Curse

Tsunami Rain · Apr 06, 2007, 12:12 PM // 12:12

played the closed beta and will admit it's having some issues server-wise...at least when I was playing it. Also, as stated, its sub-par to guildwars IMO. However, I do love the idea of a LOTR MMO type of game.

Divinitys Creature · Apr 06, 2007, 04:50 PM // 16:50

The LOTR PS2 game suxx0red. So I don't know if this will be worth trying.

trobinson97 · Apr 06, 2007, 06:24 PM // 18:24

I just tried out the beta and all I have to say is, "BOOOOOO!". The first thing that turned me off was the fact that I couldn't make a dark skinned elf to properly represent me. After that, I didn't have much hope in the game. But I went ahead and made a white guy anyway, just to check out the game. When I got to naming the guy I couldn't even give him a first and last name. Graphics were terrible in my opinion, the models looked like something from N64. The way they moved felt really generic.

The menus made my screen feel really cluttered, it wasn't very noob friendly either. I found a bow and arrows off a corpse, tried to equip them, and they promptly disappeared from my inventory. I don't know, maybe Anet has made me a Guild Wars fanboy, but there's no way I could get into that game. It really made me appreciate what Guild Wars brings to the table all the more. I can't believe some people are gonna be paying per month to play it.

Enchanted Warrior · Apr 07, 2007, 09:05 PM // 21:05

Trobinson97, I have to agree about the graphics. BUT, the mechanics of the game appeal to me. The atmosphere is more cordial, no spam, etc.. I'm going to keep going thru the open beta and see how it goes. I think the big thing is the focus is on the game, not lets make a deal like it is in gw. There are auctions etc to sell stuff, and the best thing is the devs there have promsied not to nerf pve to adjust pvp.

extra bacon · Apr 08, 2007, 02:20 AM // 02:20

eh ... i tried playing it last night, the opening cinematics were decent, but then it crashed my computer. -.-
twice.
it has since been uninstalled. hahah

arcanemacabre · Apr 08, 2007, 06:10 AM // 06:10

I played it for about 3-4 hours now, and I have to say, it's pretty fun. I haven't really felt myself "grinding" like in WoW, yet the openness and freedom is there. The graphics are somewhere between WoW and GW, I'd say, which is a little depressing because it could be much better. I'm playing a male elf Loremaster, and I actually really like the skill system. I could see it getting cluttered and frustrating with more and more skills, like in WoW, later on. I think I'm just really used to the 8-skills of GW.

I love the extent of role play that could be done. In the emotes, you can set your character's mood, which for some reason really set out as a really nice RP option. Stuff like dancing allows some openness with dance moves, where you have a standard dance, and alternate moves to mix it up. Music-playing is soo fun - you type /music, and your character whips out an instrument (that you have equipped), then you actually play the notes with keys 1-8, and can change octave with shift and ctrl. There is many instruments to choose from, too. Can we say BAND? hell yes...

Oh yeah, and there is an auction house, so that's pretty much taken care of. The quests are very GW-like, standard fedex with a handful of go kill this, etc. It does carry you through the game much like in GW, and like I said before, makes it seem very non-grinding, like in GW. When I played WoW, I found myself bored within the first few levels because of the amount of kill this, kill that, level, move on repetiveness. I don't see that in LOTRO.

All in all, I'm impressed. If GW2 can model itself closer to LOTRO than WoW, but keep more of the fundamental GW things I love, like the 8 skills, I think it could be the #1 game. If WoW wasn't so established, I'd say LOTRO would steal the market, but unfortunately it's not different enough, and WoW is, of course, so established. It's a shame, really, cause it really is a better game, as far as I can tell.

Etta · Apr 08, 2007, 11:18 AM // 11:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by extra bacon

eh ... i tried playing it last night, the opening cinematics were decent, but then it crashed my computer. -.-
twice.
it has since been uninstalled. hahah

Haha, didnt worth 50mins+ download then EB? I played it for a bit just for a laugh, have to say it rather fun. Would be good if the finish game is free to play, but it's highly unlikely.

Sujoy · Apr 08, 2007, 03:56 PM // 15:56

WoW is 1000000000x better then LOTRO.

GW is 10000000000000x better then WoW.

GW is infinityx better then LOTRO.

No offence, but these games aren't "comparable".

Saborath Gilgalad · Apr 08, 2007, 04:06 PM // 16:06

I've been in the closed beta since december, and I'd say it isn't better than guild wars. But compared to WoW I liked it much more. However I won't be buying the game and I'm not sure if I'm goign to particapate in the open beta. Mainly because the game isn't great its only good.

sakura75 · Apr 08, 2007, 04:42 PM // 16:42

WoW, GW and LOTRO are totally different game classes, but there are some issues/aspects that are comparable.
Just downloaded LOTRO for a 6 hours test.

Personal Notes ranging for 1..10 (10 = best)

Music:
GW: 7-8
LOTRO: 9
WoW: 6
The good thing is LOTRO is the option to play different instruments and using 1..8 for octaves (though it is sometimes bugged). Music quality tied for GW and LOTRO IMHO.

Graphics:
GW: 9
LOTRO: 8-9
WoW: 6 (I am not a big fan of cartoon graphics).
Characters seem to be more fluent and brighter in GW than LOTRO/WoW. But I need to say I was very impressed of the scenery when first started LOTRO, but GW Pre-Searing is still the winner.

Storyline:
GW: 6-7
LOTRO: Don't want to give a note here, since it is just a test.
WoW: 7-8
GW has the worst storyline of the three games, but it is therefore more PvP oriented. It is still too early to judge about LOTRO storyline, but it would be comparable to WoW methinks.

Sever:
GW: 8
LOTRO: 7-8
WoW: 7
Every games has lags. What I like most about GW servers is that you can reach anyone ingame who plays GW, unlike WoW where you can only talk to players in the same server.

Quest:
GW: 6
LOTRO: 7
WoW: 6
GW Quests are boring and sometimes too easy, though some NF quest are fun to do. WoW quests are grinding. LOTRO quests are not grinding but sometimes I lost the overview what/where to get or to do.

Control+Battle System:
GW: 8
LOTRO: 7
WoW: 7
May be I need to get used to the battlesystem in LOTRO, but I found it very difficult to attack monsters. You need to face to them and in range, otherwise nothing happens, therefore I think the GW is the more superior battlesystem. In WoW you can jump over small obstacles, since GW does not have an Z-axis.

Menus:
GW: decent interface hardly any menus. No Auction House, therefore alot of spamming
LOTRO: I was totally lost in the menus. Some sort of Auction House.
WoW: Menus ??? I could not even agree with the interface.

Conclusion:
Remember that this is a temporarily opinion after 6 hours of testing.
WoW I have played, but would not ever touch it again. LOTRO looks really nice, some disappointment in character graphics and the fact that you cannot play the 'dark characters' and you cannot play mage.
I have given LOTRO a chance, but I will probably stick to GW.

lacasner · Apr 09, 2007, 06:14 PM // 18:14

Its not a bad game, but I dont have the time probably to play it as Im on the casual side.

actionjack · Apr 09, 2007, 06:50 PM // 18:50

I was very excited to play the Beta (as I like to try out MMOs)... but after playing it for few minute... feel it not very good.

For one thing... it lag alot.. maybe its my computer or connection, but even at the lowest graphic sitting, it still lag.

Another, I dislike the battle mechanic and the movement. Just feel so clanky especially when force to use the keyboard to move all the time.

And the starter quest was not that appealing too... actually got lost few time....

The good thing I would say is that the background and the ground look amazing. And always fun to see some familar faces.
But would suggest WoW for better MMO.... or better... read the Trilogy.

Knightsaber Sith · Apr 09, 2007, 06:52 PM // 18:52

I played it a bit on Friday when it opened. I found the combat mechanics to be a bit awkward and the graphics style didn't really suit me. Other than that though, it was all right. I already had a problem with dorks spawn camping the spy guys you have to kill for that one quest which was very annoying.

*Darcy* · Apr 10, 2007, 09:00 PM // 21:00

It crashed my computer during install, so that's the end of it for me. If anyone wants my beta key (unused) PM me.

Anarkii · Apr 12, 2007, 07:51 AM // 07:51

I had kept my hopes low on this one(and I used to be a big Tolkien fan back in the day), but I still got disappointed

Very clumsy gameplay.

Sir Skullcrasher · Apr 12, 2007, 06:09 PM // 18:09

My friend said the game is great compared with GW. I haven't try the beta yet nor the actual game.

Apoc · Apr 14, 2007, 01:45 AM // 01:45

I'm enjoying the open BETA so far; got a level 9 Dwarf.

It's a nice change from GW and there are about 10 days left before the BETA closes, so I hope the Hard mode is up and running until then.

awesome sauce · Apr 14, 2007, 05:23 AM // 05:23

4 gigs, looks like they did a nice job compressing it......

At least its a fast server. 800 mb/sec on 6 mb connection.

draceena · Apr 14, 2007, 11:02 PM // 23:02

I have to agree that "clunky" is the best way to describe the gameplay of LOTR. Though it's nice to be able to jump and swim, the millions of keybinds that are available is just rediculous. I have tried WoW as well and feel like LOTR is just a cheap imitation. I will finish out the Beta just to say that I did give it a fair chance but I'm far into the "not buy" list and it would take alot to make me interested in buying.

ObiWan07 · Apr 23, 2007, 04:11 PM // 16:11

To be clear: LotRO looks better on high-end computers, gw looks better on low-end computers.