CivCity: Rome

Mission objectives lack imagination, and after constructing several cities the game can feel repetitive and formulaic.

CivCity follows an old model for a city builder. If you are a fan of the Pharaoh series, you may find a home here with CivCity: Rome. It focuses around the economy rather than any type of military action.

Despite a few new twists to the core gameplay, its middling graphics and its lacking features drag it down from what could have been a must buy for fans of ancient era city builders to yet another game that fails to advance the genre in any real and meaningful way.

Untrustworthy artificial intelligence, hit and miss land plots for resources and graphics, though charming, that we're no longer all that impressed with are all quite substantial disappointments. There's enough here for authentic Roman wanabees, but for everyone else it's a case of been there, done that, bought and outgrown the t-shirt.

The bottom line is Rome loses its fun sometime around the ten-hour mark of the campaign.

Although it is plagued by flaws in several areas, I still want to keep playing until I've conquered every challenge that the designers could fit in. And that says something about a game. [Sept. 2006, p.98]

CivCity: Rome fails to capture the glory of Rome or of the Civilization series of games.

It’s easy to use and understand menus and information pages make for fun gameplay and quick results when you know what to change to improve your citizen’s lives.

Problems like the poor camera angle and dated graphics are sure to put off a lot of gamers, while feeling like a clone of Caesar will probably dissuade most fans of city builders from getting properly into the game.

Sadly, its similarity to earlier titles and it's somewhat mechanical game play, this one gets a Fans Only for fans of city sims and fans of all things ancient or ancient Roman.

While there is an addictive quality to the game, the bugs and bizarre behavior of your citizens can sometimes pull the game into the realm of frustration instead of enjoyment.

Civ City: Rome doesn’t do much to meaningfully innovate, but it does successfully take the more important design elements of past games and incorporates them into a challenging, great looking, and great playing package.

A basic city building game is joined with simple combat, trading, and research. CivCity Rome is very plain and not very fun to play.

If you haven’t played a lot of city-building games, then you might find CivCity: Rome to be enjoyable enough, but otherwise it’s not a game where you’d be missing much if you skipped it.

No franchise was built in a day, and I’m afraid it might take another installment before CivCity Rome lives up to its potential.

Roughly equal parts frustration and stupidly compelling gameplay.

Younger gamers will enjoy the Roman atmosphere and fairly easy game play and there are enough features and variety in CivCity: Rome to make it a good addition to any strategy game collection.

Recreates "Caesar III" with nicer graphics and smooth gameplay. Unfortunately, after a few scenarios the game starts to repeat itself and lacks enough new things to do. [Sept 2006]

No wonder the actual Romans threw up walls. [Nov. 2006, p.74]

A Civilization-branded carbon copy of other games in the city building genre, CivCity: Rome has a few too many flaws to justify purchase over its competition.

It’s not too far into the micromanagement side of city construction to make it too difficult to get into and play the game and difficult enough to make the game last.

Although CivCity: Rome is just as good a game as it was fifteen years ago, it’s still an almost direct port of Caesar II with 3D graphics and the sly marketing gimmick of sharing a name with one of the all-time greats. We recommend sacking another town.

The interaction between the buildings could definitely be a little more complicated but the challenges of fitting everything together is more than sufficient to keep you coming back for more.

A decent game. If the subject matter grips you, or you're coming to it from "Civilization," it's compelling and well designed. Exciting it isn't, and in the end, the glory of Rome demands a level of oomph that it just can't quite muster. [Aug 2006, p.101]

An enjoyable variation on city-builders, and it certainly makes for a pleasant trip down memory lane for Caesar fans like me. The problem is, the game's flaws will keep it from being little more than a nine-day wonder on players' hard drives.

Too hard for novices, too repetitive for veterans, and too silly for warmongers, CivCity Rome falls into the netherworld of games that you wished you could've liked more.

A more challenging economic system would add a lot to the game and make it more replay-friendly. But as a step up from a lightweight like Glory of the Roman Empire, CivCity is engrossing enough to command a couple weeks of play time.

CivCity: Rome could have been a classic, but it wound up just another city builder.

A wonderfully engaging game; striking in its ease of use and rewarding in terms of depth. [Sept 2006, p.64]

While the graphics impress and the inhabitants all go about their business with a smooth efficiency, the game makes too many demands to maintain interest. Worse, there are few moments in the game that don’t awaken a feeling of déjà vu.

Worst of all is its absense of an Undo function. [Aug 2006, p.78]

The biggest problems with CivCity: Rome, however, lie in its numerous bugs and terrible camera.

An overly structured Campaign mode, and a directionless sandbox experience, help to bog the game down with bland gameplay and future of (dare we suggest) possible mediocrity.

Aside from a couple of bugs and irritating gameplay elements, the combination between "Caesar III" and "Civilization" works pretty well. And considering that the game also has a level editor, I can safely say that both novices and veterans alike will play it until "Caesar IV" and "Anno 1701" hit the shelves.

Overall CivCity feels unbalanced and rather short for a game of this genre.

In a manner of speaking, CivCity is the exact opposite of "Glory of the Roman Empire" - while the latter may feel initially more impressive, CivCity wipes the floor with it in the long run. It's an involving and challenging city builder that has more under its hood than what the paint job might suggest.

Considering the game is too dissimilar to appeal to Civ fans, too simplistic to appeal to SimCity veterans and too bland to appeal to gamers looking for a Roman epic, it’s tricky to pinpoint who exactly will want to buy CivCity: Rome. It’s not irredeemably broken, but it is repetitive and a little on the dull side.

We'd like to apologise to Sid Meier - this game, while not terrible, has sullied your good name and brand. Our only suggestion is to never let someone else make a game for you and to make sure the inevitable next game in the franchise explores a less familiar environ and period.

While it's not nearly as deep as you'd expect for a game with the Firaxis seal of approval on it in terms of features or gameplay, CivCity Rome manages to provide a significant level of entertainment, despite its obvious and glaring faults.

It becomes especially maddening when you're trying to navigate a heavily developed city where one errant mouse click can banish an otherwise productive structure to the ether.

What is surprising is the lack of creativity, integrity, or even quality regarding practically every aspect of the game. The only saving grace is the authenticity of Rome.

A passable enough way to while away the rainy summer evenings. But remember, there is much more to discover outside these lacklustre city walls.

CivCity Rome could’ve been a great game. It is the culmination of a lot of minor problems that ultimately bring down this empire. All of these issues, however, are easily fixable.

Genuinely offers something new to a genre whose form is now long established. [Sept 2006, p.110]