Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter

 PlayStation 2
  • Publisher: Ubisoft
  • Release Date: Mar 28, 2006
User Score
4.5

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 45 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 17 out of 45
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 45
  3. Negative: 24 out of 45
Buy Now
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
view
per page
  1. RonnieT.
    Apr 9, 2006
    1
    Graphics are square, controls are sluggish, team work is minimal, no voice control, weapon choice too small, missions are repetative. All in all a dissapointing game that has unbelievable video clips.
  2. AmirulH
    Jul 21, 2009
    0
    The most disappointing game i ever seen.... When i played this game, it makes me not sense why the xbox 360 is better that playstation 2. Why? The playstation 2 cannot do more better than original PC games,but i`m gonna say, this game is worthless,stupid graphics, stupid gameplay , and you may throw this game into the rubbish.This game say the most advance graphics and gameplay but what i The most disappointing game i ever seen.... When i played this game, it makes me not sense why the xbox 360 is better that playstation 2. Why? The playstation 2 cannot do more better than original PC games,but i`m gonna say, this game is worthless,stupid graphics, stupid gameplay , and you may throw this game into the rubbish.This game say the most advance graphics and gameplay but what i seen, it totally suck! But if you fan of tom clancy's game, i suggest you do not play this game.It`s bad for you.… Expand
  3. RyanT.
    Sep 1, 2006
    0
    A horrific game. The X-Box 360 version is really good. The playstation 2 version is puke on the screen.
  4. Elin
    Apr 11, 2006
    1
    Warning if you purchase this game you either are complete douchebag or for some odd reason you enjoy half assed games that share the same name of certain x-box 360 shooter. Not a single copy of this game deserves to be bought. The disc is worth being a coster. If that isn't enough to convince let me just say the graphics are terrificly awful, crap linear corridor to corridor shoot theWarning if you purchase this game you either are complete douchebag or for some odd reason you enjoy half assed games that share the same name of certain x-box 360 shooter. Not a single copy of this game deserves to be bought. The disc is worth being a coster. If that isn't enough to convince let me just say the graphics are terrificly awful, crap linear corridor to corridor shoot the retarded bad guys gameplay and while your at it you might want to shoot yourself.… Expand
  5. GeorgeF.
    Apr 2, 2007
    2
    Considering this is supposed to be an elite unit, the gameplay isn't even close to being realistic. I thought GR2 was bad, but this is the worst GR yet. Even if it is, like awesome duuuuuuuuude, on the X-box 360 the Ghost teams don't act like any SF unit out there, maybe a glorified Ranger unit at best. I love how product placement by Crye and Hatch as well as the HK XM-8 (which Considering this is supposed to be an elite unit, the gameplay isn't even close to being realistic. I thought GR2 was bad, but this is the worst GR yet. Even if it is, like awesome duuuuuuuuude, on the X-box 360 the Ghost teams don't act like any SF unit out there, maybe a glorified Ranger unit at best. I love how product placement by Crye and Hatch as well as the HK XM-8 (which is now a failed project and scrapped) are littered throughout the game. At least they got the Mutlicam right - everyone knows they will be replacing the useless ACUs soon anyway. Overall, it's just boring urban shooting and nothing more.… Expand
  6. JacobiwanS.
    Oct 26, 2006
    2
    This game has it's place: 10 years ago. It's terrible, acting like a poor Wolfenstein or Goldeneye in graphics, with even worse mechanics and animation. Right off the bat, I noticed that enemies all seemed to be missing about 1/3 of their animation frames, making them appear as if they are "lagging" across screen. It's this choppy enemy movement, coupled with the poor This game has it's place: 10 years ago. It's terrible, acting like a poor Wolfenstein or Goldeneye in graphics, with even worse mechanics and animation. Right off the bat, I noticed that enemies all seemed to be missing about 1/3 of their animation frames, making them appear as if they are "lagging" across screen. It's this choppy enemy movement, coupled with the poor aiming controls and lack of (intuitive) shot physics that make even the possibly entertaining shooting (as nothing else in this game is too well done or entertaining) not fun. So, with it's downfall in action, the game also boasts an incredibly linear level structure, with a bland, boring, and very Win95 "Maze" screensaver feel to the surroundings. I do not recommend this game to anyone.… Expand

Awards & Rankings

57
#57 Most Discussed PS2 Game of 2006

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
44

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 8 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 8
  2. Mixed: 3 out of 8
  3. Negative: 5 out of 8
  1. GameSpot
    44
    This version of the game takes what should have been a wide-open, tactical experience in a massive metropolis and turns it into just another run-and-gun shooter that ramrods you through narrow corridors.
    Read full review
  2. IGN
    37
    Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter is a very bad game on the PlayStation 2. It's terrible from a technical standpoint, and nothing else about its design really brings it out of the gutter.
    Read full review
  3. Next Level Gaming
    59
    There comes a time when you should just move on. I think Tom Clancy games and the Playstation 2 should go ahead and part ways. The system just isn't powerful enough to do what I think UbiSoft really wants to do with their games.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »