Gamespot review

#1sirrvsPosted 4/14/2009 2:32:38 PM

"This generic city-builder set during the waning days of the Roman Republic looks and plays almost exactly like its ancestors; good luck telling the difference between the game and kissing cousins such as Caesar IV, CivCity: Rome, and, more to the point, Haemimont's own Glory of the Roman Empire and Imperium Romanum."


"The glories of Rome are becoming a little tarnished. You can build only so many forums and raise so many legions before you get bored."


Now if only someone can start saying the same about storming the beach, rescuing the POW and blowing up the u-boat. I enjoy a good WWII game but I'm just surprised Gamespot and other reviewers don't issue more demerits to devs for simply copying the formula of other WWII games.

#2Franko_3Posted 4/16/2009 7:25:29 PM
Forget GS review. I dunno what the hell they are trying to do, but they don't deserve attention. They remind me the little kid that alway say something false to get more attention
#3AldouzPosted 4/23/2009 5:22:50 AM
I don't know why GS give it score 5.5... For me Grand Ages:Rome deserve score 9.0 overall...
#4ImaginativePosted 4/23/2009 4:08:56 PM

I vastly enjoy this game. GS is on crack.

#5primatepancakesPosted 4/28/2009 4:44:03 AM
this game is awesome...yet more proof that GS is totally clueless when it comes to reviews
---
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/ChopActionJesus/hate_sandcastles.jpg