Electronic Art’s latest LOTR title – a third-person thing of swords and armies – stumbles rapidly towards us, with a January 19th release date. Some videos and such have turned up for our inspection, and so without further ado I must point you to the click, beyond which I ruminate on said assets and post a video of Tolkien talking about naughty elves. Go read/watch.
Pandemic Studios seem to be borrowing some ideas from the Dynasty Warriors games with Lord Of The Rings: Conquest, at least for single player. The multiplayer, from these trailers, reminds me a little more of slightly-underwhelming fantasy melee-with-some-guns-and-RTS-elements, Savage 2. Savage 2 went free to play just before Christmas some time, if you haven’t tasted it then it’s worth a look, if just to see what the S2 guys were doing over there.
Anyway, Lord Of The Rings: Conquest looks like a potentially fun time, and yet at the same time seems to reach out and tug hard on the over-milked udder of Lord Of The Rings franchise. A game too far? Perhaps, and there seems little reason for this particular fantasy battle-romp to be set in Tolkien’s world. Still, if they do get the battles right, and capture of the scale of Tolkien’s battle vision, it could be truly spectacular. The Battle of the Pelennor Fields, a playable Balrog – it all adds up to something that a certain type of fan won’t be able to resist. Clickwards for the those trailers, and a reminder of where all this stuff comes from.
The single player trailer:
See what I mean about that? The change-class-at-flag thing has always struck me as a bit weird too, but then I suppose this is the kind of game that has a single player campaign in spite of the intentions of its multiplayer designs.
The multiplayer trailer:
That’s a little more like what I’d been expect, although the generally wishy-washiness of it does not inspire great confidence.
Now, for oddly uncomfortable viewing, compare and contrast what you’ve just seen with Tolkien talking about the mythology of Middle Earth: