Middle Earth: Shadow of War

Jericho · Post by **Jericho** » Fri, 13. Oct 17, 09:44

I want a good plate-balancing game! You play a dwarf, and you have to tidy up BagEnd. Think of the lore-friendly fun you can have throwing crockery and singing along to the fabulous dwarven lyrics. It could be a quicktime game or a rhythm game.

How about a great Tom Bombadill game!!! After all, he was the most important character in Lord of the Rings according to the internet before Fellowship came out. He can run around shouting "Hrooom" or whatever it is that he says, for 20 minutes, and then tell everyone to watch his sexy wife bathe in a stream. That will get those virgin nerds buying the game!!!!!!!!111!!!!!1!!!!!!!1111!!!

No, wait! A game about Gandalf the great and powerful wizard!!! The player gets to, erm... Walk... Erm, there would be a smoking minigame where you have to blow smoke rings...Micro-transaction lootcrates for different kinds of 'weed' to smoke...Erm, you could get lost in the mines... Er... Ride a horse?

I've not read Lord of the Rings in a decade or so... I don't really recall Aragorn doing much either to be honest. I've not read any of the other books (other than Hobbit), so maybe there are some more game-friendly characters and events where they don't have to take liberties.

They will never beat The Hobbit on the ZX Spectrum. That adventure game was the best game every made.

Golden_Gonads · Post by **Golden_Gonads** » Fri, 13. Oct 17, 09:45

Morkonan wrote:If they wanted a good story that didn't walk all over Tolkienesque sensibilities, but still had firm roots in Middle-Earth lore, I think we could agree there are greater, more engaging, stories in The Silmarillion that don't have as many canonical restrictions.

No-one can touch anything from The Simarillion. Christopher Tolkien has full rights to those and won't let anyone touch them. He's a bit like Gollum regarding them. They are... Precioussss to him. But his father sold all media rights to The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings before his death, so anything from those is all people have to work with.

Jericho · Post by **Jericho** » Fri, 13. Oct 17, 15:20

Golden_Gonads wrote: No-one can touch anything from The Simarillion. Christopher Tolkien has full rights to those and won't let anyone touch them. He's a bit like Gollum regarding them. They are... Precioussss to him.

Give it 4 or 5 years, Hollywood will come knocking...

The DC-Universe films are about to collapse, no more Trek films, The Star Wars "force" films will be over, Phase 9 of Marvel will be over, Fast&Furious will be done, Bond on another 10 year hiatus...

Hollywood will come knocking...

pjknibbs · Post by **pjknibbs** » Fri, 13. Oct 17, 16:48

And he'll probably refuse them. Why does he need to say "yes"? I can't imagine he's exactly having to scrub down the back of the sofa for money to pay his bills. The only reason the film rights for LOTR are out there is because Tolkien sold them during his lifetime, and he always considered that a mistake.

Jericho · Post by **Jericho** » Fri, 13. Oct 17, 17:02

pjknibbs wrote:And he'll probably refuse them. Why does he need to say "yes"? I can't imagine he's exactly having to scrub down the back of the sofa for money to pay his bills. The only reason the film rights for LOTR are out there is because Tolkien sold them during his lifetime, and he always considered that a mistake.

Is he back on the inheritance ladder after getting kicked out by the wicked stepmother?

Jericho · Post by **Jericho** » Fri, 13. Oct 17, 17:35

It's got a whopping 2/10 on Metacritic (general public vote).
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/middl ... dow-of-war

All about the loot-crates.

It's a shame because I've read that they aren't really necessary, unlike the Battlefront2 ones (although EA are trying to clarify the situation but are being cagey).

Morkonan · Post by **Morkonan** » Sat, 14. Oct 17, 00:57

No Metacritic rating on the Steam store page for it yet.

At this stage, it doesn't matter if the Lootcrates are necessary - Being in the game is offensive enough, especially if they work to give truly meaningful "paid" advantages to the player. And, if they provide an avenue for players to create a competition out of them, rewarding those who have paid the most, well... That'd be swell. :/

Eventually, this will happen with enough games that the purchasing audience will get used to be fleeced. Well, unless something is done, which it probably won't be, unless the market votes "now" to stop buying games that have such things in them. That won't likely happen, but it "could."

Let's see how sales go and whether or not the gaming audience has a strong enough will to actually vote with its wallet.

pjknibbs · Post by **pjknibbs** » Sat, 14. Oct 17, 02:59

Morkonan wrote: At this stage, it doesn't matter if the Lootcrates are necessary - Being in the game is offensive enough, especially if they work to give truly meaningful "paid" advantages to the player.

Shadow of War is a single player game, though, so a "paid" advantage isn't quite as bad as it is in a multiplayer one like Star Wars: Battlefronti. Of course, once upon a time a developer who wanted to give players an advantage to allow them to finish a single player game would have just included a few cheat codes for free!

muppetts · Post by **muppetts** » Sat, 14. Oct 17, 12:32

from what I have seen, if you forget about the loot crates there is quite a good game, certainly the game itself is not as negative as it is being marked. I think that loot crates, xp boosts, shops in SP games are here to stay, they make Huge amounts of money.

egosoft.com

egosoft.com

Middle Earth: Shadow of War