I am surprised on this sites very low review score
Graphics: I will agree with Gamespot on this part of the review. I agree that it is choppy and appears to look no better then a ps2 version. I also say that it has improved on the first games mistakes with better textures and lighting, more detailed blood and guts so to speak.
Sound effects are ok, I believe that some more delvelope time would have made this much better.
Game play. I love the addition of the RTS addition to the gameplay. It add some forsite on a players stradegy and I do agree with this sites opinion on the IA it is way to easy and at times ther appears to be no IA at all. The first godfather was much better on this. the storyline is kinda lame. The dons view is a great idea, but lacks depth here again more developing time could have dramatically improved the gameplay here, but even with these faults the game still is very fun and does force a player to think on how to defend what he or she conquers.. the backhand controls have been improved in my opinion and seem more natural. but I do miss the Sixasis control schemes even though they have some its not as fluid as in the first game of the series.
multi player... I really believe they would have been better off by leaving this out of the game and increasing the single players with more detailed missions and side missions simalair to the first game
Over all the game is fun and it can become repeatative it still has variations and some cool side missions that will help with the storyline if you allow it too. I do agree the game isnt a 10 but its better then a 4.5 so I rated the game an even 7 because I found the game fun even with the flaws I mentioned.
I do believe it is worth at least a rent and for those on the cheap look for it in a couple months in the bargain bin. I just dont agree that the game isnt even worth a play which this site suggests with it's rating.