Grand Ages: Medieval

 PC
User Score
5.4

Mixed or average reviews- based on 55 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 22 out of 55
  2. Mixed: 11 out of 55
  3. Negative: 22 out of 55
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. Guasco
    Oct 29, 2015
    10
    Hard to learn and simplistic on end Game, in other words it's Perfect. Too many ways to grown and players can build they own objectives and it works.
  2. Schmoopy
    Sep 30, 2015
    0
    Lots of potential, but extremely poorly balanced.
    The economic system is strange and seems to have its own logic. The game becomes extremely boring after a couple of hours. Once you've managed to build a strong base economy, there's basically very little left to do except just taking over towns. The game is extremely slow, both in pace (even on x10 speed) and in in-game speed (it takes 4    Lots of potential, but extremely poorly balanced.
    The economic system is strange and seems to have its own logic. The game becomes extremely boring after a couple of hours. Once you've managed to build a strong base economy, there's basically very little left to do except just taking over towns. The game is extremely slow, both in pace (even on x10 speed) and in in-game speed (it takes 4 months for 200 mercenaries to defeat a few wolves). Building 1 army can completely ruin your economy. An economy with issues seems impossible to reverse, leading to a consistent need to restart new games. A stern lack of content also adds to the repetitive nature of the game (4-5 towns are enough to exploit all resources).
    Could be very decent after a few patches, but right now it's almost unplayable.    … Expand
  3. Wolfen
    Sep 27, 2015
    0
    Where to start...
    To use the name "Grand Ages" although the game has NOTHING to do with the former games with this benchmark was the first insolence.
    But well. The military is broken. No clue where to start to explain it. Its just... fubar. Recruitment during fight, random losing control, getting troops as presents that wreck your economy and can't be disbanded... fubar i tell you. The    Where to start...
    To use the name "Grand Ages" although the game has NOTHING to do with the former games with this benchmark was the first insolence.
    But well.
    The military is broken. No clue where to start to explain it. Its just... fubar. Recruitment during fight, random losing control, getting troops as presents that wreck your economy and can't be disbanded... fubar i tell you.
    The AI is broken, albeit it is cheating immense it still acts tragicomic.
    The economy is shallow and will be simple as soon you researched free-trade (not much to research here... so won't take too long. After the forced auto-trade is gone you realize HOW broken the game is in the actual state).
    It has zero medieval atmosphere, for its looking like a venice-clon.
    Its deprimising to spend more time on this :)

    In short:
    An early access title for almost full price
    Tried to achieve a whole world of trade and strategy and achieved nothing.
    Every aspect of the game is both shallow and yet unfinished.
    Beware, maybe have a look in a year when it is on some sale.

    For 20 bucks/euro i wouldn't have given 0 points, but to DON'T put an early-access-label on the game and take an appropriate price for a early access-grame doesn't deserve anything else.

    The way they try to sell it is pert near to false advertisement.    … Expand
  4. Borreh1973
    Sep 27, 2015
    1
    Too boring only be watching caravan place to place majority of the time. Combat unbalanced AI. Initial campaign with confused and completed without feeling effort objectives, just did not know they were finished ... Bling Bling, completed goal. Wow, what I had to do it?!?!?!? I do not know but I did not look. I played for 10 hours and I'll try one more chance. Without another novelty, theToo boring only be watching caravan place to place majority of the time. Combat unbalanced AI. Initial campaign with confused and completed without feeling effort objectives, just did not know they were finished ... Bling Bling, completed goal. Wow, what I had to do it?!?!?!? I do not know but I did not look. I played for 10 hours and I'll try one more chance. Without another novelty, the game will go to limbo along with Tropico 5. And I will giving up Kalypso forever.… Expand
  5. Gunteraz
    Sep 25, 2015
    3
    This game had much potential but in the end it's yet another Kalypso cash-grab attempt. Game is very basic and from the get-go you understand that it's designed to require tons of DLc before it becomes anything other than medicore game. Not to mention that pre-order price was 38 euros, which was supposedly -15% off, but the launch price is 36.99.
  6. censek
    Sep 26, 2015
    0
    Really bad game, you can built only 6 types of building +(some for produce), gameplay is only watching your caravans and sometimes manage their routes. Its all, there is nothing positive on this game.
  7. Bowman100
    Sep 26, 2015
    1
    A very poor game which has nothing in common with grand ages Rome. It has a good zoom and 3D map but it's boring to play as its 95 per cent economic trading. Combat is basic with no strategy as in biggest army wins every time. I expected it to be more like the Anno series of games but it's not fun to play at all. I got refund from steam day after its release.
  8. LazySamurai
    Sep 30, 2015
    0
    Boring game. Mechanics are dull and very simple. In one hour every thing you do will be the same repetititve clicking. The trading consists only of a few boring trade goods. The town building is non existent and you don't have any control over warfare. This is more like an indie game then a trading or building sim and thus should be priced that way. 45 euro's is waaay to much for thisBoring game. Mechanics are dull and very simple. In one hour every thing you do will be the same repetititve clicking. The trading consists only of a few boring trade goods. The town building is non existent and you don't have any control over warfare. This is more like an indie game then a trading or building sim and thus should be priced that way. 45 euro's is waaay to much for this game. 10-15 would be a better price.

    Don't believe all the positive reviews! They obviously never played the game or are easily duped. This is certainly not worth a 10!! But more like a 5 or 6. I only give it a 0 because of the obvious idiots and marketeers who give this an undeserved high rating.    … Expand
  9. bluemonkey93
    Sep 29, 2015
    6
    I am a big fan of economic simulators and the realism is evident in the supply-demand aspect of the game. That being said, its extremely difficult to create a balanced enough economy to even hire your first set of soldiers to defend against raiding groups. I was hoping for more options for city buildings, policies and commodities, but there is still plenty to work with. The graphics areI am a big fan of economic simulators and the realism is evident in the supply-demand aspect of the game. That being said, its extremely difficult to create a balanced enough economy to even hire your first set of soldiers to defend against raiding groups. I was hoping for more options for city buildings, policies and commodities, but there is still plenty to work with. The graphics are decent and the scale of the map is another plus. Battles are rather boring leaving the trading and economic strategy as the primary focus of the game. Would recommend if you are into the trading and economic aspects otherwise I think you will be disappointed.… Expand
  10. Mhyth
    Oct 1, 2015
    4
    At over 60 hours of gameplay I can see the potential for this game to be greatly enjoyable in about 3 to 6 months when the developers reboot/re-imagine UI information transparency and economy/trade route management interface and automation tools. I'm also already at the frustration point of putting the game on the shelf for at least 3 months hoping that happens.

    I'm sure when the    At over 60 hours of gameplay I can see the potential for this game to be greatly enjoyable in about 3 to 6 months when the developers reboot/re-imagine UI information transparency and economy/trade route management interface and automation tools. I'm also already at the frustration point of putting the game on the shelf for at least 3 months hoping that happens.

    I'm sure when the developers were playtesting it all seemed to be 'functioning as intended' in an old school Verant-ish sense - that's because the behind the scenes economic mechanics were precisely known to them like the back of their hands that type the code. The game itself and the in game knowledge base do a poor job of communicating that information making early gameplay a very painful trial and error, go broke and restart experience. Contrary to many avid empire gamers instincts glacially slow growth, fastidious repetitive micromanagement and frequently tweaking logistics are seemingly required.

    Aggressively building, over-investing in military technologies or attempting warfare conquest too early in the game breaks the economy as well - in addition to warfare being innately simplistic, slow, and tedious.

    This game is an a.r. economy micromanager's dream in it's current state. Most other gamers may want to wait for it to get more time in the oven or pick it up on a discount site sale.    … Expand
  11. BorisTheSavage
    Sep 28, 2015
    7
    I was hoping for the sequel to Grand Ages: Rome. Instead, I got the sequel to Rise of Venice only with a giant map, land-based trade routes, and 4x elements thrown in like automated combat, research trees, and the ability to found your own cities. What really bummed me out was the lazy building system which appeared to be copied straight over from Rise of Venice. That mediocre handful ofI was hoping for the sequel to Grand Ages: Rome. Instead, I got the sequel to Rise of Venice only with a giant map, land-based trade routes, and 4x elements thrown in like automated combat, research trees, and the ability to found your own cities. What really bummed me out was the lazy building system which appeared to be copied straight over from Rise of Venice. That mediocre handful of building icons was lazily carried over from a mediocre game when it should have been done away with. It is not a bad game by any means, but when playing it I can't help but feel like the developers cut too many corners and copied too many aspects from games.… Expand
  12. gasuraki
    Sep 26, 2015
    8
    This is a game you will either enjoy or it will be disappointing. This is not grand age rome, it is not a city builder or an anno style game. It is more along the lines of older trade game (like patricians) though more stream lined. Overall I found that the game is enjoyable for what it is trying to be, perhaps wait for a sale if you are unsure. The most complex part about this game isThis is a game you will either enjoy or it will be disappointing. This is not grand age rome, it is not a city builder or an anno style game. It is more along the lines of older trade game (like patricians) though more stream lined. Overall I found that the game is enjoyable for what it is trying to be, perhaps wait for a sale if you are unsure. The most complex part about this game is also really what makes it enjoyable, and that is city placement to ensure the correct resources for trade, it comes across as simple but at the same time it will all fall apart if you dont actually have a plan once the cities start to get larger and your empire grows. Some people do not like the fact that each city can only have 5 resource buildings but honestly I think that is what makes the game fun. You can not just have one city do it all, you need at the minimum 4 or 5 cities all doing their own thing to supply everything you need.

    Pros:
    -Map is easy to navigate with the seamless zoom.
    -UI is easy and strait forward. Its stream lines nature allows for the ability to get anything you want/need in only a few clicks.
    -Route set up is easy for trading, and once getting to a trading tech you can manually control aspects of the trade route if you want to get into the weeds.
    -The most fun part of the game for me is the early to mid where you are focused more on building cities and creating your own network, trying to find the right resources, and then making sure they are spread throughout your chain of cities regularly to prevent lack of supply.

    Cons:
    - Combat has no real strategy to it, it really comes down to who has the larger army. There are things like supply and troop strength but if you are keeping your armies in/near supplied cities that wont ever be an issue. The real challenge to the combat in this game is simply affording the troops upkeep.
    -Combat 2.0 (combat is really the low point). Troops move at a lightning pace across the map but then battles take a very very long time even on 10x speed.
    - After mid game it becomes repetitive. Once you have the perfect set up of trade routes and cities it just turns into a copy paste for the rest of the map. At this point in the game it is just sending out armies in blobs and waiting.
    -Cant shake the feeling DLC is what is being banked on to really make this game great.
    -Could stand to have more production chains.

    In the end this game is good for a more casual resource trading game. That is where its strength is in my eyes. I am not always in the mood for something complex, or very deep. Sometimes I just want to sit back relax and have a bit more of a laid back experience. In the end if you are looking for a city builder this is not for you, if you are looking for strategy in combat this is not for you. But if you have fun in the early stages of CIV, or you have fun when trying to pick which islands to connect in Anno you may enjoy the early to mid game city placement and initial trade route placement.    … Expand
  13. Neravarine
    Sep 29, 2015
    7
    This game shows a lot of promise and its addictive a lot, but also it has a lot of problems.
    In my opinion this was supposed to be a mix between Crusader Kings and Total War to put it roughly. But it turned out to be a "Strategy" game, it has no tactics what so ever in combat, its little more then browser games combat, why in the 7 hells didn't you make a combat like for example Hegemony    This game shows a lot of promise and its addictive a lot, but also it has a lot of problems.
    In my opinion this was supposed to be a mix between Crusader Kings and Total War to put it roughly. But it turned out to be a "Strategy" game, it has no tactics what so ever in combat, its little more then browser games combat, why in the 7 hells didn't you make a combat like for example Hegemony series, it looks like it anyway.
    Another problem I found is AI for, well everything, but the trade when u set a route, they can do a good job, but they can **** you up, I was starting to think that whole AI was working against me.
    The merchant kept hoarding the goods, or just buying it back after they sell it, I have no idea why there was no detailed system for trades:
    For Example- On each rout I can set how much barrels of "something" I am willing to buy at one town, and then to sell at next one.. etc etc.. you got the point.
    Animals are a bit stronger then they should be, and battles last far too long by games timeline, 100vs100 fighting for 3 weeks... gr8..
    And my biggest problem: Who ever did artwork of St. Sophia(Hagia Sophia) is either some1 who hates Orthodox Christians or a total idiot, coz Orthodox version of it did not have those god damn pointy towers, and it had cross on it.

    Still I like the game, and I like it a lot, just if some1 were to fix the battles and the god damn trade AI.
    Well trade can be worked out, but still it can be retarded from time to time.    … Expand
  14. GameFlex
    Sep 26, 2015
    8
    The game is sold as a global strategy game and for me it does everything I expected of this kinda game. I can choose where to start my empire and expand it all over europe by founding, buying or taking new cities by force. Considering the available resources I can set up a trade routes to supply my cities and make big cash out of it. And claiming a competitors ground puts me in the shoesThe game is sold as a global strategy game and for me it does everything I expected of this kinda game. I can choose where to start my empire and expand it all over europe by founding, buying or taking new cities by force. Considering the available resources I can set up a trade routes to supply my cities and make big cash out of it. And claiming a competitors ground puts me in the shoes of a mighty emperor.
    And I think the visual presentation is pretty impressive. It still hits me when zooming out of my latest founded settlement to get an overview of my already huge empire!
    But I do understand the critics about the simplistic battle system IF I would have expected a Total War-ish type of game; but I don't and so the battle in Grand Ages Medieval is a tool I can use to expand my empire. Not more and not less and therefore I would really recommend the game to everyone looking for a challenging and trade-based type of strategy game.

    And regarding the all present "dlc"-criticism: there are two dlcs until now available and they are both cosmetics and no game relevent stuff. Also they are both included in the Day1 version which is sold everywhere (even on steam, where I purchased it). And right now there are no announced dlcs, yet. So stop hating on unanounced dlcs just to give a bad review.    … Expand
  15. SpartanMario
    Sep 26, 2015
    10
    This game is great. I gave it higher review than what i thought mostly from those who are jumping on the bandwagon to giving this game low reviews. While seemingly barebone at first, this game has amazing depth once you play more than a few hours into it and it is a really challenging game to learn. The learning curve and combination of having to micromanage everything is what throws manyThis game is great. I gave it higher review than what i thought mostly from those who are jumping on the bandwagon to giving this game low reviews. While seemingly barebone at first, this game has amazing depth once you play more than a few hours into it and it is a really challenging game to learn. The learning curve and combination of having to micromanage everything is what throws many people off. General tip, only produce enough to have a surplus but not enough to completely fill storage.… Expand
  16. Abraxsus
    Oct 8, 2015
    9
    First of all, sorry for my English, its not my natural.

    9/10 Wertung This Game is great. First time since a long time... I can say! YES, a MP Strategie Game that is FANTASTIC! We played yesterday a 5h+ Multiplayer Session and we had all a ton of fun! This game is very hard to master... The Ecenomy part is the WOOOAR HARD as HELL ^^ But i like it. And if u think u have Money    First of all, sorry for my English, its not my natural.

    9/10 Wertung

    This Game is great.
    First time since a long time... I can say! YES, a MP Strategie Game that is FANTASTIC!

    We played yesterday a 5h+ Multiplayer Session and we had all a ton of fun!

    This game is very hard to master... The Ecenomy part is the WOOOAR HARD as HELL ^^
    But i like it. And if u think u have Money and if u try to Atack someone u will realise
    That ur Ecenomy cant handle ur new Army and ur Whole Empire Colapse ^^

    This game is GREAT!
    MY New Faforite Strategie Game, FINALY CIVILIZATION V can go HOME

    BUY it, and play it with ur friends!
    And please set the dificulty to hard, thats the way this game liked to be played!

    Greetings :)    … Expand
  17. Gopnik
    Sep 28, 2015
    9
    Inform yourself before buying this game. Like it's a economic simulation rather than a war game. You need to spend at least 5 hours into the game before the game jumps into mid-gameplay, but only if you figure your economy out. For me the game gives a ton of fun, and I hope people not jumping on the hate train will figure this out too.
  18. N3ea4R
    Sep 28, 2015
    8
    Like: Patrician, Anno 1503, Port Royale

    A nice economy game with a decent military system. It focuses more on economy than military game so don't go in expecting a wargame. It has more to do with controlling the market through trade routes. You could play a military focused game but the combat isn't very deep and it still requires a strong economy to support a powerful army so it    Like: Patrician, Anno 1503, Port Royale

    A nice economy game with a decent military system. It focuses more on economy than military game so don't go in expecting a wargame. It has more to do with controlling the market through trade routes. You could play a military focused game but the combat isn't very deep and it still requires a strong economy to support a powerful army so it retains its economic focus even then.

    You can buy cities on the map however, so combat is not really needed. A strong economy can just buy its neighbors into the empire.

    Overall this game looks great and has a nice trading system. There are couple kinks to work out but it has a solid release.    … Expand
  19. Wubfox
    Oct 5, 2015
    9
    I feel like a lot of the negative reviews are coming from people who didn't do their homework on this game before buying. This is not a combat based game nor is it the same as the preceding Grand Ages: Rome (which is clearly stated by the developer on the Steam page). So if you find it boring, maybe try a game that isn't clearly about trade and management instead of slaughter.I feel like a lot of the negative reviews are coming from people who didn't do their homework on this game before buying. This is not a combat based game nor is it the same as the preceding Grand Ages: Rome (which is clearly stated by the developer on the Steam page). So if you find it boring, maybe try a game that isn't clearly about trade and management instead of slaughter. Personally, I've been enjoying this. It isn't perfect by any stretch, but in my view, it is certainly not deserving of the super low ratings.… Expand
  20. Uncontested
    Oct 22, 2015
    0
    Was suckered by Kalypso's use of "Grand Ages" in the title. My bad for assuming that the game would be anything like GA: Rome which its not, at all, obviously I liked the original since I bought this pile of dog dung. I hope Kalypso fails in the near future, they can't be allowed to continue like they are, making DLC games, ripping off old titles to sell you garbage. Not to mention if youWas suckered by Kalypso's use of "Grand Ages" in the title. My bad for assuming that the game would be anything like GA: Rome which its not, at all, obviously I liked the original since I bought this pile of dog dung. I hope Kalypso fails in the near future, they can't be allowed to continue like they are, making DLC games, ripping off old titles to sell you garbage. Not to mention if you were a moron like me and pre-ordered on STEAM you can't get a refund since you're outside of 2 weeks. Never mind all those people who get to try the game and get a refund.. you pre-purchased 3 weeks ago so we're not refunding you LOL.. what a joke even though you only wasted 30 minutes and found this game to be a complete waste of time. Save your money.. its nothing like "Grand Ages" I still can't even figure out why the heck they used that title.. would have been better off starting with something new... oh but wait.. its Kalypso they need more money and more DLC games in their catalog so god forbid they make a 'classic' type of RTS/City Builder.. Nope not here!… Expand
  21. Paphatters
    Nov 13, 2015
    10
    This game is a new kind of mix of expansion, economy and exploration. In the beginning you start with a small town and you have to found new towns and stabilize your small realm with production and trade routes. Later you take over or capture towns, you start war and fight your opponents to expand into their realm. Your goal is to have more towns and citizens than all the other emperors.This game is a new kind of mix of expansion, economy and exploration. In the beginning you start with a small town and you have to found new towns and stabilize your small realm with production and trade routes. Later you take over or capture towns, you start war and fight your opponents to expand into their realm. Your goal is to have more towns and citizens than all the other emperors. However, troops are expensive and their upkeep is high as well. You need to make lots of money before raising up a huge army and you cannot afford a huge army for a long time. The steps are: make money, create army, defeat an enemy (or capture some towns) and then reduce you army until you have enough money for the next rush.… Expand
  22. Dethstar
    Dec 2, 2015
    4
    Interesting one this. I have put off writing a review for ages to try and be fair to it mainly because I couldnt make up my mind.

    In summary. A lost opportunity. A great framework was created here but it wasn't carried through with any depth. It is lightweight. It could have been a really accessible version of the more inscrutable strategy games which people like me just don't have    Interesting one this. I have put off writing a review for ages to try and be fair to it mainly because I couldnt make up my mind.

    In summary. A lost opportunity. A great framework was created here but it wasn't carried through with any depth. It is lightweight. It could have been a really accessible version of the more inscrutable strategy games which people like me just don't have time to learn.

    It could have combined the best of a couple of genre's to provide depth and win on the basis of being that much more accessible.

    But it it just feels unfinished. It feels good to begin with. Then you start to notice the really strange and annoying way you have to access what your looking for in the UI.

    For example, a trader is in a city loaded up with goods for sale. So, click the market or the town right? NO. First you must zoom out a fair way so you can see the city name, then you click your little trader icon under it. Then you click the town. 4 clicks for the price of one and a bit of unzooming. This is a very typical example of the design mistakes in this game. Rather than add depth by giving you diversity and options and while not making the combat total war (which personally I didnt want or expect anyway) it handles it in such an unengaging simplistic way it is really not interesting. The trading and commerce is also simplistic in a similar way. What could have been fun has been dumbed down.

    It could have been a good game as it is beautiful, the sound is ok and it has a nice feel to it but it is like they never got to make any of it work properly and just stopped development. Hard to understand the vision here, it reminds me a bit of settlers more than any war type game but it nothings is happening. Way too little content and diversity.

    Diplomacy is so pathetic it is hard to see why they bothered to add it in at all. Very lame. Poorly designed and too lightweight even for casual strategy.    … Expand
  23. Silver_Saddle
    Nov 13, 2015
    10
    Yes, this game has issues. But it's also a fascinating mix of economy and military. Don't expect too much of military tactics. And don't buy the game because of its title and then boohoo because it has nothing to do which "Grand Ages: Rome"...

    Also: many new features after release - all for free. No expensive DLC's at all as many bad reviews predicted.
  24. Axolotl_LP
    Jun 7, 2023
    0
    It is just boring. I can't write more, because there is no more to say. It is only boring. There is no good Interface and there are no tips.

Awards & Rankings

29
#29 Most Shared PC Game of 2015

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
63

Mixed or average reviews - based on 11 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 3 out of 11
  2. Mixed: 7 out of 11
  3. Negative: 1 out of 11
  1. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    Oct 22, 2015
    40
    Extremely slow-paced strategy game sacrifices all the fun and features to economic complexity what –at the end– doesn’t work that well. [Issue#257]
  2. Games.cz
    Oct 22, 2015
    50
    Grand Ages: Medieval is an ambitious trade/military/leadership simulator of medieval Europe. After the first few hours of entertainment you will be probably caught - either by bears or more likely by boredom.
    Read full review
  3. Multiplayer.it
    Oct 20, 2015
    59
    Grand Ages: Medieval is a wasted opportunity. It tries to be original in many ways, but lacks in too many key aspects.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »