Follow us on Twitter: @ggtl
Join our friendly community!
Latest news
5.2.09
The review for Lord of the Rings Conquest has been posted under the 30th of January, if you want to read up on it you can find it here: http://ggtl.blogspot.com/2009/01/review-lord-of-rings-conquest.html
- Anonymous
It's taken three years for a Lord of the Rings game to make it to console, not since the Battle for Middle-Earth II have we been exposed to Tolkien's fictional world and as with the console version of that game EA have successfully created a game that doesn't compliment either Tolkien's written world or Peter Jackson's films.
The game loosely follows both book and movie, beginning with the Battle of Helm's Deep (although one or two "what if" scenarios have been added such as a battle to retake Moria and a siege of Minas Morgul). Whether you play as Good or Evil (the Evil campaign is unlocked only after completing the Good campaign) you get the choice of four classes, Warrior, Archer, Mage or Scout. The game seems to favour the range class of the Archer, fire enough arrows while moving backwards and you have a good chance of beating anything that comes towards you, whether it be a weak orc or a great troll.
Conquest is made from the same mould as Star Wars: Battlefront 1 and 2 which were also made by Pandemic. One major difference being, the Battlefront games were good. Not that Conquest isn't outstandingly bad, it's just the same as every other game made by EA when they venture into genres that aren't sport related. The gameplay is disappointing as you soon find yourself falling into the repetitiveness that is button-mashing.
The graphics overall are also sub-par, the only thing the developers seem to have concentrated on are the faces of the games residence; the rest of the game from a graphic point of view would fit in if it was released on the original Xbox. The size of the battles too is disappointing, even as close as a month or so from the release date, it was suggested that the number of participants in battles would be different depending on which map you were on abut could reach as much as 50. Instead we were restricted to a number around the 30 mark. Another nail in the coffin for this game is the heroes. Normally a point where developers can really go to town and be inventive with their abilities, special moves and so on. Not so in Conquest, the majority of the heroes are just the same as the normal classes but with a bit more survivability. Faramir and Aragorn, for example, are exactly the same. In fact, the only real difference is that Aragorn's special ability is to throw ghosts at his enemies!
Not all heroes however are unimaginative, Sauruman feels different, as does the Mouth of Sauron and the Balrog (they would actually find it hard to make him feel like a regular soldier though.) The animated quick time events are a great little feature too, the ability to climb up the leg of a Mumak and take it out in the same manner as Legolas does in the Return of the King is awesome as is scrambling up the back of a troll before performing a very graceful one hit move. It never gets old and adds some much needed balance to fighting against monsters. The randomness in some battle of being picked up by a circling giant eagle or nazgul, in my opinion is also a good addition to the game which gives you a feeling of being in a real battle where simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time can spell doom for a warrior. Having said that though, I did get exceptionally frustrated when, while playing as Sauron and striding menacingly towards Gandalf the White to begin an epic battle of the ages, I was picked up by a passing giant eagle which resulted in an instant kill.
Overall, this game lacks anything that is truely memorable, the bad gameplay, graphics and unimaginative style mean that the bad points greatly outweigh the good. The potential for a great game -certainly one that would become as successful as the Battlefront games, if not more- was definately there, but the end result is disappointing.
5/10
Lewis
Not all heroes however are unimaginative, Sauruman feels different, as does the Mouth of Sauron and the Balrog (they would actually find it hard to make him feel like a regular soldier though.) The animated quick time events are a great little feature too, the ability to climb up the leg of a Mumak and take it out in the same manner as Legolas does in the Return of the King is awesome as is scrambling up the back of a troll before performing a very graceful one hit move. It never gets old and adds some much needed balance to fighting against monsters. The randomness in some battle of being picked up by a circling giant eagle or nazgul, in my opinion is also a good addition to the game which gives you a feeling of being in a real battle where simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time can spell doom for a warrior. Having said that though, I did get exceptionally frustrated when, while playing as Sauron and striding menacingly towards Gandalf the White to begin an epic battle of the ages, I was picked up by a passing giant eagle which resulted in an instant kill.
Overall, this game lacks anything that is truely memorable, the bad gameplay, graphics and unimaginative style mean that the bad points greatly outweigh the good. The potential for a great game -certainly one that would become as successful as the Battlefront games, if not more- was definately there, but the end result is disappointing.
5/10
Lewis
Labels: 360, Conquest, LotR, Review
- Anonymous
As a Tolkien fan I have been frustrated at the lack of Middle-Earth titles available on next-gen consoles as games on the PC and earlier consoles from Tolkien’s universe have been so popular. So, when I heard of this up-and-coming title I began combing websites, gaming magazines, the lot.Developed by Pandemic, Conquest seems to be very similar to the company’s successful Star Wars: Battlefront series, in the sense that you get to influence how certain battles during the War of the Ring play out without making it a RTS. You also get a choice of classes: (four up to now) Warrior: basic melee class. Archer: pretty self-explanatory and it gives the game a third person shooter feel. Mage: healer and ranged damage. Scout: the backstabbing class, go invisible and sneak around the battlefield.
On the surface it appears to be nothing more than a LotR version of Battlefront but if you delve into the depths of the game it’s obvious that there are influences from MMORPGs (in the healing and sneaking abilities) as well as FPS games like Battlefront and Battlefield that make their way into the campaign.
Once you’re finished with the campaign there’s also instance action battles that can be played online or offline with a variety of maps ranging from the Battle of Pelennor Fields -where you can face up to 150 enemies- to Balin’s Tomb where the smaller map provides more out-and-out action.
Although all of this is good and seems like it will add up to an excellent game, it seems too similar to Battlefront. However, it is never too late for Pandemic to stamp their personality on the game before release; thus separating it from the other games on the market.
Lord of the Rings: Conquest is due for release in Autumn/Fall of this year and will be available on PC, PS3, 360 and DS.
Lewis
Labels: Conquest, Hype Train, LotR
- Anonymous
I’m sure by now you all know that there are next to no RTS games that can cross the gap between PC and console, so when it was announced that BFMEII was being made available on the 360, I was interested in how it would make the transition.
I’m a huge Tolkien fan and I figured don’t knock it till you’ve tried it, and went out and bought BFMEII for my 360. Biggest mistake I’ve made since I got the console.
I wasn’t expecting much in the first place; I’d played it on the PC before and thought the first in the series was better, but I was still shocked at how little effort went into the game. Not only was there no visual improvements but features that were on the PC version were taken away for the console version.
Two areas on the PC that should be commended are Create-a-Hero which wasn’t on the first and made game-play more versatile, and War of the Ring mode which was a turn based play mode that allowed you to invade other areas as your chosen faction and take over Middle-Earth. Yet neither of these were used on the console version, leaving you with a choice of skirmish mode or the campaign which was poor on the PC in the first place.
If there are any other games which you think shouldn’t have made it consoles, or shouldn’t have been ported to PC, then post in the comments.
Lewis
Labels: Battle For Middle-Earth II, LotR, Writer's note
- Anonymous
Subscribe to our content
and never miss a single thing
subscribe to our monthly newsletter:
Our most recent writing
Our most recent reviews
Recent comments
All comments are subject to our commenting policy
Latest videos
Subscribe on YouTube
GGTL Classics
Some of the very best articles dug out from deep in the GGTL archives, written by some of our past and present wordsmiths alike.
Your continued use of this website and/or any others owned by Gamer's Guide to Life.com represents your acceptance and indicates your full understanding of all of our legal policies and terms. Our legal policies and terms are legally binding. If you in any way disagree with or refuse to be bound by any part of said legal policies and terms, you are advised to leave this website immediately.