Man, that Eurogamer review was scathing!
I would really love to read a review of this game written by a fan of the original.
Some of the complaints make it seem as if the reviewers don't understand the game...but others seem completely valid. Not really sure what to think.
I think the main complaint is that there isn't much side stuff to do in Mafia 2, which destroys some of the point of it being open world.
That complaint is just silly as this isn't trying to be a sandbox game. The city is a backdrop or, as suggested above, a "hub" world.
Honestly, that has me excited. I always love the potential of the worlds presented in sandbox games, but find that they ultimately bore me to tears with the sheer amount of random bullshit you're expected to complete. Assassin's Creed 2 would have been an infinitely more enjoyable game if they didn't have hundreds of tiny objective markers littering the map. It completely killed me interest in the game. That type of busy work feels like a waste of time to me and often detracts from the design of the proper missions.
What worries me about Mafia II, however, is that the missions may not actually be as good as they should be. If it fails on that front, the game will have missed its mark. I will not slam it for lacking in sandbox value, however.
edit - OK, I see now that Eurogamer also gave the original Mafia a 4/10. While the reviewer may be different, this at least gives me hope that I will enjoy the sequel just as much. It clearly doesn't appeal to them.