By Online Games VIP Editorial
·
IGN’s retrospective review finds Grand Theft Auto 2 smoother and more forgiving than its predecessor, but less convincing in its futuristic setting.
IGN’s Luke Reilly has revisited Grand Theft Auto 2 as part of a broader look back at the core Grand Theft Auto games ahead of Grand Theft Auto 6. This is not presented as a conventional re-review with a numerical score. Instead, IGN’s project examines what each game achieved when it was released, which ideas became part of the series’ legacy, and how enjoyable those games remain today.
In IGN’s analysis, Grand Theft Auto 2 is a meaningful mechanical refinement of the original, even though its setting creates a serious break with the identity established by the first game. The sequel makes driving, combat, survival, and progression less frustrating, but its retro-futuristic Anywhere City does not connect as naturally with the earlier game’s contemporary crime setting. This article is an analysis of IGN’s review, not an OnlineGamesVIP hands-on verdict.
IGN’s Luke Reilly describes Grand Theft Auto 2 as a continuation of the top-down format that made its predecessor successful. The sequel does not abandon the overhead view or the basic idea of causing trouble across a city. Its most important changes are instead practical adjustments that make the existing structure easier to manage.
The clearest example is the addition of saving. IGN reports that players can save at churches, although doing so costs in-game currency. That is a notable change from the original game’s harsher approach, which expected players to make progress while dealing with limited lives and a largely arcade-like restart structure. The save system does not remove the older design entirely. IGN notes that Grand Theft Auto 2 still retains score-based progression, limited lives, and a high level of difficulty.
Analysis: this places the sequel between two design eras. It still carries the pressure and repetition associated with arcade games, but saving acknowledges that a home console and PC game built around substantial missions cannot always ask players to begin from the start. The fee attached to saving also preserves some tension. Players are given a safety net, but not an unlimited one.
IGN also identifies a health bar as a major improvement. The sequel uses a 10-point health system represented by five hearts that can be divided in half. By comparison, Reilly describes the first Grand Theft Auto as leaving its character close to defeat much of the time, with a single hit potentially ending a run. The expanded health system does not make the game easy, but it gives players more room to recover from the awkwardness of its controls.
That change matters because the on-foot movement remains based on what IGN calls antiquated, tank-like controls. The sequel did not adopt a more modern dual-analogue approach, despite arriving when dual-analogue controllers were changing the expectations for movement in action games. IGN’s review therefore presents the health bar as compensation for a control scheme that remains difficult to use defensively.
According to IGN, driving is one of the areas where Grand Theft Auto 2 feels substantially better than its predecessor. The camera is less erratic and tracks vehicles more smoothly, although it can still move slightly while a car is in motion. Vehicles also straighten themselves while travelling along streets, making it easier to stay in a lane or change direction without repeatedly tapping the d-pad.
IGN further reports that vehicles encounter fewer obstacles that can bring them to a sudden stop. From a top-down view, it can be difficult to tell whether an object is embedded in the environment or merely decorative. The sequel avoids some of those collisions by allowing narrow objects such as light poles to have no effect on cars. Reilly notes that this is not especially realistic, but it reduces interruptions that affected the original’s pace.
Analysis: these changes are less dramatic than introducing a new viewpoint or a completely different driving model, but they address the friction players feel constantly. A top-down crime game depends on movement remaining readable at speed. If the camera, vehicle handling, and scenery repeatedly interfere with that movement, the player spends more time correcting the game than making decisions inside it. IGN’s description suggests that Grand Theft Auto 2 understands this problem better than the first game did.
The sequel also expands the combat toolkit. IGN reports that cars can be equipped with weapons and gadgets including machine guns, mines, and oil slick traps. The selection of handheld weapons is described as more than twice as large as in the original. The additions include grenades, Molotov cocktails, a suppressed submachine gun, a shotgun, dual pistols, and an electro gun.
The electro gun receives particular attention in IGN’s review because it can lock onto multiple targets. The game also includes a mild auto-aim feature, which Reilly describes as an assistance missing from the first Grand Theft Auto. Together, these changes make combat less dependent on perfectly positioning a character under the pressure of the tank controls.
