all of Ubisoft's 360 games have it to varying degrees; they even managed to add it to the craptastic Far Cry Instincts Predator when they patched it!)

  • Commodore75 #59 5 years ago

    So . . . does this game have split-screen co-op?

  • krudster #60 5 years ago

    I saw no v-sync tearing issues in the full game. Did anyone else?
    Edited by 1 at 10/03/07 @ 08:08

  • byron_hinson #61 5 years ago

    Got to say compared to GRAW 1 it certainly has no v-sync issues for me in the retail version.

  • Notorious_LRO #62 5 years ago

    @Morriss: Jesus! Don't trade Zelda for Sonic's crappy secret rings. The rumors of Sonic and his miraculus recovery are bull****!!1.

  • Whizzo #63 5 years ago

    I've spotted a bit of tearing on Caldera in MP, that was when using a scope on the top of the dish on what is an extremely complex map. However in comparison to getting tearing using a scope on any level in GRAW1 the difference is huge.

  • Overlush #64 5 years ago

    @smelly

    "Am I the only one fed up with this type of thing? There's only a handful of different ways you can shoot things... "

    Perhaps, but my point was, if you don't find the mechansism of shooting things (first or third person) particulalry satisfying, you're prone to drawing that conclusion.

    I find RPGs, sports games, many Nintendo franchises and others quite dull and samey, but that's because they're not my 'thing'.

    No one's right or wrong on this matter, I just think it's a bit lame having a dig at a genre for being the way it it is - especially when that genre is (I would guess) the biggest selling one!
    Edited by 1 at 10/03/07 @ 16:28

  • smelly #65 5 years ago

    @Overlush : I didnt mention over genres. I just mentioned this genre, which just seems to be a one trick pony, and as long as this is all gamers want. Then the industry will soon disapear up its own bottom.

    After all most fps games (this one not included as it does have a tacticle element) are just overly extended mini games.

  • morriss #66 5 years ago

    Krudster: A question: If you think that the price of GRAW 2 should be lowered because it's just an 'update' of GRAW, do you also think that the PES series and the FIFA series should be lowered in price too?

  • morriss #67 5 years ago

    @wasp: it'll be out on the PS3 too, along with FEAR and all the other macho games that come out for the 360. What's your point?

  • Overlush #68 5 years ago

    @smelly

    "...this genre...just seems to be a one trick pony...after all most fps games are just overly extended mini games"

    Sigh. Yes, I dare say to someone who's not 'in' to the genre, that's what they would appear to be. As I'm not 'in' to sports games I could level the same criticisms against them, but I don't because I'm just a little bit more open minded than that.

    Films, cars, books, games, music, camping, sports, clothes, whatever: if you don't 'get' the appeal, it's easy to dismiss and over simplify the experience.

    Ah what the hell...

    EDIT: Looking at Tesco's top 6 is, for me, a sight to behold: appealing next-gen shooter after applealing next-gen shooter. Call it what you will, but for those of us who love shooters, you can't ask for more. Thanks MS :)
    Edited by 1 at 10/03/07 @ 21:37

  • Jedermaen #69 5 years ago

    Despite the events of the game taking place a year after last year's Mexican adventure...

    There's actually only a single day between the end of GRAW 1 and the beginning of GRAW 2.
    Edited by 1 at 10/03/07 @ 22:12

  • Darren #70 5 years ago

    I watched the GameTrailers.com 720p video review of GRAW 2 and I definitely noticed v-sync issues although it's not as in-yer-face as it was in the first game. I wonder if the PS3 version of this game, Double Agent and Rainbow Six Vegas will have this issue...?

  • morriss #71 5 years ago

    No. Because the PS3 is a better machine.

  • kangarootoo #72 5 years ago

    @Overlush

    +1 for any or all of your comments.

  • The-Bodybuilder #73 5 years ago

    >"(like with finding oblivion dull)"

    Trust me, you're not the only one...

