Fantastic game. If you like city-builders, you owe it to yourself to pick this one up… very nice execution, and extremely playable. It’s kind of a smaller title so might have fallen beneath people’s radar (especially with Caesar IV and CivCity: Rome coming out in the next few months).
I wouldn’t say it’s all that different from the other basic resource-flow and city-layout games (Caesar III, Pharaoh, Children of the Nile), but it is well done and frankly I still really like that tweaking, planning, “wait 'em up” kind of gameplay. It’s been a while since a game delivered that well for me, so Glory is a quite pleasant surprise.
I’m about 10 missions in, so perhaps it runs into trouble later, and the graphics are clean and decent but not earthshattering. Information about your current resources could be easier to find. But really these are small complaints – if you like this basic kind of game there is a lot to like here.
Yeah, I tried the demo and it seemed pretty good if a bit bland. I sorta wonder at the timing in three Roman city builders coming out in the next 3 months or so though (I do really like the right click UI in Glory, though I didn’t particularly like having to navigate down three levels to do most anything - so maybe in terms of efficiency it wasn’t all that. But it sure is unobtrusive).
Of the three, I see CivCity:Rome as being the one that tries to implement the genre a bit differently, what with melding the city building aspects and the Civ tech tree. I saw an interview with some of the devs of Caesar IV yesterday (Tilted Mill, though when the list the people involved it appears most of Impressions ended up there), and while it looks great (3D engine and all that) when asked what made it really special, the list of ideas there seemed more solid than spectacular. I do like that the’ve adopted the concept of citizens going out and seeing satisfaction of their desires versus the old “random walker” concept which could be so daggone frustrating.
I did not like this game much. Too easy for veteran city builders, probably not interesting enough for newcomers. Every neighborhood ends up looking exactly the same and placement of markets and warehouses ensures you never have to work too hard to get a big city working.
Why can I only build one coliseum?
Everyone wants an altar, but that just means that they get more demands to make of me. Plop it down to keep them happy and before long my fishing village is drowning in villas.
If only men can do certain kinds of jobs, why is it so hard for the AI to sort out the work schedule so that Doofus Loofus can quit the tailor and work in the quarry?
Well, there is one grand Colosseum, but there was more than one arena for gladiator fights. I don’t mind that certain temples or fountains are unique, but only a single gladiator arena?
The fact you can only build one just furthers the impression that every neighborhood is the same.
EDIT: Further research reveals just how rare amphitheaters of any size were, at least permanent structures even inside Rome. So the argument that “well, they were rare” has some merit. Rome did have more than one at some times, but most were temporary structures. Rome didn’t get its first permanent stone amphitheater until the last century BC. Most Roman cities would have a single place for the games.
Not that I will accept realism as an argument in such a ludicrously unrealistic game as GRE, and I still think that the paucity of structures detracts from any sense of a city feeling right. Especially since you can drop theaters and baths like crazy.
