The "Retro Game Reviews" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This thread has been linked to the game 'Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2'.
Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2
How does one review a game retrospectively?
I recently borrowed a copy of Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2 (GRAW2 for short) from a friend of mine. I really enjoyed playing the prequel, and when I heard good reviews about the second I was keen to pick it up. But I never got around to it and there were other notable first and third person shooters competing for my time; Gears of War 2, Rainbow Six Vegas 2 and more recently Battlefield 1943 (amongst others). It would seem I was destined not to play GRAW2 until I stumbled across a copy recently, and was thankfully leant it.
Nostalgia can be a wonderful thing. For example, I have forgotten a lot of the reasons I dumped my ex girlfriends. I have forgotten the arguments. Instead I can fondly remember that first date, that first kiss and the first time we… nevermind. My point is that my memories of playing GRAW are also through rose-tinted glasses; happy gaming days where the graphics and game-play were excellent. And even though I have not really thought about it for a while, there has always been a part of me that wanted to pick up and play GRAW2.
Retrospective gaming is not that easy, as I have found out. Furthermore retrospective review writing is even less fun.
The story GRAW2 takes place immediately after the events of GRAW. In fact nearly everything about this game is exactly the same as the first. This has its merits in many ways; if you liked the first game (as many did) you will probably like the second (as many did). Personally, though, I do slightly begrudge paying top dollar for a game that has done little or nothing to improve the gaming experience of its predecessor. Agreed, in this case I didn’t. But I would have been peeved if I had forked out for this on the day of release only to find that it’s all, pretty much, the same.
As I hadn’t played it for a while I figured I would familiarise myself with the controls and feel of the game. The ‘training’ mission is quite short and sweet, and covers the basics of what you need to know. I also enjoyed this little walk down memory lane; the red diamonds that appear as you spot an enemy; the holding down of left trigger to steady your sight for the headshot; the cover system (which only 2 years on now feels antique). It did what was required, and that was to get me back into GRAW. And a bonus here (although I still don’t know why Ubisoft do this in a lot of their games) is that I picked up 25 very easy gamer points for doing next to nothing.
There is then a ‘cut scene’ in which you are driven to the start of the campaign mode. And it is here that I found my first real disappointment. The graphics in this were quite awful. The details, particularly in objects that were close, were not the polished article I remember from way back when. Perhaps this was because it wasn’t a true cut scene, but one in which you can swivel your head to have a look around. For whatever reason, I remember feeling quite unimpressed.
However, cut scenes do not form a part of the core gaming experience, so perhaps it was a little picky of me to mention it. The game starts off as you would expect: quite slow, with only a few enemies to kill between you and the three other member of your squad. As you progress the enemies become more numerous and harder to kill (as in vehicles). It’s all pretty standard FPS stuff. But what GRAW2 does well is the following…
The graphics during game-play are actually quite stunning. It does lack a bit of detail in places, like when you get up close to something, but I must say for the most part they are very good. The lighting as dusk approaches can still be used as a lesson to many developers, as the sun blinds you when it shines into your eyes and you cannot see what is lurking in the shadows. The atmosphere is pretty spot on, and as you will spend most of your time shooting or being shot at then you will find that the small details are a nice to have rather than a necessity.
The pace of the game is also good, with a mixture of stealth and all out gunfire. Headshots play their part as a quick and sometimes easy way of taking down an enemy rather then being drawn into a gun fight. They can also be satisfying if done over distance. You get explosives to play with, sniper rifles, grenades and machine guns. Picking the right weaponry will help you complete a level quicker, but it is not imperative. One thing that is lacking here, I felt, was the melee attack. There are games that do it ok (Halo 3) and games that do it very well (Gears of War), and then there are games that do not even try. This, sadly, is the latter.
The controls are quite easy to pick up, which is useful when you have a few new gadgets to control. Things are pretty much as they were before; you can control your squad’s movements and rules of engagement (i.e. hold or fire); you control the hovering camera that will allow you to spot enemies from afar, until the notice it and shoot it out of the sky. What you also get this time is the ability to view through a squad member’s helmet mounted camera. This can be useful when planning an attack on an enemy. But all in all things are the same as before.