  • smelly #74 5 years ago

    "Looking at Tesco's top 6 is, for me, a sight to behold: appealing next-gen shooter after applealing next-gen shooter."


    are you trying to make me depressed?

  • The-Bodybuilder #75 5 years ago

    >" didnt mention over genres. I just mentioned this genre, which just seems to be a one trick pony, and as long as this is all gamers want. Then the industry will soon disapear up its own bottom.

    After all most fps games (this one not included as it does have a tacticle element) are just overly extended mini games. "

    Stop being such an ignorant twat.
    The same can be said for ANY genre. All you have to do is just not like the genre.
    I don't like rpgs, and I COULD say they are all one or two trick ponys (either a bi-sexual looking bigs haired freak with a giant sword trying to save the world, or another western rpg with elves and goblins).

    The difference is, I don't have to be ignorant and can accept people like those genres.....for some reason.

    Why do people have to be such, ignorant elitist snobs?

  • Overlush #76 5 years ago

    "are you trying to make me depressed? "

    LOL!

    No, just pointing out how happy I am :)

    /nods to kangarootoo
    Edited by 1 at 11/03/07 @ 10:32

  • quantumsheep #77 5 years ago

    Very much enjoyed this - finished it very quickly though =(

    Still, the online element seems like a bit of fun =)

    Hadn't played the original, so this really was a bit of a treat for me!

  • smelly #78 5 years ago

    >Why do people have to be such, ignorant elitist snobs?


    Why do people have to get so aggressive when you dare to talk about something like this? Could it be that deep down they find them dull to? Or maybe violent video games do make people violent and aggressive.. hmm..

  • The-Bodybuilder #79 5 years ago

    >"Why do people have to get so aggressive when you dare to talk about something like this? Could it be that deep down they find them dull to? Or maybe violent video games do make people violent and aggressive.. hmm.. "

    LOL. I was just making an observation.

    Atleast I now understand why you love ninty so much.

  • smelly #80 5 years ago

    Nah, i just think they make the best games in the world.. eventually.. if you wait long enough :-)

    But that's not my point. This isnt me slagging it off because it's on a specific console or whatever, i'm against all that kind of nonsense! It's not event that i'm against fps games as such, im also not one of these people that are "against" violent games even, or that promote censorship or anything. I just dont see the need, to me the only thing these types of game have going for them is how pretty they look.

    Its not that im even against violent games, one of the few games on the 360 i play lots is dead rising. I also used to REALLY enjoy fps games, one of my favourite games was half life 2, and i really enjoyed halo first time around (didnt think much to the sequel mind).

    It's just that even the strategic ones (like this) dont really add anything much to the "genre", they dont seem to do anything really "new" and after years of playing games (and a lot of those games WERE shooting games), im just bored and tired of the genre and desperate for something "new".

    Bear in mind i'v been playing games for a LONG time now.. Easily over 20 years..

    Its like all those violent shooting movies of the 80's featuring arnie, stallone, van dam, etc.. at the time they were ace, but after seeing loads of them it soon becomes boring and repetitive. So much so, watching those movies now, you realise how boring and shite they were.

    IMHO if the industry keeps pumping out generic fps games and keeps relying on them, then gamers will soon get bored, and the whole games industry will soon implode and have major financial difficulties while its trying to figure out how to make games which dont bore people.

    How many people do you know who are already starting to say they're getting bored of games and gaming? I wonder if its games their getting bored of, or whether its shooting games they're getting bored of (which seem to be pretty much the only type of game released nowadays).

    Dont get me wrong, having strategic squad based stuff is a step in the right direction. Im not half as against this as i am against generic crap like FEAR (and i fear *hohoho* perhaps halo 3 will go the same way). I even rented GoW as everyone was saying how great it was, i was bored within minutes.. been there done that, shot things before, yawn.. Someone recently said (not me) that GoW was just an overly extended whack a mole game, to me that pretty much sums up every fps game i've played.. Even the clever tactile squad based ones..

