You're put in control of a Roman colony, and you have to do things like place buildings, manage salaries, develop trade routes, and defend your borders. All of the basic goals in the game are the same - for example, in both games you need to supply your citizens with services and goods so they'll upgrade their houses so you can tax them more - but where the details differ, pretty consistently CivCity: Rome is the game that makes the better decisions.The puzzling aspect to this is that if you're developer Tilted Mill Entertainment or publisher Sierra Entertainment, why would you decide to release Caesar IV now? Wouldn't you figure that people have had their fill of managing Roman cities for a while? Or, since your game is coming out last, wouldn't you compare it to the earlier releases, learn from their mistakes, and take the time to make your product the superior one? Caesar IV could have used some extra time just to separate it from the other Roman city-building games, if not to improve its terrible interface and spruce up its boring campaign, but perhaps Tilted Mill and Sierra decided it was a sunk cost, and that there wasn't any point in delaying the inevitable.Caesar IV is a fairly typical city management game. Now, I didn't play Glory of the Roman Empire since it appeared to be a lightweight, casual game, but I reviewed CivCity: Rome about a month ago, and the similarities between it and Caesar IV are striking.

It is almost an identical game to CivCity: Rome (released in July), and it shares the same theme with Glory of the Roman Empire (also released in July).

Caesar iv cheats pc