As experienced cruisers with more than a dozen trips under our belts over the past 10 years, we found the Marco Polo to be one of the oldest and smallest cruise ships we have been on. After spending more than 3 weeks on the Marco on our European Excursion we are of the opinion that "bigger" is MUCH better; e.g., RCL's Voyager of the Seas, Carnival's Destiny and/or the Grand Princess, etc. It became apparent that the real strength of the Marco Polo were the number of "Ports of Call" she made, as opposed to quality and quantity of ship board activities themselves. Nevertheless, we considered the majority of the tours we had signed up for to be an extremely poor value for the money. At numerous ports of call the "shopping tours" were a joke inasmuch as we were in port on a Sunday or a holiday and the shops were not open during our stay. In summation, the "dancers" were among the very best we have ever seen and our cabin tenders were as good as any we have ever had. Likewise, our queen size bed was the best we have ever experienced on ship. Unfortunately, everything else on the Marco Polo came up on the short end of the stick; i.e., the variety of the meals were substandard (compared to any other ship we have been on)as were the number of ship board activities per se. In short, if you want to visit these particular ports of call and prefer to be escorted through dozens of churches, castles, and museums as opposed to experiencing the quality and quantity of ship board activities which are available to you elsewhere - the Marco Polo is the ship you want to take. Respectfully, 2262103
*Cruiseline.com is not a booking agent or travel agency, and does not charge any service fees to users of our site. Our partners (travel agencies and cruise lines) provide prices, which we list for our users' convenience. Cruiseline.com does not guarantee any specific rates or prices. While prices are updated daily, please check with the booking site for the exact amount. Cruiseline.com is not responsible for content on external web sites.