    It's just that (as a gamer), just like with movies at the end of the 80's.. I'm beginning to crave something "different".

    (geesus that was a long rant - i hope it makes sense, if it doesnt feel free to just come back with a witty "meh, you're just saying that because you're a nintendo fanboy" retort. As Im sure you will.)
    Edited by 2 at 11/03/07 @ 20:53

  • WickedDeeJ #81 5 years ago

    Well GRAW for the PC was a completely different game than the Xbox360 version.

    Having tried both, I personally preferred the PC version, it was like being back in the good old days of Rainbow Six, before they made it easy for the console-folk. I can understand not everyone likes the "you make a mistake, you're dead" type of game, but that's what both Ghost Recon and R6 started as, and GRAW PC was a welcome return to form, in my opinion. Made it feel that much better when I beat a level.

    A PC version of GRAW 2 would be nice, as I'm curious to see whether Ubisoft has followed the same route as with GRAW.

  • Overlush #82 5 years ago

    @smelly

    So, you've been playing games for over 20 years, used to love shooters (even until quite recently going on your Half-Life 2 and Halo comments) but now yearn for something more?

    Could it be that it's not shooters that have got old and boring, but you?

    I guess all I'm trying to say is: why feel the need to 'show the rest of us the light at the end of the tunnel' if we're quite happy? Why feel the need to spell doom and gloom for the industry if people continue to buy shooters, when you yourself bought them for the best part of 20 years?

    P.S. don't diss' Arnie and Stalone - IMHO Terminator and Rambo still kick ass :)
    Edited by 1 at 12/03/07 @ 09:05

  • Machiavel #83 5 years ago

    Got tired of the first GRAW, hated the demo for GRAW2, yet instinct led to a purchase and I'm thoroughly enjoying it. Indeed, just a polished up, more focused re-run of the first one, but it's highly enjoyable.

  • Machiavel #84 5 years ago

    Oh, and another appalling Yankedoodle plot.

    "We're secretly killing enemies of America inside Mexico, keep it quiet!"
    "Oh no! They're accusing us of killing Mexican troops, and we're innocent!"
    "Let's kill some more then, and watch as dutiful Mexican troops, grateful to us American heroes, get blown up..."

  • The-Bodybuilder #85 5 years ago

    >"I just dont see the need, to me the only thing these types of game have going for them is how pretty they look. "

    Luckily for the rest of us, games aren't created based on whether YOU like it.
    It that was the case, we would all be stuck playing mario universe.

  • The-Bodybuilder #86 5 years ago

    >"Easily over 20 years....IMHO if the industry keeps pumping out generic fps games and keeps relying on them, then gamers will soon get bored"

    1. Movie's of the 80's were exactly that, 80s. They lasted for a decade.
    2. You speak like an analyst. "then gamers will soon get bored". You've been playing for 20 years, and gamers STILL aren't bored.
    3. Movies of the 80's aren't dead, they just evolved, much like shooters will. It's no suprise that the summer blockbusters (the most lucrative of them all) are usually kiss kiss, bang bang movies, with loads of explosions and such.
    They still sell even till now in the movies, what makes you think the games won't too?
    4. Every form of entertainment media always have one form of genre that is more dominant than the others. No big deal.

    >"How many people do you know who are already starting to say they're getting bored of games and gaming? I wonder if its games their getting bored of, or whether its shooting games they're getting bored of (which seem to be pretty much the only type of game released nowadays). "

    Yes, I know many who are playing games less and less (me being one of them). This is due to time, and they too only have a few hours a week to play games. For this reason, they (ironically) play ONLY shooting games simply because they don't have time (or can't be bothered) to learn how to play a different type of game.

    I understand what you're saying, but the mistake you are making is that you seem to struggle with the concept that others DON'T think like you. What may seem "logical" in your head, is ludricous someone else.

    Oh and meh, you are a nintendo fanboy. :)
    P.S: Speaking about you and ninty, I do find it odd that someone can get bored of a specific type of genre (no matter how different the games may actually be),but yet doesn't get bored of running around "jumping on stuff" (see, even I can simplify a genre too, out of ignorance) with the same ninty characters in the same ninty setting doing the same ninty things.

    :)
    Edited by 1 at 12/03/07 @ 17:13

  • smelly #87 5 years ago

    "I guess all I'm trying to say is: why feel the need to 'show the rest of us the light at the end of the tunnel' if we're quite happy? Why"


    Did I say that you should feel the same as me?
    No.
    I was just explaining how i felt.

    It's called a dis..cuss..ion.

    I dont expect other people to have the same thoughts as me. It's called sharing ideas and thoughts and talking about stuff.

    see? It's a thing that grown ups do.. But then again, i guess people who like this type of thing are still at school and havent learned that yet :-)

  • smelly #88 5 years ago

    >yet doesn't get bored of running around "jumping on stuff"


    How many good "running around jumping on stuff" games have there been of recent years? Apart from the odd shite kids based game, the good ones are few and far between. Mario, ratchet & clank, jack and daxter.. So about 1 decent platformer for every 300 odd shooters..

    Hell even mario games have stopped being "running around jumping on stuff" and havent been since mario world on the snes.


    But even then im hungering something "new", games are a versitile platform, lets have more new, less of the same old same old (and that includes platformers)

  • SomaticSense #89 5 years ago

    Smelly: Thinks that all FPS/TPS games never really add anything new to the genre. He's right.

    Overlush and The Bodybuilder (and me also): Couldn't give a shit whether they are all the same as they enjoy them anyway, which is all that matters.

    So what was the 'discussion' about again?

    Yeah, shooter games, tactical or otherwise very rarely add anything new, but to be honest who gives a shit if the people that do like the genre enjoy playing them?

    Smelly, go to another comments section on a game you actually care about, instead of wasting your time here on an article for a game in which your most important contribution seemed to be "*snore* Sounds dull".
    That, or go back and play your beloved Ninty's Zelda TP, which just so happens to be almost exactly the same as OoT.

  • SomaticSense #90 5 years ago

    Honestly. It can be like a kids playground on this site.

  • smelly #91 5 years ago

    @SomaticSense: If you werent a complete retard, you'd notice that i've stated numerous times that TP is easily the worst zelda i've played. Why you muppets keep feeling the need to bring every thread back to nintendo is beyond me. Presumably it's because i'll then mention nintendo in my reply and you can use that to say "ha, you're just saying all this because you're a nintendo fanboy" or something equally lame.


    Admitidly i started out with a throw away comment. But then I went into depth as to why i think these types of games add nothing to our industry and are (in the long term) bad for gamers as a whole. How many people do you know who are "bored of games"? I know a few.

    In fact asside from a dead rising, zelda and sam and max, i played sod all games last year.

    Maybe im getting old, maybe gaming is getting tired. It was just a conversation. At no point did i say "har har, if nintendo made this it'd be better" at no point did i say "this sucks, zelda is better". The only people mentioning nintendo is you lot (and my replies to them).

    This has got NOTHING to do with whether or not i like nintendo games, and everything to do with me having a discussion as to the direction the industry is going (or rather, it's not going anywhere in most cases, it's stuck at the traffic lights).


  • The-Bodybuilder #92 5 years ago

    >"But even then im hungering something "new", games are a versitile platform, lets have more new, less of the same old same old (and that includes platformers) "

    I don't get it.
    You want new IP, but yet you love the same ol ninty IPs over and over again? :)
    /stops nintendo baiting.

    And it's very easy to say "i want knew stuff". That's like me saying I want a car with a "completely new technology", but having no idea what.
    The fact is your previous comment, as great as it may seem to you, goes against the current trends of gaming. Gaming hasn't been as big as it is now (namely due to those pesky shooters you hate), and it shows no sign of ending anytime soon.

