User Score
5.7

Mixed or average reviews- based on 20 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 20
  2. Negative: 8 out of 20
Buy On

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Joeaverage
    Jan 30, 2005
    4
    A good idea with good graphics but if your looking for a team based shooter dont buy this the team ai is terrible your team could hit a fly with a grenade from a different country but they can't shot someone who stands in front of them very disappointing.
  2. Socom2FAN
    Dec 5, 2004
    0
    This game sucks, the graphics, movements, everything is just terrible. Playing this game is not even as good as playind Duke Nukem 3D!
  3. JackM.
    May 16, 2007
    3
    This was very boring. Sure the graphics may look good but gameplay was boring. It's easy to take damage; your constantly taking cover. There are no health packs. Your team is useless. And once you die, you start from the beginning of the mission; there are no checkpoints. All I can say is, very boring!
  4. Dec 7, 2011
    1
    Very Poor. They took away all the best things about the first two games (Open and non-linear landscapes, a second fireteam and the ability to fully customize them, switching between team members) and instead produced a SOCOM clone that has nothing to do with the first two games, and is vastly inferior to SOCOM in all ways to boot. The AI is a joke, watching two of my team mates and oneVery Poor. They took away all the best things about the first two games (Open and non-linear landscapes, a second fireteam and the ability to fully customize them, switching between team members) and instead produced a SOCOM clone that has nothing to do with the first two games, and is vastly inferior to SOCOM in all ways to boot. The AI is a joke, watching two of my team mates and one enemy firing away at each other in the open from three feet away and no one getting hit, but everyone of their soldiers is a sharpshooter when aiming at you. Your team mates do nothing to aid in the missions at all. They don't even draw fire away from you. If all that didn't kill the atmosphere from the first two games, your Commanding Officer sounds like he moonlights as the Movie-Fone guy. This ought not have the Ghost Recon wording on the box. It's actually an entirely different shooter, and an extremely poor on at that

    Pros: Graphics and Background story
    Cons: Everything else
    Expand

Awards & Rankings

73
#73 Most Discussed PS2 Game of 2004
Metascore
58

Mixed or average reviews - based on 21 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2 out of 21
  2. Negative: 3 out of 21
  1. games(TM)
    60
    A brave sequel that tries a little too hard... Its lack of accessibility will annoy "Rainbow Six 3" die-hards, while the new direction will leave fans of the original feeling rather cold. [Christmas 2004, p.102]
  2. A flawed experience from start to finish, Ghost Recon 2 on the PS2 has its share of really good action-packed moments, but its glitches are just too hard to ignore.
  3. An inferior product. This is a linear, action-oriented shooter that has precious little in common with the original game's realistic and tactical squad-based combat.