And I think this is part of the problem with this game. There is nothing that remarkable about it when compared to GRAW. It feels like Ubisoft have simply completed the game they never quite got around to doing with the first. The campaign mode is short (about 6 hours according to some, although it took me and my cautious nature a bit longer). I am lead to believe that the online offering is (or was) fairly good, however I cannot bring myself to try it as there are other games out there offering an awesome online experience. Halo 3 has a plethora of maps and modes to choose from, and Gears 2 has Horde of course.
I’m sure this game was great in its day, and to be frank for what you can pick it up for these days I would say it is worth buying if you have £10 lying around somewhere. Just don’t expect too much from this game. The graphics are great in places, and the gaming is solid and fun, however it is short and there is probably more fun to be had playing other games online.
So how do I score this game? Comparing it to other games to day I would give it a score of 80%. This might seem unfair, but this is the problem of doing something in retrospect. I cannot ignore the impact that other FPSs have had on the genre since then, and it is my opinion that you will get a lot more from a game like Gears 2 than GRAW2.
How does one review a game retrospectively?
I recently borrowed a copy of Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2 (GRAW2 for short) from a friend of mine. I really enjoyed playing the prequel, and when I heard good reviews about the second I was keen to pick it up. But I never got around to it and there were other notable first and third person shooters competing for my time; Gears of War 2, Rainbow Six Vegas 2 and more recently Battlefield 1943 (amongst others). It would seem I was destined not to play GRAW2 until I stumbled across a copy recently, and was thankfully leant it.
Nostalgia can be a wonderful thing. For example, I have forgotten a lot of the reasons I dumped my ex girlfriends. I have forgotten the arguments. Instead I can fondly remember that first date, that first kiss and the first time we… nevermind. My point is that my memories of playing GRAW are also through rose-tinted glasses; happy gaming days where the graphics and game-play were excellent. And even though I have not really thought about it for a while, there has always been a part of me that wanted to pick up and play GRAW2.
Retrospective gaming is not that easy, as I have found out. Furthermore retrospective review writing is even less fun.
The story GRAW2 takes place immediately after the events of GRAW. In fact nearly everything about this game is exactly the same as the first. This has its merits in many ways; if you liked the first game (as many did) you will probably like the second (as many did). Personally, though, I do slightly begrudge paying top dollar for a game that has done little or nothing to improve the gaming experience of its predecessor. Agreed, in this case I didn’t. But I would have been peeved if I had forked out for this on the day of release only to find that it’s all, pretty much, the same.
As I hadn’t played it for a while I figured I would familiarise myself with the controls and feel of the game. The ‘training’ mission is quite short and sweet, and covers the basics of what you need to know. I also enjoyed this little walk down memory lane; the red diamonds that appear as you spot an enemy; the holding down of left trigger to steady your sight for the headshot; the cover system (which only 2 years on now feels antique). It did what was required, and that was to get me back into GRAW. And a bonus here (although I still don’t know why Ubisoft do this in a lot of their games) is that I picked up 25 very easy gamer points for doing next to nothing.
There is then a ‘cut scene’ in which you are driven to the start of the campaign mode. And it is here that I found my first real disappointment. The graphics in this were quite awful. The details, particularly in objects that were close, were not the polished article I remember from way back when. Perhaps this was because it wasn’t a true cut scene, but one in which you can swivel your head to have a look around. For whatever reason, I remember feeling quite unimpressed.
However, cut scenes do not form a part of the core gaming experience, so perhaps it was a little picky of me to mention it. The game starts off as you would expect: quite slow, with only a few enemies to kill between you and the three other member of your squad. As you progress the enemies become more numerous and harder to kill (as in vehicles). It’s all pretty standard FPS stuff. But what GRAW2 does well is the following…
The graphics during game-play are actually quite stunning. It does lack a bit of detail in places, like when you get up close to something, but I must say for the most part they are very good. The lighting as dusk approaches can still be used as a lesson to many developers, as the sun blinds you when it shines into your eyes and you cannot see what is lurking in the shadows. The atmosphere is pretty spot on, and as you will spend most of your time shooting or being shot at then you will find that the small details are a nice to have rather than a necessity.