Analysis: the weapon expansion gives Grand Theft Auto 2 a broader action vocabulary without changing its fundamental viewpoint. Players can approach encounters with more tools, use vehicles as offensive equipment, and rely on limited aiming assistance. That should appeal most to players who enjoy experimentation and improvisation, while those looking for precise modern gunplay may still find the underlying movement restrictive.
The largest concern in IGN’s review is not a technical shortcoming. It is the game’s decision to leave behind the original’s recognisable contemporary setting. Grand Theft Auto 2 takes place in Anywhere City, USA, an unspecified near-future location with a stylised retro-futuristic aesthetic. IGN describes a city controlled by a megacorporation, divided among gangs, and filled with Elvis Presley impersonators.
IGN’s Luke Reilly argues that the change produces an identity crisis. The sequel looks and feels unlike the first game, but the disconnect is made more noticeable because its box art and introduction do not consistently support the same setting. Reilly notes that the opening movie features cars associated with the 1990s and an obvious New York setting, while the playable game moves into Anywhere City’s unfamiliar future.
That contrast affected Reilly’s original experience with the game. IGN reports that he stopped playing relatively quickly in 1999 because the sequel felt unrelated to what came before, including the tone established by its introduction. The retrospective format matters here: the review is not simply judging how the game compares with current releases. It is examining why a player might have struggled to understand what this particular sequel was trying to be at the time.
Analysis: a setting change can be valuable when it expands a series’ possibilities, but it can also weaken the connection between a sequel and its predecessor. Anywhere City appears to give DMA Design more room for stylisation, gang politics, corporate control, and unusual technology. At the same time, the setting may make the game less immediately legible as a continuation of the original urban crime fantasy. The problem is not that a future city is automatically unsuitable. It is that the game’s supporting presentation, as described by IGN, appears to send players in different directions.
This also explains why improved mechanics may not have been enough to secure a stronger first impression. A player can appreciate smoother driving and a better survival system only after deciding to remain in the game. If the introduction and the playable world seem to promise different experiences, the sequel risks losing players before its refinements become apparent.
Based on IGN’s documented findings, Grand Theft Auto 2 is most likely to suit players who enjoy early open-ended action games and can accept friction in older control systems. Its improvements are aimed at reducing frustration rather than replacing the original formula. Saving gives progression more continuity, the health bar makes mistakes less immediately punishing, and the driving changes reduce unnecessary collisions.
Players interested in the history of the Grand Theft Auto series may also find the sequel useful as a snapshot of experimentation. It preserves the top-down structure while adding a more elaborate arsenal, vehicle equipment, and a new relationship between gangs, corporations, and the city. IGN’s review positions those features as part of the game’s contribution to the series’ evolution, even while questioning the success of its setting.
On the other hand, players who want instantly readable controls or a setting tied closely to the series’ established crime-fiction identity may be less comfortable. IGN specifically points to the continued tank-like on-foot controls and the mismatch between Anywhere City and the game’s surrounding presentation. Analysis: those issues are likely to matter more to a newcomer than to someone already interested in late-1990s game design or the origins of the franchise.
Readers interested in another portable-era entry from the series can look at Grand Theft Auto Advance. It is relevant as a catalog comparison for players exploring the franchise’s top-down period, although the supplied record does not provide details that would support a direct mechanical or historical comparison between it and Grand Theft Auto 2.
What remains unconfirmed in the supplied review record
The supplied publisher text ends during the discussion of combat, so several parts of IGN’s full retrospective are not available here. The record does not confirm the review’s complete assessment of mission design, gang relationships, the structure of Anywhere City, technical performance across specific platforms, or how the game holds up across its full campaign.
The record also does not include a numerical score, which is consistent with IGN’s stated decision to avoid its typical score out of 10 for this retrospective project. It does not provide a release date for the article beyond the supplied publication metadata, and it contains no sales figures, patch information, or current availability details. Those points should not be inferred from the review excerpt.
The key question for readers is therefore one of priorities. IGN’s analysis clearly supports the view that Grand Theft Auto 2 improves several systems that made the first game difficult to play. It also presents Anywhere City as a bold but divisive departure. Whether that trade-off works for an individual player will depend on how much value they place on mechanical refinement compared with a familiar setting and a coherent first impression. The supplied review record supports that tension, but a complete judgment about the game’s missions and long-term variety would require the remainder of IGN’s article.