Throwing in the massively upgraded engine, which makes the game look even more luscious than before the game could hardly be better, and with music that suits both the period and manages to be both pleasant and doesn't distract from the game, this can only be hailed as a massive success.

The game as a whole is really well done, so Grand Ages: Rome is really worth to play.

An expansive campaign, numerous multiplayer options, and excellently varied mission goals give this title a lot of mileage.

The motivating RPG part, the good graphics and the family revenge story make Grand Ages: Rome a real competitor to "Caesar 4."

It’s a big, polished and fulfilling game and we were impressed by the slick HUD and the right-click radial construction menu, which facilitates a sophisticated economic system. There’s plenty of replay value, fourplayer multiplayer and an editor to boot, too.

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.

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.

Grand Ages: Rome will win no prizes for cleverness or originality, though the military subgame is better than we are used to in this genre. It is mostly a surprising refinement in a series that has been mostly bland and pointless.

You can turn yourself into the ruler of an ancient city who manages every single detail to make his city grow and prosper. If the devs improve their battle system we have here a quite promising new strategy game. [Mar 2009]

If Grand Ages: Rome had been a real time strategy, it would have had a lot more value. But, seeing as it lacks the adrenaline, we are left yearning for details, for culturally and historically correct references, or for the magic of ancient lives.

Despite some glaring issues with this game I still enjoyed it immensely. It's fun, addictive and relaxing.

It might not add anything new to the genre but it's still reasonably entertaining, especially if you're keen on the period it's set in.

Mildly engaging. [May 2009, p.97]

To say that the game is shallow would be harsh, but it certainly doesn't plumb the potential depths of the period, and while it has multiplayer I can't see it having much longevity. [May 2009, p.77]

Its worst sin is simply being too ordinary. [May 2009, p.71]

Grand Ages: Rome is an enjoyable game, but if you've played any of the other city-builders that have come along in the last ten years, you'll quickly grow bored of this one.

Grand Ages: Rome is a decent game that doesn't try very hard to break out of the city-building mold. Instead it fits comfortably in the age old staples of the genre. The only good thing about this is the developers laid a good foundation for them to work with on the inevitable sequel, which will hopefully come up with something new and really make this game break out.

Grand Ages: Rome is yet another generic city-builder set in ancient Rome.