Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter

 PlayStation 2
  • Publisher: Ubisoft
  • Release Date: Mar 28, 2006
User Score
4.4

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 46 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 17 out of 46
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 46
  3. Negative: 25 out of 46
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. PaulD.
    Feb 24, 2006
    10
    Awesome game, amazing manueveability!
  5. JohnM.
    Mar 14, 2006
    10
    best game yet on the 360. Graphics are great and the gameplay is absolutely AMAZING, I love the cross com it gives a whole new strategic view of things in this kind of game. this is definetely a instant classic.
  6. 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
  7. KieranG.
    May 24, 2006
    9
    the game is really good the graphics might not be perfect but the company put alot of efort into makeing people happy if you dont like get an xbox 360 i would like to see you do any better you are all ungreat full i enjoyed the game.
  8. 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
  9. 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
  10. special-ops
    Sep 3, 2014
    6
    This game is boring for the PS2 and i rated this game 6.0/10.I don't like the tactics,levels,challenges and the multiplayer but i only the graphics for this game.If you ask me i prefer the Xbox360 and the PC version of this game more.I did play this game and it was so boring.

    GameSpot rated this game 4.4/10 and IGN rated this game 3.7/10
  11. YessirKilla
    Feb 21, 2015
    7
    It's no masterpiece, but at least the game had decent multiplayer, mediocre graphics, and a fun campaign. For a few dollars, it's worth your money. The game isn't small like what Gamespot said and there's a survival mode in the game that once you get into it, it's really fun.
  12. JJ2FAS4U
    Dec 28, 2021
    5
    Atmosphere: 5
    Enjoyment: 5
    Gameplay: 5
    Graphics: 6
    Music: 5
    Story: 6
    Total: 5.33
  13. The_D4RknesS
    May 27, 2023
    0
    one of the worst if not the worst FPS available for PS2, the protagonist wears an idiotic helmet that takes away all the sharpness of the image, when aiming the gun there is no precision at all!, very high difficulty even on easy, horrible graphics. This garbage shouldn't even exist for the PS2

Awards & Rankings

61
#61 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 »