The pace of the game is also good, with a mixture of stealth and all out gunfire. Headshots play their part as a quick and sometimes easy way of taking down an enemy rather then being drawn into a gun fight. They can also be satisfying if done over distance. You get explosives to play with, sniper rifles, grenades and machine guns. Picking the right weaponry will help you complete a level quicker, but it is not imperative. One thing that is lacking here, I felt, was the melee attack. There are games that do it ok (Halo 3) and games that do it very well (Gears of War), and then there are games that do not even try. This, sadly, is the latter.
The controls are quite easy to pick up, which is useful when you have a few new gadgets to control. Things are pretty much as they were before; you can control your squad’s movements and rules of engagement (i.e. hold or fire); you control the hovering camera that will allow you to spot enemies from afar, until the notice it and shoot it out of the sky. What you also get this time is the ability to view through a squad member’s helmet mounted camera. This can be useful when planning an attack on an enemy. But all in all things are the same as before.
And I think this is part of the problem with this game. There is nothing that remarkable about it when compared to GRAW. It feels like Ubisoft have simply completed the game they never quite got around to doing with the first. The campaign mode is short (about 6 hours according to some, although it took me and my cautious nature a bit longer). I am lead to believe that the online offering is (or was) fairly good, however I cannot bring myself to try it as there are other games out there offering an awesome online experience. Halo 3 has a plethora of maps and modes to choose from, and Gears 2 has Horde of course.
I’m sure this game was great in its day, and to be frank for what you can pick it up for these days I would say it is worth buying if you have £10 lying around somewhere. Just don’t expect too much from this game. The graphics are great in places, and the gaming is solid and fun, however it is short and there is probably more fun to be had playing other games online.
So how do I score this game? Comparing it to other games to day I would give it a score of 80%. This might seem unfair, but this is the problem of doing something in retrospect. I cannot ignore the impact that other FPSs have had on the genre since then, and it is my opinion that you will get a lot more from a game like Gears 2 than GRAW2.
There have been no replies to this thread yet.
Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2
How does one review a game retrospectively?
I recently borrowed a copy of Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2 (GRAW2 for short) from a friend of mine. I really enjoyed playing the prequel, and when I heard good reviews about the second I was keen to pick it up. But I never got around to it and there were other notable first and third person shooters competing for my time; Gears of War 2, Rainbow Six Vegas 2 and more recently Battlefield 1943 (amongst others). It would seem I was destined not to play GRAW2 until I stumbled across a copy recently, and was thankfully leant it.
Nostalgia can be a wonderful thing. For example, I have forgotten a lot of the reasons I dumped my ex girlfriends. I have forgotten the arguments. Instead I can fondly remember that first date, that first kiss and the first time we… nevermind. My point is that my memories of playing GRAW are also through rose-tinted glasses; happy gaming days where the graphics and game-play were excellent. And even though I have not really thought about it for a while, there has always been a part of me that wanted to pick up and play GRAW2.
Retrospective gaming is not that easy, as I have found out. Furthermore retrospective review writing is even less fun.
The story GRAW2 takes place immediately after the events of GRAW. In fact nearly everything about this game is exactly the same as the first. This has its merits in many ways; if you liked the first game (as many did) you will probably like the second (as many did). Personally, though, I do slightly begrudge paying top dollar for a game that has done little or nothing to improve the gaming experience of its predecessor. Agreed, in this case I didn’t. But I would have been peeved if I had forked out for this on the day of release only to find that it’s all, pretty much, the same.
As I hadn’t played it for a while I figured I would familiarise myself with the controls and feel of the game. The ‘training’ mission is quite short and sweet, and covers the basics of what you need to know. I also enjoyed this little walk down memory lane; the red diamonds that appear as you spot an enemy; the holding down of left trigger to steady your sight for the headshot; the cover system (which only 2 years on now feels antique). It did what was required, and that was to get me back into GRAW. And a bonus here (although I still don’t know why Ubisoft do this in a lot of their games) is that I picked up 25 very easy gamer points for doing next to nothing.
