Grand Ages: Rome

 PC
User Score
8.4

Generally favorable reviews- based on 66 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 48 out of 66
  2. Mixed: 14 out of 66
  3. Negative: 4 out of 66
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. SeanB
    Mar 24, 2009
    9
    This game is GORGEOUS! The graphics are so nice. Rich textures and lighting. A stylish depth of field that is used at screenshot style angles. The transport system was simplified to nothing. You now focus on where things are and less on how it gets there. This means you can build a gorgeous city that most City-sims wouldn't allow due to the rules of movement. It is easy to do any This game is GORGEOUS! The graphics are so nice. Rich textures and lighting. A stylish depth of field that is used at screenshot style angles. The transport system was simplified to nothing. You now focus on where things are and less on how it gets there. This means you can build a gorgeous city that most City-sims wouldn't allow due to the rules of movement. It is easy to do any basic task, with a stream-lined and sensible interface. It allows the player to focus on the grand goal of building a city and crushing the barbarians that threaten good Roman citizens.… Expand
  2. Mehve
    Apr 6, 2009
    8
    Not ground-breaking, but more refined than many other city-builders, with quite attractive visuals. Resource management is good, without the issue of transportation complicating things (for better or for worse). Combat is lackluster, lacking much variety or opportunities for advanced tactics, and entirely non-existent in quite a few missions. The plot has the potential to be interesting, Not ground-breaking, but more refined than many other city-builders, with quite attractive visuals. Resource management is good, without the issue of transportation complicating things (for better or for worse). Combat is lackluster, lacking much variety or opportunities for advanced tactics, and entirely non-existent in quite a few missions. The plot has the potential to be interesting, but remains a little thin and hides most of the time. Ultimately, while this is technically an RTS, the pacing is far, FAR more Simcity than it is Starcraft.… Expand
  3. ChrisThomas
    Aug 14, 2009
    8
    I would say 8.5. the thing this game lacks is re playability. you could say it has it because of the fact you can choose a different family to play as. But the missions themselves are the same. The multiplayer from what I have seen has died off fairly fast. The only way to get a match is to auto find one which makes getting to play certain maps and match types impossible. Having moreI would say 8.5. the thing this game lacks is re playability. you could say it has it because of the fact you can choose a different family to play as. But the missions themselves are the same. The multiplayer from what I have seen has died off fairly fast. The only way to get a match is to auto find one which makes getting to play certain maps and match types impossible. Having more playable factions should be their next step when they either make an expansion for this game or create Grand Ages 2. Overall its a great game with good graphics, in-depth storyline, decent multiplayer when it first came out ( as said before somewhat dead now ), and a half decent combat system although outdated still offers some strategy and offers a good spectacle to watch when you play a 2v2 and each sides has a good amount of units. Overall its a good game any city-building fanatic should try, Not the best but certainly the best thing for this specific time period and settings so far. Price is a tad bit high though it should be lowered to 30$ in the US.… Expand
  4. xNitrousOxide
    Jan 31, 2014
    10
    As a huge fan of the Tropico series, I absolutely love this game. When I found out the Tropico devs (Haemimont Games) had made a couple of similar games set in Roman times, I was intrigued. I've now spent more time playing Imperium Romanum and Grand Ages: Rome than the Tropico series.

    First off, the graphics are phenomenal. No longer are city building games confined to the graphics of    As a huge fan of the Tropico series, I absolutely love this game. When I found out the Tropico devs (Haemimont Games) had made a couple of similar games set in Roman times, I was intrigued. I've now spent more time playing Imperium Romanum and Grand Ages: Rome than the Tropico series.

    First off, the graphics are phenomenal. No longer are city building games confined to the graphics of the past, yet apparently no one is familiar with this game, unlike say, the Caesar series. What an outcry! I can daydream for hours at the highly detailed art. This game does a truly amazing job at re-creating the Roman Empire, at least visually.

    People who say this is "just another city building game"... yeah, because so many city building games have a focus on actually planning out neighborhoods via small AoE radii... not. My experience with the "just another city building game" is carelessly throwing down a building wherever you have room. Grand Ages: Rome is WAY deeper than that. You can build poor neighborhoods, rich neighborhoods, mixed neighborhoods, and every kind of neighborhood has its own rewards and challenges to maintaining a high level of satisfaction. But you reviewers probably play the game for an hour at most and think you can somehow learn all the little nuances a game has in that time? Keep dreaming. You guys get paid to sell your own pathetic opinion, but truth is, in the eyes of a Simulation and City-Building game fan, this game is one of the greatest things to be released in the last five years.

