![](http://i.neoseeker.com/screenshots/R2FtZXMvUEMvU3RyYXRlZ3kvUlRT/grand_ages_rome_image10.jpg)
They could have built it in a day if they had tried.
First, there is a flaw in the marketing message for this game. Some of you will be affected by the field's mention of 4X strategy and massive armies "but it is only through ignorance or deceit, that this game would be advertised as anything other than"Once a Roman town Builder with shallow combat." Perhaps it is an attempt on the publisher's part to take the title away from lackluster by Builder genre, after all, they have certainly distanced the game from the previous two games in the series, Glory of the Roman Empire and the Imperium Romanum, which was rather unspectacular. Someone who has played any of these games will see continuity in Grand Ages: Rome, but it is not something that the publisher apparently eager to promote.
Anyway, Grand Ages: Rome attempted to clear the name of the franchise, but ultimately not to bring any compelling new ideas for gameplay. This is essentially a fairly predictable city builder that apart from some visual improvements, will not hold any surprises or new challenges for people who have not played a by-Builder since Caesar III. And if you have not played a by-Builder since then, you may not mind the Grand Ages: Rome so much. If on the other hand, you came up through the game Views Zeus and Emperor, you will certainly find yourself wishing more from this latest offering.
The basic format is fixed. The player is tasked with creating a functioning and self-sustaining city by balancing the inter-related services and functions in a variety of structures. Houses provide workers who can work on the farm that sends wheat to the mill, which will send flour to the baker who send bread to the stores to feed workers. It's just one of the more complex chains of production in the game. To build and maintain your structures, you need wood and brick and the occasional rock block. To preserve peace, you must prefectures, which can only be staffed by members of the senior class who have more complex needs than the populous. Throw in some other buildings for learning, entertainment, health and commerce and things quickly become complicated.
At least that is the way it looks on the surface. In practice, the Grand Ages: Rome makes things relatively easy. It seems like the AI is much better than previous titles in the series, so the public to manage their own affairs at this time, leaving the player to worry exclusively about building placement-targeted and resource balance. Resources immediately shown where they are needed and many of the buildings is an area of effect, making the concept of traffic flow completely irrelevant. There are no more gender-specific job this time so you do not have to worry about the manning of distaff industries. In addition, the game has simplified the work to the point that one house provides enough workers for infrastructure building. It is an inelegant solution, but so does balancing your cities a little easier.
Grand Ages: Rome has a much more open campaign than his predecessors. After completing the basic introductory mission, players let loose on a map of the Roman world, and can choose from a wide range of tasks that are focused on key locations and events during the first century BC. Players will sit Spartacus' slave revolt, establishing outposts in Gaul, and even slipping into the wars in the triumvirate. History and timing of these missions are quite irrelevant as far as gameplay goes, but it gives a little background for the player's own imagination. What's more interesting is that you can ally you with a special group that can open or close the new missions later in the game. As you complete missions, you can even level up your character, adding new talent and resource bonuses that you purchase with points earned in each level.
Players who want to try their hand at competitive and cooperative city building can even head online and try their luck there. Of course, the tactical aspects of the game is not going to rival even the original Age of Empires, so these online contests are more about marketing than the general ship. An interesting thing that set the previous game in the series apart was the inclusion of objective card, the player would take the entire course of a mission. Although they presented some scripting problems at times they are offered plenty of smaller goals that gave the player some rewards and direction during the mission. This system has been removed from Grand ages, so now players are just aiming at one or two goals in each mission with a few choice targets thrown in as well.
The interface has been improved significantly. Where previous games in the series have required players looking for information about their city's overall performance, Grand Ages: Rome contains lots of useful overlays to show you in bright colors, which of your buildings are in danger or short of a necessary resource. This new feature makes locating your support buildings so much easier. In addition, the summary function of the Forum have been removed and placed in the overall interface of the game itself, so you can easily access all the numbers you need to plan your future growth.
Combat seems to have been improved as well. The animation looks great and AI is much more aggressive. As with the original game, but fighting is still relatively simple. Players have a handful of very basic unit types, and no real military maneuvers that are more advanced than "move" and "attack." As in most city builders, the key to military victory has far less to do with general ship than it does to build enough units to steam roll your enemy in the general mêlée. The good news is that if you like the approach, there are many more combat missions focused this time around.
Besides the simplified combat, there are two other major problems with Grand Ages: Rome. First, satisfying the demands of your citizens are not really that difficult, and because you have access to all buildings at the start, there is no sense in expanding the possibilities. Really, you are just building the same basic city again and again in every mission. The only variation comes from the inclusion of specific design goals and the presence of the enemy barbarians. The lack of consistency in the flow of traffic or the movement of goods means that the location of your building is really more a matter of aesthetics rather than function. Although disasters have been scaled back. Now, as long as you keep all employees, you do not have to worry about the game sinking riots, fires or resource shortages.
Second, there is just not much personality there. Yes, there are some interesting meetings and animations to look down to street level, but you can not play games from this perspective. Once you've zoomed out enough to actually work interface properly, it's just impossible to see much life in the game. Although it may seem the realistic presentation is a purely artistic preference, it also impacts the player's awareness of his city is working properly as well. I challenge all to spot the prefect's tiny bucket of water as he walks to a fire.
Otherwise the graphics are quite good. Each card has plenty of atmosphere and lots of detail. The architecture is truly phenomenal and the people look perfectly at home in mid-marble columns and tiled roofs. Even better, it is all located in a natural environment, looks magnificent and benefits from a broad spectrum of Moody lighting and weather effects.
Concluding remarks
Grand Ages: Rome is a fun game, but if you've played any of the other city-builders who have come together in the last ten years, you will quickly grow bored of it. The pieces are all in place in the city's structures and jobs, but keeping people happy is relatively easy and is repeated in every mission to the point of being boring. More variety and more challenge will definitely help to improve the game's appeal, which would be a more lively visual style.
© 2009-03-20, IGN Entertainment, Inc. All Rights Reserved
![ign](http://l.yimg.com/a/i/us/ga/vg2/logo_ign.gif)