Unfinished, buggy, abandon... what could have been good, isn't
D. Milburn "davart1", Amazon
7 November 2009
Summary: This game has the depth of a parking lot puddle. Yes this game has been out awhile so I'll be quick as I tend to wait to buy games as I know a half dozen patches will be released for them... so CivCity Rome whom received one patch that failed to fix many issues is unfinished by the makers, it's a poor attempt to ride on the Civ Series coat tails and it's more loaded with bugs than a plebes home.
Summary: Well its a great game after the patch is installed except for one crucial area...combat. Put it to you like this. Sometimes your troops will not engage the enemy. Period. They will stand close by and die by the dozen while one or two fight valiantly. Then try to control them and you never know what your going to get. I had full legions at times that wouldnt even leave the fort! Its a known bug but are they going to fix it since it basically ruins gameplay?
Summary: 2k Games got me. When I saw CivCity and the 2k Games logo I figured that it's from the makers of Civilization 4 and it will be great. Wow, was I wrong. Although the graphics looked good in the previews as well as the upcoming gameplay, it was a disapointment. The gameplay is very buggy, and the tasks don't keep you active. You can build and build, then wait and wait. When you are playing the game, the graphics are slightly choppy.
Summary: Hey, have you ever played Caesar II from the 1990s? Yeah, well this game is basically a knock-off of that game with better graphics. And quite frankly, Caesar II was more fun. I don't see how CivCity has any point. You build your city and nothing interesting ever happens. There is no progression to the game that keeps it fresh. The makers intergrated technologies and wonders from the successful Civilization game series, but they are inconsequential in this game.
Summary: I brought this after having played Caesar3 and loved it but wanted something with a bit more scope for controlling dynamics of a city - and I thought being a civcity game this would offer me the extension - WRONG - this is a bad rip off of Caesar3, sure, graphics are more advanced with the zoom in view but other than that I was playing the same game but with less involvement or control.
Summary: I was really looking forward to this game, and I was prepared to overlook one or two things. Every game has it's own personality, right? I found instead this game actually doesn't have much of one at all. I didn't mind the graphics. Not cutting edge sure, but not that bad either. A little muddy but a change from cartoony. It was hard to enjoy closeup views, however, when so many buildings lost their roof on zoom. No way to toggle that feature.
Summary: The Civ name has been tarnished. Analogously, one thing I have been learning is that just because Sid Meier's name is on a product, it doesn't mean the product is good. In the case of CivCity: Rome, unfortunately, it doesn't just come in at "modestly good" - it comes in at "dismally poor.
Summary: Like the other reviews, I find this game a rip-off of Caesare III. (I didn't know there was a IV! Must look into that.) While the graphics are admirable, the gameplay wasn't challenging at all. It didn't take me any time at all to win, and I'm one of the worst game players ever. OTOH, it's a good afternoon waster if all you want to do is build and perfect your city in open play with no goals. Don't buy it now. Wait until it's cheap, like $9.95 or something.