There is then a ‘cut scene’ in which you are driven to the start of the campaign mode. And it is here that I found my first real disappointment. The graphics in this were quite awful. The details, particularly in objects that were close, were not the polished article I remember from way back when. Perhaps this was because it wasn’t a true cut scene, but one in which you can swivel your head to have a look around. For whatever reason, I remember feeling quite unimpressed.
However, cut scenes do not form a part of the core gaming experience, so perhaps it was a little picky of me to mention it. The game starts off as you would expect: quite slow, with only a few enemies to kill between you and the three other member of your squad. As you progress the enemies become more numerous and harder to kill (as in vehicles). It’s all pretty standard FPS stuff. But what GRAW2 does well is the following…
The graphics during game-play are actually quite stunning. It does lack a bit of detail in places, like when you get up close to something, but I must say for the most part they are very good. The lighting as dusk approaches can still be used as a lesson to many developers, as the sun blinds you when it shines into your eyes and you cannot see what is lurking in the shadows. The atmosphere is pretty spot on, and as you will spend most of your time shooting or being shot at then you will find that the small details are a nice to have rather than a necessity.
The pace of the game is also good, with a mixture of stealth and all out gunfire. Headshots play their part as a quick and sometimes easy way of taking down an enemy rather then being drawn into a gun fight. They can also be satisfying if done over distance. You get explosives to play with, sniper rifles, grenades and machine guns. Picking the right weaponry will help you complete a level quicker, but it is not imperative. One thing that is lacking here, I felt, was the melee attack. There are games that do it ok (Halo 3) and games that do it very well (Gears of War), and then there are games that do not even try. This, sadly, is the latter.
The controls are quite easy to pick up, which is useful when you have a few new gadgets to control. Things are pretty much as they were before; you can control your squad’s movements and rules of engagement (i.e. hold or fire); you control the hovering camera that will allow you to spot enemies from afar, until the notice it and shoot it out of the sky. What you also get this time is the ability to view through a squad member’s helmet mounted camera. This can be useful when planning an attack on an enemy. But all in all things are the same as before.
And I think this is part of the problem with this game. There is nothing that remarkable about it when compared to GRAW. It feels like Ubisoft have simply completed the game they never quite got around to doing with the first. The campaign mode is short (about 6 hours according to some, although it took me and my cautious nature a bit longer). I am lead to believe that the online offering is (or was) fairly good, however I cannot bring myself to try it as there are other games out there offering an awesome online experience. Halo 3 has a plethora of maps and modes to choose from, and Gears 2 has Horde of course.
I’m sure this game was great in its day, and to be frank for what you can pick it up for these days I would say it is worth buying if you have £10 lying around somewhere. Just don’t expect too much from this game. The graphics are great in places, and the gaming is solid and fun, however it is short and there is probably more fun to be had playing other games online.
So how do I score this game? Comparing it to other games to day I would give it a score of 80%. This might seem unfair, but this is the problem of doing something in retrospect. I cannot ignore the impact that other FPSs have had on the genre since then, and it is my opinion that you will get a lot more from a game like Gears 2 than GRAW2.
How does one review a game retrospectively?
I recently borrowed a copy of Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2 (GRAW2 for short) from a friend of mine. I really enjoyed playing the prequel, and when I heard good reviews about the second I was keen to pick it up. But I never got around to it and there were other notable first and third person shooters competing for my time; Gears of War 2, Rainbow Six Vegas 2 and more recently Battlefield 1943 (amongst others). It would seem I was destined not to play GRAW2 until I stumbled across a copy recently, and was thankfully leant it.
Nostalgia can be a wonderful thing. For example, I have forgotten a lot of the reasons I dumped my ex girlfriends. I have forgotten the arguments. Instead I can fondly remember that first date, that first kiss and the first time we… nevermind. My point is that my memories of playing GRAW are also through rose-tinted glasses; happy gaming days where the graphics and game-play were excellent. And even though I have not really thought about it for a while, there has always been a part of me that wanted to pick up and play GRAW2.
Retrospective gaming is not that easy, as I have found out. Furthermore retrospective review writing is even less fun.
