Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Lord of the Rings: Conquest - DEMO IS OUT NOW ON PSN

BiosysBiosys Registered User regular
edited December 2008 in Games and Technology
Last thread about this is 7 months old, it's my first op so go easy on me, and ideas for thread titles are appreciated.

lotrcwallpaper02ak5.jpg


Lord of the Wars: Conquest Battlefront Star 2

Spoilered for h-scroll and awesomeness:
Spoiler:

Like all great OP's, and also through laziness this OP shall be presented in QA format.

DEMO IS OUT ON PSN RIGHT NAOW, DOWNLOAD IT, IT WILL BE OUT ON XBL AND PC NEXT WEEK
Reviews and impressions of the demo have been... mixed. Smme love it, some hate it, and there's quite a few issues. Unfortanetly, due to it not being out on the Marketplace yet, I can't give my own impressions. Expect it out on PC around the same time as the Xbox demo. Ok, now read the rest of the OP, I spent at least 5 minutes writing it.

So what's all this then?

Lord of the Rings: Conquest (hereby referred to as LOTR:C), is the new up-and-coming game from Star Wars Battlefront developer Pandemic, if you hadn't already guessed by the amount of comparison I've already made.

As always, Wikipedia is our friend:
The Lord of the Rings Conquest is the upcoming video game developed by Pandemic Studios and published by Electronic Arts. It is based on The Lord of the Rings film trilogy, and uses a similar style to the Star Wars: Battlefront games. The game allows the player to play as both the forces of good and evil, but unlike The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth, the latter option is based around Sauron stopping the One Ring from being destroyed and fighting back.

Sounds cool I guess, but I never played the Battlefront games. What's the gameplay actually like?

First of all, shame on you.

Secondly, here is my explanation:

The gameplay runs like a hybrid first person/third person shooter/fighter. You play as four distinct classes (descriptions next), two of whom are melee-based, and two of whom are range-based. There are many different modes, like Conquest (Think traditionary Battlefield), Capture the Flag (self-explanatory), and your good old Campaign mode, which features the GOOD side, like your ordinary LOTR, or the EVIL side, unlocked after beating the good campaign once, where Sauron gets his shit together and ganks Frodo as he's about to drop the ring, which then leads to an orgy of destruction and hobbit-killing. Battles are held on giant battlefields from the movie, with 75v75 players on the battlefield at any one time, compared to Battlefront, which had a measly 16v16,

And these classes?

Just look in the spoiler:
Spoiler:

How about this new multiplayer shindig all the kids are into?
No surpise, that's kickass too. Multiplayer matches are 16v16, with AI players filling the (many) gaps, except for one very special mode. There's also 4 player splitscreen co-op, or 4 player online co-op. Here's a list of the modes., so I can feel accurate:
    Deathmatch - Self-explanatory, fight until your 'reinforcements' (number of times people can respawn) runs out. You play as heroe's from the LOTR franchise in this however, mixing it up a little bit.
    Conquest - Traditionary Battlefront/field gameplay, fight for control over a series of flags/points, with reinforcements often added in.
    Capture the Flag - Capture the Flag. Again, self-explanatory.

Now the ultra cool mode: Ring Bearer.

In this mode, all the other players are Ringwraiths, while one player is Frodo. Think Juggernaught from Halo. Frodo is fast and nimble, yet the Ringwraiths can kill him easily. The Ringwraith that kills Frodo becomes Frodo, and so on and so forth. It's a fun little mode, and should be a welcome break from continous EPIC BATTLES.

TOO MUCH PICTURE AND TEXT NEED VIDEO NOW BEFORE BRAIN SEIZURE

Here, go knock yourself out:

Developer Diary : The Evil Campaign

Action Showcase

Comic Con '08 Developer Walthrough P1

Comic Con '08 Developer Walthrough P2

That's just about enough for now.

Release info and platforms, Mr. Know It All?

The game will be coming out on the 9th of January in everywhere but North America, for the PC, Xbox 360, PS3 and Nintendo DS, with the North American version coming out on the 13th. No Wii version unfortanetly.
Not that much info on the DS version, is being made by Pandemic, more info as I found it or others tell me.

I CANNOT PLAY GAMES WITHOUT AN INCENTIVE. I NEED ACHIEVEMENTS, STAT.
Waaaaay ahead of you. Here's a list of Xbox 360/Microsoft Games for Live achievements (and yes, there is a "You shall not pass!" achievement, as compulsory):
Spoiler:

And for everyone's favourite underdog system, here's a list of PS3 trophies (yup, once again):
Spoiler:

Miscelleanous Stuff

List of Heroes/Villains you'll get to play as at certain spots during the campaign, as well as in the Hero Deathmatch multiplayer mode.
Spoiler:

Links to other LOTR:C websites:

The Official Website
Lord of the Rings War
Middle Earth Center

PC SPECIFICATIONS

System Requirements
===================

Lord of Lord of The Rings: Conquestâ„¢ requires at least the following:

FOR WINDOWS XP SP2 or Windows Vista
* 2.4 GHz Core Duo processor or equivalent
* 1 GB RAM
* A 256 MB Video Card, with support for Pixel Shader 3.0 - nvidia 7800 or equivelent
* The latest version of DirectX 9.0c
* A DirectX 9.0c compatible sound card
* At least 6 GB of hard drive space for installation.

These are recommended of course, so if you're just under you should be able to play it. Nothing too strenous though, for most of the PA community it should be easily playable.

That is all for now, now discuss!

Biosys on
«13

Posts

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    The first image is way too big.

  • BiosysBiosys Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Couscous wrote: »
    The first image is way too big.

    I know, quickly shrinking it now.

    EDIT: Ok, it's done.

  • MrDelishMrDelish Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    yes yes yes

    Why don't developers understand that large scale games like this are complete awesome?

    edit: so there's actual singleplayer as opposed to the "let's put together the multiplayer maps in sequence and call it campaign" approach they took with Battlefront? More awesome

  • BiosysBiosys Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    MrDelish wrote: »
    yes yes yes

    Why don't developers understand that large scale games like this are complete awesome?

    Because developers can generaly almost always be classified under the banner of 'a stupid'.

    I don't know how many people are on the battlefield at one time, but I'm assured it's in the real of 'epic'.

    Multiplayer is 16v16, but with AI players filling the gaps.

    I'll update the OP with some multiplayer modes in a bit.

  • MrDelishMrDelish Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Biosys wrote: »
    MrDelish wrote: »
    yes yes yes

    Why don't developers understand that large scale games like this are complete awesome?

    Because developers can generaly almost always be classified under the banner of 'a stupid'.

    I don't know how many people are on the battlefield at one time, but I'm assured it's in the real of 'epic'.

    Multiplayer is 16v16, but with AI players filling the gaps.

    I'll update the OP with some multiplayer modes in a bit.

    If only Relic would do something like this with Warhammer 40k

  • BiosysBiosys Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    MrDelish wrote: »
    Biosys wrote: »
    MrDelish wrote: »
    yes yes yes

    Why don't developers understand that large scale games like this are complete awesome?

    Because developers can generaly almost always be classified under the banner of 'a stupid'.

    I don't know how many people are on the battlefield at one time, but I'm assured it's in the real of 'epic'.

    Multiplayer is 16v16, but with AI players filling the gaps.

    I'll update the OP with some multiplayer modes in a bit.

    If only Relic would do something like this with Warhammer 40k

    I don't even like Warhammer 40k (the fluff and such, though the general theme and races are cool), but man, a game in this style for Warhammer 40k would rock so hard.

  • YorkerYorker Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    I'll buy this if it means we'll get Battlefront 3.

    76561198037322631.png
  • MrDelishMrDelish Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Yeaaaaaaaah

    I got excited when I found an addon for GMod that adds Firewarriors and Space Marines and pitted some squad battles. The AI is dumb as rocks, but it shows just how much better these sort of games are when in the action as opposed to just watching, commanding

  • BiosysBiosys Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Yorker wrote: »
    I'll buy this if it means we'll get Battlefront 3.

    Good man. Battlefront 3 is in development now I think, although it won't get any press or info until a bit after LOTR:C comes out.

  • lowlylowlycooklowlylowlycook Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    I'll probably wait for review/impressions of this, but if they would just make a Total War:Tolkien, they would already have my money.

    steam_sig.png
    (Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
  • DashuiDashui Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Biosys wrote: »
    Yorker wrote: »
    I'll buy this if it means we'll get Battlefront 3.

    Good man. Battlefront 3 is in development now I think, although it won't get any press or info until a bit after LOTR:C comes out.

    Is Pandemic working on the third game? Last I heard, it was passed off to a different developer?

    Anyways, fuck yeah to this game. I didn't realize it was actually coming out next month. It's just over two weeks from being released!

    Xbox Live, PSN & Origin: Vacorsis

    steam_sig.png
  • BiosysBiosys Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Dashui wrote: »
    Biosys wrote: »
    Yorker wrote: »
    I'll buy this if it means we'll get Battlefront 3.

    Good man. Battlefront 3 is in development now I think, although it won't get any press or info until a bit after LOTR:C comes out.

    Is Pandemic working on the third game? Last I heard, it was passed off to a different developer?

    Anyways, fuck yeah to this game. I didn't realize it was actually coming out next month. It's just over two weeks from being released!

    Oh crap, yeah, your right.

    So, what platforms will people be getting this on?

    I'm a sheep so I need to know this.

  • CherrnCherrn Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    I'm actually very interested in this despite not caring for the previous Battlefront games. They were too limited in size and ambition, but they're doing some very interesting things in this, and I'm looking forward to playing the Mordor campaign.

    All creature will die and all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai.
  • YorkerYorker Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Dashui wrote: »
    Biosys wrote: »
    Yorker wrote: »
    I'll buy this if it means we'll get Battlefront 3.

    Good man. Battlefront 3 is in development now I think, although it won't get any press or info until a bit after LOTR:C comes out.

    Is Pandemic working on the third game? Last I heard, it was passed off to a different developer?

    Anyways, fuck yeah to this game. I didn't realize it was actually coming out next month. It's just over two weeks from being released!

    That was Free Radical, which shut down, apparently they handed it down to Rebellion Developments, who for the most part seems to have made PSP/PS2 ports of various games.

    EDIT: They also made the AvP games, which weren't bad.

    76561198037322631.png
  • MonkeydryeMonkeydrye Registered User
    edited December 2008
    After watching the trailer on the PSN, I will likely be getting this for my PS3

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • BiosysBiosys Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Yorker wrote: »
    Dashui wrote: »
    Biosys wrote: »
    Yorker wrote: »
    I'll buy this if it means we'll get Battlefront 3.

    Good man. Battlefront 3 is in development now I think, although it won't get any press or info until a bit after LOTR:C comes out.

    Is Pandemic working on the third game? Last I heard, it was passed off to a different developer?

    Anyways, fuck yeah to this game. I didn't realize it was actually coming out next month. It's just over two weeks from being released!

    That was Free Radical, which shut down, apparently they handed it down to Rebellion Developments, who for the most part seems to have made PSP/PS2 ports of various games.

    EDIT: They also made the AvP games, which weren't bad.

    I think they made the PSP port of Battlefront, so it could actually work out well.

    As I remember that was a good game.

    Playing TF2 currently, when I'm done for the night I'll edit the OP to add in some other information

  • JihadJesusJihadJesus Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    I had been planning on buying and HDTV at the end of January and then saving up for the console but now it looks like I need to find about $250 extra.

    Anyone know of an Olive Garden around here? I'll just be out back.

    Tired of getting reamed by Gamestop? Sign up for Goozex!
  • urahonkyurahonky Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Pandemic is working on this too? Fucking sold.

    Games completed recently: Dead Island: Riptide, Batman: Arkham Origins, StarCraft 2: Heart of the Swarm, StarCraft 2: Wings of Liberty, Dragon's Crown
  • DisruptorX2DisruptorX2 Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Could be great. I love multiplayer melee based games, but no one makes them. :x See: the horrid tacked on MP mod of Dark Messiah that didn't play like the real game.

    Framerate in those videos also looks alot better than the the trailer I saw playing at Target.

    1208768734831.jpg
  • BiosysBiosys Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Updated the OP with multiplayer details, going to have a quick look for videos of multi.

    EDIT: Ok, I looked around, and the only videos are shitty youtube ones, I may edit them in, I'm not sure.

    Also, when checking on Gametrailers, I noticed that people had already reviewed the game without buying it.

    The level of idiocy amazes me.

    EDIT2: Yup, no other videos other than Youtube, you guys want me to add them or not?

  • RohanRohan Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    I love the Battlefront games, and this is a good idea. However the animation looks stilted, as if Pandemic are using the same engine that they were on PS2 for the Battlefront games. Hopefully what they've shown up there are the console versions because I will be getting the pc one, and I expect smoother gameplay than that. Really looking forward to it, though.

    ...and I thought of how all those people died, and what a good death that is. That nobody can blame you for it, because everyone else died along with you, and it is the fault of none, save those who did the killing.

    Nothing's forgotten, nothing is ever forgotten
  • HearthjawHearthjaw Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Biosys wrote: »
    Dashui wrote: »
    Biosys wrote: »
    Yorker wrote: »
    I'll buy this if it means we'll get Battlefront 3.

    Good man. Battlefront 3 is in development now I think, although it won't get any press or info until a bit after LOTR:C comes out.

    Is Pandemic working on the third game? Last I heard, it was passed off to a different developer?

    Anyways, fuck yeah to this game. I didn't realize it was actually coming out next month. It's just over two weeks from being released!

    Oh crap, yeah, your right.

    So, what platforms will people be getting this on?

    I'm a sheep so I need to know this.

    I remmber when I first got my 360 (soon after they actually came out) and quickly googled Battlefront confident that a 3rd one must be in development.

    How crushed I was :(

    But this looks awesome, I've been hungering for some split screen action for a while.

    steamid: sewersider
  • HonkHonk Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2008
    My negative side: Do we really need more Battlefield clones?

    My positive side: Yay, LoTR mp madness, awesome!

  • BiosysBiosys Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Rohan wrote: »
    I love the Battlefront games, and this is a good idea. However the animation looks stilted, as if Pandemic are using the same engine that they were on PS2 for the Battlefront games. Hopefully what they've shown up there are the console versions because I will be getting the pc one, and I expect smoother gameplay than that. Really looking forward to it, though.

    I believe those are the console versions, and the actual videos are from a few months back at least.

    With the game nearing release Pandemic are probably spending most of thier time polishing things, like character movement etc.

    Honk, are there even that many Battlefield clones? The only ones I can think of are Battlefront, but I probably missed a few.

    Also, it's 4-player splitscreen co-op, not 2. I'll change the OP.

  • HonkHonk Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2008
    Biosys wrote: »
    Rohan wrote: »
    I love the Battlefront games, and this is a good idea. However the animation looks stilted, as if Pandemic are using the same engine that they were on PS2 for the Battlefront games. Hopefully what they've shown up there are the console versions because I will be getting the pc one, and I expect smoother gameplay than that. Really looking forward to it, though.

    I believe those are the console versions, and the actual videos are from a few months back at least.

    With the game nearing release Pandemic are probably spending most of thier time polishing things, like character movement etc.

    Honk, are there even that many Battlefield clones? The only ones I can think of are Battlefront, but I probably missed a few.

    Also, it's 4-player splitscreen co-op, not 2. I'll change the OP.

    Well I count Battlefield: Vietnam and Battlefield 2142 as Battlefield clones as well. In that they're pretty much a more polished version of the same content.

    Still fun some times though. But these images look great! I look forward to it.

    And splitscreen co-op as well, awesome!

  • AngryPuppyAngryPuppy Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Can I ask if 16 vs 16 actually means 32 human players in one game, or is it more like a 16 human player maximum limit with an additional 16 bots? In particular I'm asking about the 360 version, since I know consoles typically lose out with regard to player count due to the lack of a dedicated server culture.

    I didn't realize the game was out so soon or I would have read up on it more. I'd do so now but I'm in work and my curiosity has be piqued. Goilfiend loves LOTR and of the few games I've coaxed her into playing beat 'em ups have definately been the most successful, so this could be a winner.

  • HonkHonk Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited December 2008
    16 vs 16 generally means 32 humans is possible. I'm not sure in this specific case though.

  • BiosysBiosys Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    AngryPuppy wrote: »
    Can I ask if 16 vs 16 actually means 32 human players in one game, or is it more like a 16 human player maximum limit with an additional 16 bots? In particular I'm asking about the 360 version, since I know consoles typically lose out with regard to player count due to the lack of a dedicated server culture.

    I didn't realize the game was out so soon or I would have read up on it more. I'd do so now but I'm in work and my curiosity has be piqued. Goilfiend loves LOTR and of the few games I've coaxed her into playing beat 'em ups have definately been the most successful, so this could be a winner.

    16v16 = 16 good guys, 16 bad guys, rah rah, fight the powah. In Conquest and CTF you're normal grunt guys, in Deathmatch you're heroes from the bad and good side. Most of the bad heroes are kinda made up, as in they're only really orcs that Tolkien bothered to name in the books.

    AI players are in as well, I believe, so battlefields aren't all empty and lonely.

    I think the Ringwraiths v Frodo mode is different. It probably has smaller maps, with just 16 players, ie. 15 Ringwraiths, 1 Frodo.

    EDIT: Battlefield : Vietnam and 2142 are more like sequels or expansion packs more than clones, as they're still both made by DICE.

  • OlivawOlivaw good name, isn't it? peach treesRegistered User regular
    edited December 2008
    I am uncertain

    On the one hand, the Battlefront games were pretty lazy and bad

    On the other hand, this game looks a lot better and Lord of the Rings is cool

    Such a quandary

    7u0YG.gif
    PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | SCREENED | STEAM ID | BUY SOME STUFF!
  • YorkerYorker Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Biosys wrote: »
    AngryPuppy wrote: »
    Can I ask if 16 vs 16 actually means 32 human players in one game, or is it more like a 16 human player maximum limit with an additional 16 bots? In particular I'm asking about the 360 version, since I know consoles typically lose out with regard to player count due to the lack of a dedicated server culture.

    I didn't realize the game was out so soon or I would have read up on it more. I'd do so now but I'm in work and my curiosity has be piqued. Goilfiend loves LOTR and of the few games I've coaxed her into playing beat 'em ups have definately been the most successful, so this could be a winner.

    16v16 = 16 good guys, 16 bad guys, rah rah, fight the powah. In Conquest and CTF you're normal grunt guys, in Deathmatch you're heroes from the bad and good side. Most of the bad heroes are kinda made up, as in they're only really orcs that Tolkien bothered to name in the books.

    AI players are in as well, I believe, so battlefields aren't all empty and lonely.

    I think the Ringwraiths v Frodo mode is different. It probably has smaller maps, with just 16 players, ie. 15 Ringwraiths, 1 Frodo.

    EDIT: Battlefield : Vietnam and 2142 are more like sequels or expansion packs more than clones, as they're still both made by DICE.

    If the Ringwraith mode has more than 10 players i'll be disappointed.

    76561198037322631.png
  • OlivawOlivaw good name, isn't it? peach treesRegistered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Yorker wrote: »
    Biosys wrote: »
    AngryPuppy wrote: »
    Can I ask if 16 vs 16 actually means 32 human players in one game, or is it more like a 16 human player maximum limit with an additional 16 bots? In particular I'm asking about the 360 version, since I know consoles typically lose out with regard to player count due to the lack of a dedicated server culture.

    I didn't realize the game was out so soon or I would have read up on it more. I'd do so now but I'm in work and my curiosity has be piqued. Goilfiend loves LOTR and of the few games I've coaxed her into playing beat 'em ups have definately been the most successful, so this could be a winner.

    16v16 = 16 good guys, 16 bad guys, rah rah, fight the powah. In Conquest and CTF you're normal grunt guys, in Deathmatch you're heroes from the bad and good side. Most of the bad heroes are kinda made up, as in they're only really orcs that Tolkien bothered to name in the books.

    AI players are in as well, I believe, so battlefields aren't all empty and lonely.

    I think the Ringwraiths v Frodo mode is different. It probably has smaller maps, with just 16 players, ie. 15 Ringwraiths, 1 Frodo.

    EDIT: Battlefield : Vietnam and 2142 are more like sequels or expansion packs more than clones, as they're still both made by DICE.

    If the Ringwraith mode has more than 10 players i'll be disappointed.

    Yeah seriously

    7u0YG.gif
    PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | SCREENED | STEAM ID | BUY SOME STUFF!
  • BiosysBiosys Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Olivaw wrote: »
    Yorker wrote: »
    Biosys wrote: »
    AngryPuppy wrote: »
    Can I ask if 16 vs 16 actually means 32 human players in one game, or is it more like a 16 human player maximum limit with an additional 16 bots? In particular I'm asking about the 360 version, since I know consoles typically lose out with regard to player count due to the lack of a dedicated server culture.

    I didn't realize the game was out so soon or I would have read up on it more. I'd do so now but I'm in work and my curiosity has be piqued. Goilfiend loves LOTR and of the few games I've coaxed her into playing beat 'em ups have definately been the most successful, so this could be a winner.

    16v16 = 16 good guys, 16 bad guys, rah rah, fight the powah. In Conquest and CTF you're normal grunt guys, in Deathmatch you're heroes from the bad and good side. Most of the bad heroes are kinda made up, as in they're only really orcs that Tolkien bothered to name in the books.

    AI players are in as well, I believe, so battlefields aren't all empty and lonely.

    I think the Ringwraiths v Frodo mode is different. It probably has smaller maps, with just 16 players, ie. 15 Ringwraiths, 1 Frodo.

    EDIT: Battlefield : Vietnam and 2142 are more like sequels or expansion packs more than clones, as they're still both made by DICE.

    If the Ringwraith mode has more than 10 players i'll be disappointed.

    Yeah seriously

    Yeah, 8 sounds better for that mode.

    Still kickass though.

  • YorkerYorker Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Biosys wrote: »
    Olivaw wrote: »
    Yorker wrote: »
    Biosys wrote: »
    AngryPuppy wrote: »
    Can I ask if 16 vs 16 actually means 32 human players in one game, or is it more like a 16 human player maximum limit with an additional 16 bots? In particular I'm asking about the 360 version, since I know consoles typically lose out with regard to player count due to the lack of a dedicated server culture.

    I didn't realize the game was out so soon or I would have read up on it more. I'd do so now but I'm in work and my curiosity has be piqued. Goilfiend loves LOTR and of the few games I've coaxed her into playing beat 'em ups have definately been the most successful, so this could be a winner.

    16v16 = 16 good guys, 16 bad guys, rah rah, fight the powah. In Conquest and CTF you're normal grunt guys, in Deathmatch you're heroes from the bad and good side. Most of the bad heroes are kinda made up, as in they're only really orcs that Tolkien bothered to name in the books.

    AI players are in as well, I believe, so battlefields aren't all empty and lonely.

    I think the Ringwraiths v Frodo mode is different. It probably has smaller maps, with just 16 players, ie. 15 Ringwraiths, 1 Frodo.

    EDIT: Battlefield : Vietnam and 2142 are more like sequels or expansion packs more than clones, as they're still both made by DICE.

    If the Ringwraith mode has more than 10 players i'll be disappointed.

    Yeah seriously

    Yeah, 8 sounds better for that mode.

    Still kickass though.

    10.

    9 Wraiths.

    1 Frodo.

    76561198037322631.png
  • OlivawOlivaw good name, isn't it? peach treesRegistered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Don't you people know anything

    Gawd

    7u0YG.gif
    PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | SCREENED | STEAM ID | BUY SOME STUFF!
  • BiosysBiosys Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    I would reread all the books, but...

    I'm lazy. But I'm feeling a complete idiot for not remembering that.

  • EmanonEmanon __BANNED USERS
    edited December 2008
    I felt burned by the Battlefront games, they were no BF2. Nor BF1942 for that matter. If Conquest has good reviews I'll check it out.

    Anybody play the LOTR:BFME RTS games? I have all the expansions and play online, mostly hosting a Minas Tirith map in a 3v1 where I'm the defender.

    Treats Animals Right!
  • BiosysBiosys Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Emanon wrote: »
    I felt burned by the Battlefront games, they were no BF2. Nor BF1942 for that matter. If Conquest has good reviews I'll check it out.

    Anybody play the LOTR:BFME RTS games? I have all the expansions and play online, mostly hosting a Minas Tirith map in a 3v1 where I'm the defender.

    I had BFME 1, got rid of it a looooong time ago. I meant to check out number two, bt never really got the chance.

    Any good?

    While some of the gameplay was the same (modes, classes), the actual gameplay when you picked a class was a lot different. It was third person for a start, and the entire method and way of playing was a lot different to Battlefield.

  • OlivawOlivaw good name, isn't it? peach treesRegistered User regular
    edited December 2008
    I bought Battle for Middle-Earth and it had a glitch where it could not install

    Fuck that game

    Battle for Middle Earth 2 was better, but it was still a little shallow for an RTS, with certain units being completely useless on certain maps

    The maps were really the highlight, especially the defense maps

    Oh, and the Create-A-Hero was pretty cool too

    7u0YG.gif
    PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | SCREENED | STEAM ID | BUY SOME STUFF!
  • zimfanzimfan Registered User
    edited December 2008
    I played BFME quite a bit

    also I enjoyed what they did with Battlefront 1 and 2 so I can't wait for this.

    PasscodeSig.png
  • AngryPuppyAngryPuppy Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    By the way if anyone frequents the developer or EA forums please make some noise about 'Region Locked Multiplayer' and whether or not it'll be in this game. I first encountered it in Army of Two, and then Mercenaries 2, and considering I'm Irish and my Significant Cooperator is American it really ruined both of those games for me. Mercs has (finally) had it patched out but sitting around making assumptions is what got me stung a second time by this malarky.

    I certainly won't be buying this day one even though that is my usual modus operandi, because this 'feature' is never mentioned or advertised until a game comes out in multiple regions and people try to play with their foreign pals. It's definately got my interest but until I have reliable confirmation that you can play multiplayer across borders I'll have to hold off.

    I find it hard to believe there is so little knowledge of this practice and even harder to believe that it was actually removed from Mercs 2 considering how small the minority who voiced their dissatisfaction with it. It was a pleasant surprise but came a bit too late. Hopefully at least it indicates a precident that EA will no longer be implementing region locked multiplayer but as I've said before I'm not going to make any assumptions.

«13
Sign In or Register to comment.