    Shame is, most people who would like this game are going to miss out because of a) bad reviews and b) an idiot publisher that marketed it as a 4x game and not a city-builder.

    Definitely recommend trying it out if you enjoyed Tropico, however.    … Expand
  5. vence
    Jul 22, 2013
    8
    Very nice game, for me who is an old gamer who played all the Ceasar and Paharaoh series, and who tried a lot of clones to find a true successor, this one is the true best candidate, graphically gorgeous and historically accurate while keeping the fun element, get it if you like city building games
  6. DanaM
    Jun 30, 2009
    8
    Great economic system Enjoyed ROTMK and tillted mill efforts more, but find this is a great competitor to Caesar IV Very intuitive GUI, excellent graphics, and diversity of missions. Great game.
  7. Viljanen
    Nov 1, 2011
    8
    This game has somewhat unique approach to city-building and resource management with its flow resources and areas of effect. After an expansion and some updates it is enjoyable to play. The graphics are nice and you can see your citizens going about their business in the city. I think the biggest drawbacks of this game is that is a bit too easy after the initial city is set up. Once theThis game has somewhat unique approach to city-building and resource management with its flow resources and areas of effect. After an expansion and some updates it is enjoyable to play. The graphics are nice and you can see your citizens going about their business in the city. I think the biggest drawbacks of this game is that is a bit too easy after the initial city is set up. Once the denarii start rolling in the game becomes super-easy and you can do whatever you want. Also many of the buildings, especially the high-level research buildings are almost useless. The economy could use some rebalancing.

    If you are a fan of city-builders and liked Caesar IV I'd recommend you buy this game as it shouldn't be very expensive by now.    … Expand
  8. DangerBoy
    May 11, 2011
    8
    Graphics are great and what voice acting there is has been done well. While this game doesn't bring anything terribly new or exciting to the genre it's still a very satisfying city builder.
  9. Parvarteshwar
    Feb 22, 2012
    7
    The biggest problem with modern City Builders is they have a control radius around buildings, exempli gratia: if you place a house more than 20m from a workplace then the inhabitants would rather emigrate than walk their lazy asses over there. While this adds some standardisation and forces a high degree of planning it also leads to a crisis of space, with its micromanagement being centralThe biggest problem with modern City Builders is they have a control radius around buildings, exempli gratia: if you place a house more than 20m from a workplace then the inhabitants would rather emigrate than walk their lazy asses over there. While this adds some standardisation and forces a high degree of planning it also leads to a crisis of space, with its micromanagement being central to the success of your city. Grand Ages: Rome unfortunately commits two city building sins. One it does not attempt to break out of this mould and your experience will therefore revolve around squeezing all your buildings as close together as possible. And two, it is a city building game about Rome, from which there are about a dozen to chose. It does have many positive points: Diverse array of buildings, an excellent campaign which is also historically accurate, detailed models, and a good combat system. The resource management is also very good, with the production of goods always being balanced by a reasonable the demand and the trade gives ample opportunity for monetary income. But in the end, your cities will always be highly restricted and specially constrained. If you're bored with Caesar IV and looking for something more historically accurate then Grand Ages Rome will be good for you but otherwise don't bother.… Expand
  10. TK317
    Jul 15, 2012
    6
    Grand Ages Rome has beautiful graphics, a fitting soundtrack, and a good campaign, but there are some pretty big problems too. The biggest thing that this game lacks is re-playability; when you first play it you can't get enough of it, but after you beat the campaign two or three times things just get really boring. Free build is a fun feature, but once again, after building a few dazzlingGrand Ages Rome has beautiful graphics, a fitting soundtrack, and a good campaign, but there are some pretty big problems too. The biggest thing that this game lacks is re-playability; when you first play it you can't get enough of it, but after you beat the campaign two or three times things just get really boring. Free build is a fun feature, but once again, after building a few dazzling cities, things just get boring and repetitive. The family system is nice, being able to get different perks depending on what family you are in, but other than making certain missions easier, it really has no effect on the course of the game. The combat system, although the units look nice, is really terrible as there are too few units, too overpowered special abilities, and no real strategy required. The multiplayer should just be completely ignored; there are few people who play it. The Reign of Augustus expansion adds little of value; the new campaign is far too brief. If the developers were to release a new game in this series, they would have to do a massive overhaul to get even a somewhat replayable game. Great graphics, great voice acting, great idea - poor execution.… Expand
  11. Tibster
    Apr 18, 2014
    7
    Like the game and the idea. Its a long game, so you get a lot for your buck. I found the game way to easy and had no problems at all completing the campaign without reloading. You can complete most of the missions without building half of the buildings available. The game also have a bug, making you unable to reload at some points, so you have to restart the mission. This game could haveLike the game and the idea. Its a long game, so you get a lot for your buck. I found the game way to easy and had no problems at all completing the campaign without reloading. You can complete most of the missions without building half of the buildings available. The game also have a bug, making you unable to reload at some points, so you have to restart the mission. This game could have been much more fun and challenging, therefor Im only giving it a 7.… Expand
  12. Mike-Messiah
    Mar 11, 2014
    8
    This game is really under rated, just because it didnt come from a Big named studio. The mechanics are pretty run of the mill but the execution is solid. Others have mentioned its good qualities, so let me go straight to the CONS/bad parts
    1) The Slave Market is wa overpowered or lets say ,it makes everything so much easier. U can run half of your city's production without any citizen    This game is really under rated, just because it didnt come from a Big named studio. The mechanics are pretty run of the mill but the execution is solid. Others have mentioned its good qualities, so let me go straight to the CONS/bad parts
    1) The Slave Market is wa overpowered or lets say ,it makes everything so much easier. U can run half of your city's production without any citizen maintenance issue. And we all know that the biggest challenge of City Builder Games are citizen maintenance. The game takes off the weight off your shoulders, quiet considerably.