The story GRAW2 takes place immediately after the events of GRAW. In fact nearly everything about this game is exactly the same as the first. This has its merits in many ways; if you liked the first game (as many did) you will probably like the second (as many did). Personally, though, I do slightly begrudge paying top dollar for a game that has done little or nothing to improve the gaming experience of its predecessor. Agreed, in this case I didn’t. But I would have been peeved if I had forked out for this on the day of release only to find that it’s all, pretty much, the same.
As I hadn’t played it for a while I figured I would familiarise myself with the controls and feel of the game. The ‘training’ mission is quite short and sweet, and covers the basics of what you need to know. I also enjoyed this little walk down memory lane; the red diamonds that appear as you spot an enemy; the holding down of left trigger to steady your sight for the headshot; the cover system (which only 2 years on now feels antique). It did what was required, and that was to get me back into GRAW. And a bonus here (although I still don’t know why Ubisoft do this in a lot of their games) is that I picked up 25 very easy gamer points for doing next to nothing.
There is then a ‘cut scene’ in which you are driven to the start of the campaign mode. And it is here that I found my first real disappointment. The graphics in this were quite awful. The details, particularly in objects that were close, were not the polished article I remember from way back when. Perhaps this was because it wasn’t a true cut scene, but one in which you can swivel your head to have a look around. For whatever reason, I remember feeling quite unimpressed.
However, cut scenes do not form a part of the core gaming experience, so perhaps it was a little picky of me to mention it. The game starts off as you would expect: quite slow, with only a few enemies to kill between you and the three other member of your squad. As you progress the enemies become more numerous and harder to kill (as in vehicles). It’s all pretty standard FPS stuff. But what GRAW2 does well is the following…
The graphics during game-play are actually quite stunning. It does lack a bit of detail in places, like when you get up close to something, but I must say for the most part they are very good. The lighting as dusk approaches can still be used as a lesson to many developers, as the sun blinds you when it shines into your eyes and you cannot see what is lurking in the shadows. The atmosphere is pretty spot on, and as you will spend most of your time shooting or being shot at then you will find that the small details are a nice to have rather than a necessity.
The pace of the game is also good, with a mixture of stealth and all out gunfire. Headshots play their part as a quick and sometimes easy way of taking down an enemy rather then being drawn into a gun fight. They can also be satisfying if done over distance. You get explosives to play with, sniper rifles, grenades and machine guns. Picking the right weaponry will help you complete a level quicker, but it is not imperative. One thing that is lacking here, I felt, was the melee attack. There are games that do it ok (Halo 3) and games that do it very well (Gears of War), and then there are games that do not even try. This, sadly, is the latter.
The controls are quite easy to pick up, which is useful when you have a few new gadgets to control. Things are pretty much as they were before; you can control your squad’s movements and rules of engagement (i.e. hold or fire); you control the hovering camera that will allow you to spot enemies from afar, until the notice it and shoot it out of the sky. What you also get this time is the ability to view through a squad member’s helmet mounted camera. This can be useful when planning an attack on an enemy. But all in all things are the same as before.
And I think this is part of the problem with this game. There is nothing that remarkable about it when compared to GRAW. It feels like Ubisoft have simply completed the game they never quite got around to doing with the first. The campaign mode is short (about 6 hours according to some, although it took me and my cautious nature a bit longer). I am lead to believe that the online offering is (or was) fairly good, however I cannot bring myself to try it as there are other games out there offering an awesome online experience. Halo 3 has a plethora of maps and modes to choose from, and Gears 2 has Horde of course.
I’m sure this game was great in its day, and to be frank for what you can pick it up for these days I would say it is worth buying if you have £10 lying around somewhere. Just don’t expect too much from this game. The graphics are great in places, and the gaming is solid and fun, however it is short and there is probably more fun to be had playing other games online.
So how do I score this game? Comparing it to other games to day I would give it a score of 80%. This might seem unfair, but this is the problem of doing something in retrospect. I cannot ignore the impact that other FPSs have had on the genre since then, and it is my opinion that you will get a lot more from a game like Gears 2 than GRAW2.