So after being spoilt by the gritty warfare of the former Xbox 360 poster boy, Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter (GRAW), I was ecstatic when this title landed on my desk. Eager to see how the game ported to the handheld, I was soon left wondering where the GRAW part of this title was lost in translation.

Safe and out of sight of patrolling enemy

Let's get one thing straight, GRAW is all about team tactical warfare, right? Wrong. GRAW2 on PSP dismisses team play and puts you in the shoes of Captain Mitchell with the weight of the world resting solely on your shoulders to stop the latest terrorist / extremist / guerrilla force. Unless you're going to link up with a mate over Co-Op, it's going to be one lonely affair.

Yes, the PSP incarnation has much less ported the home console version as it has taken artistic licence (akin to the Wachowski Brother's bastardisation of V for Vendetta), to create a story arc set between the events of GRAW and its sequel.

First impressions are positive; it captures the visual style of the home console incarnations, complete with the over the shoulder point of view and even a little bloom lighting for good measure. That is until you make your first steps and stare face to face with your main enemy out on the battlefield. This enemy doesn't charge at you guns blazing, it takes a rather more passive approach, encapsulating a thick blanket of fog, hindering your view and concealing your enemies. Yes that infamous "feature" of the fifth generation of gaming [Superman 64 I'm looking at you], makes a less than welcome comeback to provide an additional challenge to your mission. Whilst the character models and other graphics are quite nice for the PSP, the fog is an ever-present issue that truly lets down the graphics overall and serves as a reminder for the console's limitations, destroying your level of immersion in the game.

One of the numerous weapons at your disposal... And that ever present fog

Any gamer worth their salt knows that graphics should never be regarded above gameplay. Unfortunately it's not just the graphics that have taken a hit. This iteration in the typically smart tactical shooter series has about all the artificial intelligence of a Commodore 64. Enemies walk around like wind up toy soldiers, following a set route and randomly shouting out at the top of lungs to easily alert you to their presence. Conversely, whilst being stupid enough to justify their extermination from the gene pool, the enemy are also made too smart. Unless you lie prone, moving at but a snail's pace, the enemy has a habit of detecting you even over long distances (well as far as the fog will let you see at least...). Ideally, going solo against squads of armed militia, you really would rather avoid direct confrontation, as has been the norm for most Ghost Recon titles. The majority of the early levels lack any cover whatsoever meaning, more often than not, the enemy will see you and start blazing, throwing any strategy out the window. The stupidity of the artificial intelligence makes them easy targets as you line them up through your sights for the perfect headshot. You steady your aim, hold your breath and pull the trigger but more often than not the enemy drop to the floor in two frames of animation and begin returning fire. Last I checked, shooting an unprotected head with a .45 calibre rifle equalled death? When a game starts going against the well established constructions of its previous iterations you know there's something wrong.

Fortunately to the game's benefit, there are numerous weapons, fire modes and deployable support to keep the gameplay fresh with numerous ways to handle a situation. The majority of the time though, you are perfectly capable of just waltzing through missions, guns blazing, without even needing a second thought as to mixing up your strategy or even planning ahead in most cases. This creates open gameplay in one respect, but in another it would succeed greater if you were instead forced to use a specific tactic or method; not because it is your mission command, but because the situation simply demands for it. It was this sort of gameplay that raised the Ghost Recon series above your typical run and gun shooter and brought it into the category of a thinking man's shooter. I guess if the AI doesn't need to think, then neither do you.

Match in the gas tank. Boom, boom!

As the only way in which to return to the team based gameplay we've all known and loved, co-op is certainly a valued addition. It's just a shame that, unlike the PSP port of Rainbow Six Vegas, GRAW2 does not support online play. Whilst I thoroughly enjoyed the original GRAW's campaign mode from start to finish, I am yet to make a dent in the Xbox 360 sequel, instead investing countless hours in online deathmatch. It would have been great to see some greater attention paid to the multiplayer side as even in the home console versions, when the ten hours or so of solo campaign missions are over, it's the multiplayer that keeps players coming back.

As usual, the transition from home console to handheld presents a few control issues. The loss of an analogue stick and 4 key buttons means that some improvisation was necessary to translate the mechanics to the PSP. One of the most instantly notable omissions from the control scheme is the loss of a button to take cover behind your surroundings. This key command was also removed from the multiplayer on the home console versions, so it doesn't make the game unplayable thankfully. Unfortunately with all the commands that the development team have crammed across the buttons, some mechanics can just simply feel awkward and overly complicated, particularly when in the heat of battle and you need to change to a specific weapon. It has me thinking that the reason they left you on a solo mission was possibly because it would have been impossible to have fit the addition of squad commands in with all the other commands.

GRAW2 for PSP shows promise, I really wish I could rate it higher, but for all its ambition, it got a little lost along the way. The development team should have concentrated more so on what makes a GRAW game from a gameplay point of view rather than the visual stylings. When GRAW hit shelves it was a hit because of its solid gameplay, not just its pretty visuals.

So is it worth your money? If you have a PS3 or Xbox 360 and are yet to try the series, you're best off investing your money in the home console versions, as they are genuinely solid titles and a lot of fun. If you've played through both home console titles and are desperately looking for another fix, be warned, but give it a go if you so desire. It's kind of like playing deathmatch against the AI, from a random B grade shooter.

Otherwise just wait around for that next Tom Clancy game to come out. You know the one. The one with guns. And terrorists.