    To every smelly that hates shooters, there are many......MANY more that love them. I'm a big fan of horror, action, gangster/mobster and epic movies (along with more "emotional" films). At thier core, they are all the same. I very much doubt I'm gonna wake up tomorrow and start moaning for "something new".

    From the beginning of gaming (when multiple genres began to exist), action, sports and racing games have dominated. Over 3 decades and many new generations of gamers, that hasn't changed.
    Edited by 1 at 13/03/07 @ 00:13

  • smelly #93 5 years ago

    >Gaming hasn't been as big as it is now

    Actually thats a popular misconception. Yes more people play games, but also the population of the world has gone up.

    In terms of ratio of population that plays games, it's actually LESS than it was when the snes ruled the world. But that's a different story.

    BUT.. Just because it's not gonna happen, doesnt mean I cant moan about it! so ner :-)

  • The-Bodybuilder #94 5 years ago

    >"Actually thats a popular misconception. Yes more people play games, but also the population of the world has gone up. "

    1. You're spreading a misconception too. There are too many variables for why the world's population has gone up (mostly from the chinese, other ethnic minorities, and from poorer countries, of which gaming is last on thier agenda).
    Simply saying "the population has gone up" is inaccurate and misleading in the context of the number of game players.

    >"In terms of ratio of population that plays games, it's actually LESS than it was when the snes ruled the world. But that's a different story. "

    O'RLY? got any proof to go with that pudding? Sounds like now it's you spreading the misconception. Let's not forget the other variables that affect lifestyles (people are also working more with less time, and have less disposable income).
    Which still doesn't change the statement I made that gaming is bigger now than ever before, which it is.

    >"BUT.. Just because it's not gonna happen, doesnt mean I cant moan about it! so ner :-) "

    3. Moaning about it is futlie....resistance is futile. You'll be back to playing shooters.

    They always come crawling back. Mwahahaha.
    Edited by 1 at 13/03/07 @ 10:53

  • Overlush #95 5 years ago

    "In terms of ratio of population that plays games, it's actually LESS than it was when the snes ruled the world"

    Not that I'm disputing this statement smelly, but where do you get your facts from?

  • Fab4 #96 5 years ago

    "Not that I'm disputing this statement smelly, but where do you get your facts from?"

    It doesnt take you to be a genius to work it out. The areas of the world were population is exploding...India and China, are both less likely to match that population growth with game platform sales...hence the actual percentage of world population that is gaming is decreasing.

  • Overlush #97 5 years ago

    But who's to say the percentage of people playing in developed countries hasn't increased enough to offset this? Look, I'm not trying to call people a liar or anything as it truly doesn't really matter anyway what the right answer is, I'm just geniunely curious about the statistics.

  • The-Bodybuilder #98 5 years ago

    >"hence the actual percentage of world population that is gaming is decreasing. "

    Tis true, just very irrelevant. Gaming has only ever been in the developed countries.
    Oh and just some years ago, the only territories were N.America, Europe and Japan. Now it's also China, S.Korea, Australia, S.America, Some places in Africa, and even India.

  • Shalashaska #99 4 years ago

    you know its not just this game, but i think alot of the people who comment on these games, esecially those who slag them off get their opinions from other reviewers instead of actully playing the games, i looked up on a guy who said Vegas 2 was crap, not only had he not played it, but his gamer score was like 125gp, play the game then tell me its shit!
    As for GRAW 2, its no way near a simple add on, its much more refiened, better looking, better online, better in every way to GRAW. And I dont mean to tak off topic again, because I would sooner discuss GRAW2 than the twats i am refering too but If you are a PC fanboy dont post messages about an XBOX360 game condemning decent games because you have to wait 6 months before you can play them, (ie. Gears of war etc...)
    peace!