Any one considering buying this game, even though gamespot gave it a bad review?

#1AS412TPosted 1/17/2010 9:23:55 PM

These guys at gamespot are usually thorough, yet I'm afraid they left out a certain level of significance of the game that requires the immediate attention of anyone and everyone who read their review. Truely I can't say the gamespot review DIDN'T TOUCH the topic I am about to give you, but it should have been in the cons list at the top. I don't think poorly or negatively on the review other than that. Now to the point: The game is F**K*NG REDICULOUS!! If you have meerly played a few hours of the free build you might find it challenging, or borderline impossible to beat (any given map), but once you get to KNOW the game (say 10-20 precious hours of your time later) you will at least START to understand its complexities and frequent annoyances. Relying on the tutorial for the free build part of the game will introduce you to about 15-30% of the complexity of the game the rest you have to figure out completely alone, or with the help of an online source. I found the constant fires annoying. I found the obsseive need for prefectures annoying, the need for another outpost (because the original one gets burned down too soon) annoying, how precise the rioters pinpointed the EXACT things you COULD not lose (and wemt ahead and burned them down so the city they live in could decend into poverty and depression) ALSO annoying, and the fact that the lousy military couldn't keep the crime-obsessed civilians in line, PATHETIC, and an obvious overlooking on the game developers part. Oh and they don't F**K*NG tell you what the heck a equite is or that you have to build different teirs of houses to house the different levels (plebs, equites, prawhateverthehecktheircalled), I mean WTF is the "upgrade" function for then?

I sadly bought this game at the same time as the prequel thinking that they were TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT GAMES; hated the first game; then played the next only to find out ITS THE SAME DAMN GAME PLUS LIKE TWO (2) PIXELS and a few extra features!!

But they couldn't have just called it Imperium Romanum II, because NO ONE WOULD BUY IT KNOWING IT WAS A SEQUEL TO THAT GAME, at least after beeing enlightened about IR's failures. Next time I'm reading gamespot and going to be more careful. Anyway they changed the name, fooled me, and drove me F**K*NG CRAZY! (That rhymes).

PLEASE DON'T WASTE YOUR MONEY, and if you are subscribed to their official forum, PLEASE SPRED THE KNOWLEDGE THAT THIS IS THE SINGLE WORST GAME EVER MADE FOR THE PC (and sence its prequel is the same damn game- practically- they BOTH ARE)!! NEED I ADD MORE "!"S??!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh and for the X360 I nominate The Force Unleased (as the biggest waste of production money and artist skills- at least for all starwars titles out there period).

So to top it off, GRAND AGES ROME, is not GRAND, it is IMPERIUM ROMANUM II - with VERY slight differences and the ONLY thing worthwhile in either game is the GRAPHICS, they ARE beautiful, though the screen movement can be jerky at times.

So if you want to oogly Roman buildings and cute palmtress (etc.) play this game, but if you want to PLAY a game even SLIGHTLY worth your time, money, ect., DON'T F**K*NG DO IT MAN, DON'T DO IT!!!!

It goes into the halls of the worst games ever made PERIOD