U-Games
Game Details
The Lord of the Rings Online: Shadows Of Angmar
Available on :
Pc
Developed by :
Published by :
Genre :
Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game
Description
The Lord of the Rings Online: Shadows of Angmar will allow players to forge heroic legacies in the ongoing struggle for Middle-earth. Gamers of all levels will establish their unique reputations, explore incredibly detailed realms and join ...
Articles
Latest news
02-05-08 New addition to Lorebook
01-14-08 Codemasters will soon announce MMO
11-11-07 LOTRO: the Gold Edition
08-14-07 More adventures in Middle-Earth
Related Tags
Most active topics
Latest comments
Latest forum comments
News
PC Review: LOTR Online: Shadows of Angmar
Herrdidi has checked out Lord of the Rings Online: Shadows of Angmar to conclude that World of Warcraft has finally met its match.
Want to know why LOTRO is better? Just click here and read!
Want to know why LOTRO is better? Just click here and read!
In other news:





6 Comment(s)
derf26 (old)
What the hell? Throughout your review it sounds like you're gonna give the game 80%. You say that's this game is basically WoW with a very small amount of differences. The PvP still has no thrill at all whatsoever, as does the PvE since there are no real losses (armour and weapons bound to you). And despite this you give this game a 9.8 in gameplay?
In the Pros, you even mentioned it was innovating, even though you yourself admitted that the game was simply following the standard fantasy MMO mold.
I don't understand this. But in any case, what I can say is this. LOTRO is better than WoW in the sense that a game released in 2007 is better than one released in 2005.
I mean, if you give this game 95%, then if AOC holds on to its promises (and from the vids it is), you'll have to give Conan 120%, because that game is revolutionary for an MMO and breaks the mold.
I can't understand why games like LOTRO or WoW which are so much worse than a game like Oblivion get such high ratings just because they are MMOs? Why does this automatically grant them the right to suck. Why does this grant them the right to clone WoW and other games without real innovation and receive 95% ratings? And how the hell do you find it interesting even in the least PvPing in a game with no significant risk? These MMOs have been dumbed down and you're just accepting it.
When a game like WoW is cloned, the clone should receive lower ratings! Not higher! The only reason the graphics are better is because WoW is two years older, and in terms of any significant improvements, that's about it.
When I started playing LOTRO within a few minutes I recognised all the controls and most of the gameplay. Sure, it makes life easier. But if you can hop from one game to another and adjust in a mere 5 minutes, doesn't this tell you something?
How can you play the same game over and over again, seemingly blind and oblivious to the fact that the only change is the name, the skins, and a couple of features. And "teleporting"? How is that new in a game? RPGs have had teleporting for decades, and this is somehow innovating? Well maybe it is compared to WoW, but WoW is hardly an interesing game. Sure it has subscribers, but that's about all it has.
Maybe i'm being overly critical, but that's becuase you gave the game 95 bloody percent. Oblivion doesn't deserve 95%, Half Life 2 doesn't deserve 95%. How the hell does this deserve 95%?
My point is that the basic faults present in WoW and similar fantasy MMOs which ruin the thrill and risk in the game are still there. All the improvements you see are very shallow. I wouldn't give this game more than 80%. Polishing old games doesn't make them new.
L0k1-
Herrdidi
So, you're right in one way, and not so right in another :)
About the score, maybe it is over rated, but hell. It represents the feeling I had while playing it.
I think it's a great game.
Drofder2004
Anonymous
Anonymous