    2) The combat. yes, it is more of an added bonus, but its pretty crappy. AI sucks, path finding issues are still not fixed even after 1.11 patch (latest) Troops can never navigate around a mountain, they just run straight to a wall and get stuck their. Unit selection is also crappy, like 20 years behind times. The enemies are plain dumb. If you rick click them with your army, they stop engaging their current target and come chasing at your army, even if your army is far away. Its like they have a CLICK detector in their helmets. U can obliterate the entire army simply by spamming walls, and an cavalry group to keep right clicking the enemy to EXPLOIT their dumb AI

    3) The campaign is well laid out till mid game, where they start posing good challenges like a certain criteria or time limit needs to be met. However, towards the last 4-5 missions, those challenging aspects are taken away and it becomes very easy. Its like the devs thought -"ok , you have reached a point where you have seen whatever we have to offer you, so just go have some sand-box like fun without any time limitation".. So it all ends up being boring, easy, tedious....In the 2nd last mission i just laid out my base in 5-10 mins and let the game to run idle till i reach the 20,000 dinari target. BOOOORING....

    Still, a very good game, well above my expectations...seeing such bad reviews from Game sites and publications    … Expand
  13. Dco326
    Dec 9, 2021
    8
    Stvarno je okej igra skroz, trebali su da izmene neke stvari ali realno i matora je ali da sam bio hooked na nju malo jesam, ne bi je opet igrao u nekim trenucima je previseeeeeeeeeee spora.

Awards & Rankings

94
#94 Best PC Game of 2009
47
#47 Most Shared PC Game of 2009

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
72

Mixed or average reviews - based on 18 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 18
  2. Mixed: 10 out of 18
  3. Negative: 0 out of 18
  1. PC Games
    80
    The motivating RPG part, the good graphics and the family revenge story make Grand Ages: Rome a real competitor to "Caesar 4."
    Read full review
  2. GameStar
    76
    Looks like Rome was ahead of its time: raw materials weren't transported, they were teleported. At least that's what happens in Grand Ages: Rome, because the focus of the game is not on building effective transportation. Instead you need to build an efficient economy. This can be quite motivating if you enjoy being rewarded for your city planning.
    Read full review
  3. Gamers.at
    78
    The developers seem to have learned from their previous mistakes and have implemented some rather extreme but useful changes into Grand Ages: Rome. In technical respects the game may convince, although the user friendliness would still need some improvement. However, for those interested in this kind of game Grand Ages: Rome is a good choice nevertheless.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »