Lore and stories are great, you really feel part of middle earth during its most wellknown time
Too bad those parts do not play nice in an MMO setting.
This would be a great game... as a singleplayer or COOP experience.
As an MMO, the world feels too phased and instanced and fractured, articicial gates and invisible walls everywhere, and grouping is discouraged at every turn.
Lore and stories are great, you really feel part of middle earth during its most wellknown time
Too bad those parts do not play nice in an MMO setting.
This would be a great game... as a singleplayer or COOP experience.
As an MMO, the world feels too phased and instanced and fractured, articicial gates and invisible walls everywhere, and grouping is discouraged at every turn.
Thats why i play games like swtor tsw, lotro and WoW... Because they have great stories, story is the most important part of an RPG, and thats still what MMORPGs are, they are RPGs to enjoy with your friends online...
people like different things in games, calling stories in mmos a fail is only your perspective....
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
the world feels too phased and instanced and fractured, articicial gates and invisible walls everywhere, and grouping is discouraged at every turn.
I admit I'm not quite understand what you mean with "too phased and instanced and fractured"... LotRO has one of most open worlds in mmo's - especially with the last few year's "instance everything" trend - it's definitely on par with its fellow games from that time. You don't see any loading screens in the whole SoA region (except entering in a building of course), you can easily ride up and down for an hour without any border, right until the Gates of Moria.
Grouping is still there of course, there were changes indeed to help the solo gameplay but to call it "grouping is discouraged"... it's a bit of an exaggeration
Every single building you can enter (when you can enter at all) has a loading screen indeed, even the smallest farm house. The interiors also never fit the outside design of the building.That definitely contributes to that amazing "open world" feeling this game provides...
(end of sarcasm)
PS: SoA isn't seamless either. You have a loading screen between The Shire and Ered Luin.
Every single building you can enter (when you can enter at all) has a loading screen indeed, even the smallest farm house. The interiors also never fit the outside design of the building.That definitely contributes to that amazing "open world" feeling this game provides...
(end of sarcasm)
PS: SoA isn't seamless either. You have a loading screen between The Shire and Ered Luin.
I mentioned it too, and 6 years ago seamless interiors weren't a common thing I guess.
PS. There isn't any loading screen, just walk / ride up to Needlehole, follow the Water, through the bridge and you'll find yourself near Falathorn in Ered Luin. (the elven homesteads, next to Duillond)
I have only just gotten into playing MMO's Again after not playing any for months. Lotro i logged into and let me tell you it's one hell of a bore. It's sparse with quest compared to wow. You cant just begin to skip quest otherwise you will never lvl up. Quest variety is very narrow, not unlike wow where you got so many more different types of quests.
Imo the toons in lotro looks deform and uninspiring. The landscapes looks bland, just look at the ground and sprite like trees from distance. When you get to Eregion the graphics start to look better. Also it starts to feel like a heavy grind doing the same 5 differetn quest every lvl from 35+.
Whatever you do dont buy quest packs, go for the subscribtion. It is much cheaper somehow with a sub if you plan to play it for long unless you keep rerolling at lvl 40. Also I mentioned how few quests there is so if you buy one quest pack it doesnt leave you with much freedom.
The combat isnt that great but better than let say SWTOR. With guardian class you spam 10 or more abilities a mob, not doing much dmg and with hunter its just the same 4 shots over and over. Lore master is more fun but the pet is a horrible tanker, you have to time stuns and stuff while grinding. Runemasters class I found annoying while warden was more fun. I also played captain to 27 and that was more of a success.
For a first time play its is fun enough but it gets very boring the second time since the path is very linear not unlike wow where you have so many areas to explore and lvl up in. Mind you Im not playing WoW anymore but that game does so many Things right and its untedious compared to Lotro.
Originally posted by Methos12 Problem with LotRO as a F2P MMO is that you'll essentially run into a brick wall at around level 35 or so when you run out of content and have to unlock it, either by paying or grinding the living hell out of multiple characters to get enough TPs to unlock it. Latter gets ridiculous as cost ramps up.
So just play up to L35 and decide. That is already a lot of free fun.
If you're like the majority of us, looking for that MMO while hopping from current MMO's.. This isn't the one. If you're looking for a game to fill that "MMORPG" hole, this isn't the game. It's your basic run of the mill themepark MMORPG set in middle earth. Nothing breath-taking, nothing new really.. just a different setting.
Just wait for Wildstar, TESO, and EQ:N. And keep your fingers crossed.
Lore and stories are great, you really feel part of middle earth during its most wellknown time
Too bad those parts do not play nice in an MMO setting.
This would be a great game... as a singleplayer or COOP experience.
As an MMO, the world feels too phased and instanced and fractured, articicial gates and invisible walls everywhere, and grouping is discouraged at every turn.
Thats why i play games like swtor tsw, lotro and WoW... Because they have great stories, story is the most important part of an RPG, and thats still what MMORPGs are, they are RPGs to enjoy with your friends online...
people like different things in games, calling stories in mmos a fail is only your perspective....
Erm, not really. Because the stories in MMOs do not measure up against stories in singleplayer games.
There is an entire genre of RPGs to play online with friends. Diablo, Titan's Quest, Neverwinter.
MMORPGs were always about things on a massive scale, hundreds of people playing together forming a larger story.
MMOs that try to do singleplayer stories always come out worse off because
a) the combat is worse than a singleplayer/coop game, because of net code limitations
b) the story is always worse because it is padded with fetch quests and constrained by the limited mechanics of the MMO genre. Also, the result of each quest is the same, and it NEVER impacts the game world.
c) Again, NO IMPACT ON THE GAME WORLD. Since everyone shares the same world, once you exit the instance, you influence ends.
I can't say a game has "great stories" when they force me to kill 10 wolves every 2 minutes to get the next chunk of "story".
the world feels too phased and instanced and fractured, articicial gates and invisible walls everywhere, and grouping is discouraged at every turn.
I admit I'm not quite understand what you mean with "too phased and instanced and fractured"... LotRO has one of most open worlds in mmo's - especially with the last few year's "instance everything" trend - it's definitely on par with its fellow games from that time. You don't see any loading screens in the whole SoA region (except entering in a building of course), you can easily ride up and down for an hour without any border, right until the Gates of Moria.
Grouping is still there of course, there were changes indeed to help the solo gameplay but to call it "grouping is discouraged"... it's a bit of an exaggeration
haha WHAT?
Try to swim the Brandywine, you hit an invisible wall. Try to climb a mountain, invisible wall.
Find a dungeon? "You can't enter here without the right quest!" If you find one you can enter, it's instanced.
Find a building? Most you can't enter, the ones you can, require loading screens.
Archet is phased, as are many other areas.
Want to explore? The game insta kills you if you explore certain regions, and locks others, unless you complete level 50 quests.
If you think this is an open game, you must not have played many MMOs.
MMOs in the 90s and early 00s were a thousand times more open than LotRO. It's one of the least open MMOs I've ever played. Hell, some MMOs that came out around the same time, like Vanguard, didn't have a single loading screen. No invisible walls. See a mountain? Climb to it. See a dungeon? Walk right in no loading at all.
And it discourages grouping in a big way. Want to group with friends? Sure! Well what can you do together? Well you can mindlessly kill monsters... except XP is so nill from that that it isn't a viable way to play. So you have to quest.
You all have different qualifications for different quests. You can either grab a bunch of mindless filler fetch quests and be bored, or do the long tedious quest chains hoping to get to go into an instanced dungeon. Problem is, you'll all be on different steps. So unless you have a dedicated group of real life friends, that all play at the same time every day, you aren't going to group with friends. You're going to have to attempt to find randoms. And then as soon as the quest step finishes, they'll degroup and wander away, because this game actively discourages grouping by not rewarding it.
Erm, not really. Because the stories in MMOs do not measure up against stories in singleplayer games.
There is an entire genre of RPGs to play online with friends. Diablo, Titan's Quest, Neverwinter.
MMORPGs were always about things on a massive scale, hundreds of people playing together forming a larger story.
So? Not all the stories in every SP game is equal either. MMO stories provide some more variety. Is there a reason game with a marvel comic book story? No, except Marvel Heroes. That is one reason to play marvel heroes.
And yes, there is entire genre of RPGs to play online with friends. So? MMO is just another to do so. You are like saying if i enjoy a story in a FPS, i cannot do so in a point-and-click adventure. That is of course false. If i enjoy one style in one genre, i can do so in another.
MMORPGs are not massive anymore. Much of the gameplay is in instances. Don't tell me you think a 10 man instance is massive.
If you're like the majority of us, looking for that MMO while hopping from current MMO's.. This isn't the one. If you're looking for a game to fill that "MMORPG" hole, this isn't the game. It's your basic run of the mill themepark MMORPG set in middle earth. Nothing breath-taking, nothing new really.. just a different setting.
Just wait for Wildstar, TESO, and EQ:N. And keep your fingers crossed.
Wrong
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
First of all I didn't try LOTRO out for a long time because I was familiar with Dungeons and Dragons Online's abyssmal F2P model with Turbine Points and thought LOTRO would be pretty much the same. Luckily that is nowhere near the case at all and TP is far easier to earn in game than it is in DDO.
LOTRO's F2P isn't nearly as bad as most people here are making it sound by any means. It's true there are a number of things you'll really want to get from the cash shop as a F2P player but earning Turbine Points in game is pretty easy. By the time I reached the end of the free content (not counting the main epic story line which is always free regardless of which areas you own or don't) I had acquired more than enough TP ingame to buy a whole quest pack to continue on as well as riding skill and a good bit of TP left over. On top of that you can easily create throw away alts and making a quick farming run to earn 140 TP in about an hour and a half for your account.
That being said I would look at LOTRO more like a Buy2Play game with a really good free trial. You can easilly play to your 30s or so through the first bunch of areas which are compmletely free and if you really enjoy the game by that point you have a few options. You can do your deeds and farm TP to buy more content or you can dish out a little bit of cash to unlock virtually the entire game. Paying a mere $14.99 for 1 month of VIP gets you 500 TP, unlimited access to the game for that month and best of all, a whole lot of unlocks that are permanent for your account even after you cancel VIP and drop down to Premium (you'll go to premium instead of full f2p after spending any cash on the game). These unlocks include removal of the credit cap, access to all traits, 5 bag slots instead of 3, all swift travel routes unlocked, and a few other very useful things for any character you log on during this time. You'll also get a permanent 3rd character slot (and 2 more for a total of 5 if you ever buy moria xpac which is in the quadpack). In addition to that you can buy the expansion quadpack for $40 to get all 4 expansions which includes pretty much ALL content for lvl 50-85. The best part is the sales LOTRO constantly has, I was actually able to pick up the quadpack and get all 4 expansions for only $20 which was one hell of a deal. With the newest expansion getting real close I wouldn't be suprised in the least if the quadpack went on sale again or just straight up dropped in price.
All in all you can pretty much play compleyely free to mid 30s or so and then you can either grind xp and do just epic questline, take a lot of time and farm TP with throwaway alts, or spend $55 for virtually full access to the game without subbing. All depends on how much you enjoy the game and can afford to spend if you want to but either way I highly recommend at least trying it out through the areas that are completely free and any beyond that you can afford to buy with earned ingame TP.
This is correct.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
Erm, not really. Because the stories in MMOs do not measure up against stories in singleplayer games.
There is an entire genre of RPGs to play online with friends. Diablo, Titan's Quest, Neverwinter.
MMORPGs were always about things on a massive scale, hundreds of people playing together forming a larger story.
So? Not all the stories in every SP game is equal either. MMO stories provide some more variety. Is there a reason game with a marvel comic book story? No, except Marvel Heroes. That is one reason to play marvel heroes.
You're relying on this excuse way too much. This is to do with the IP, not the genre.
If you ask "Would this game be better if it wasn't an MMO?" and the answer is yes? The devs fucked up somewhere.
Another genre would be better suited for SWTOR. Another genre would have been better suited for TSW.
In fact, both games started off as singleplayer games in concept. And it shows. Neither retained players. Both were changed to MMOs because the companies behind them wanted to be justified in charging a monthly fee.
Erm, not really. Because the stories in MMOs do not measure up against stories in singleplayer games.
There is an entire genre of RPGs to play online with friends. Diablo, Titan's Quest, Neverwinter.
MMORPGs were always about things on a massive scale, hundreds of people playing together forming a larger story.
So? Not all the stories in every SP game is equal either. MMO stories provide some more variety. Is there a reason game with a marvel comic book story? No, except Marvel Heroes. That is one reason to play marvel heroes.
You're relying on this excuse way too much. This is to do with the IP, not the genre.
If you ask "Would this game be better if it wasn't an MMO?" and the answer is yes? The devs fucked up somewhere.
Another genre would be better suited for SWTOR. Another genre would have been better suited for TSW.
In fact, both games started off as singleplayer games in concept. And it shows. Neither retained players. Both were changed to MMOs because the companies behind them wanted to be justified in charging a monthly fee.
So? The point is that IP and playstyle is more important, to me, than genre. If you want to call Marvel Heroes a different label, it does not change the game, or if it is fun for me.
And yes, some of these games are better as non-MMORPGs. Again .. so? Even if the dev makes an error in putting it in a different genre, it does not mean i should not play it. I do think MH is better to take out all the MMO stuff ... but no game is perfect. It is just like i think Splinter Cell Blacklist will be better if it allows for more building climbing .. but i am not going to avoid playing it just because it is not perfect.
Love it or hate it, LOTRO has a really passionate player base.
To the OP, the world is wide open to you until about level 50. Until then, you can explore all you like but questing content is gated by a paywall at about level 30. There are a number of excellent guides re how to maximize your game currency for questing to level up, and most of them recommend subscribing for 30 days to permanently acquire some benefits such as swift travel, AH access, extra bags, free riding skill, extra character slot, etc.
All players need to buy expansions in order to access the questing content, instances and raids in them. But it is possible to pay for them with game currency, or to skip content and grind on mobs if you want to wait until you are closer to the level cap to buy an expansion. You can totally play LOTRO without spending a dime as long as you are patient and persistent, and willing to grind out the game currency for what you want.
LOTRO has some of the best environmental art around and remains true to the book lore while providing a way for the player to engage with the story. It also has one of the friendliest and most generous player communities - anywhere. Good luck.
I've been away for about a year playing GW2 and just recently returned due to the soon to launch Helm's Deep. I find myself falling in love with LOTRO all over again! I am running the game on max settings with the high res client. I find the game is still looking good for a game that came out in 2007. In my opinion no other game beats the epic story you get to play in LOTRO. I envy a new player who has yet to experience it and is starting from the beginning. There is just so much story without even mentioning the other content available. I can't really speak about the f2p model since I am a lifer from the early days. One of the est investments I ever made. I have friends who play tne f2p model who regret not getting the lifetime when it it was offered.
I am a huge Tolkien fan as are my friends. If you are not a fan of Tolkien and Middle Earth this game might appear uninteresting to you I imagine. I guess I can count myself fortunate there are many Tolkien fans still playing this game.
Lore and stories are great, you really feel part of middle earth during its most wellknown time
Too bad those parts do not play nice in an MMO setting.
This would be a great game... as a singleplayer or COOP experience.
As an MMO, the world feels too phased and instanced and fractured, articicial gates and invisible walls everywhere, and grouping is discouraged at every turn.
Thats why i play games like swtor tsw, lotro and WoW... Because they have great stories, story is the most important part of an RPG, and thats still what MMORPGs are, they are RPGs to enjoy with your friends online...
people like different things in games, calling stories in mmos a fail is only your perspective....
Erm, not really. Because the stories in MMOs do not measure up against stories in singleplayer games.
There is an entire genre of RPGs to play online with friends. Diablo, Titan's Quest, Neverwinter.
MMORPGs were always about things on a massive scale, hundreds of people playing together forming a larger story.
MMOs that try to do singleplayer stories always come out worse off because
a) the combat is worse than a singleplayer/coop game, because of net code limitations
b) the story is always worse because it is padded with fetch quests and constrained by the limited mechanics of the MMO genre. Also, the result of each quest is the same, and it NEVER impacts the game world.
c) Again, NO IMPACT ON THE GAME WORLD. Since everyone shares the same world, once you exit the instance, you influence ends.
I can't say a game has "great stories" when they force me to kill 10 wolves every 2 minutes to get the next chunk of "story".
Obviously you never played any of the MMOs i described... As there are many epic quests inthere way beyound killing ten donkeys.
still you dont see that the majorrity of players likes stories in mmos, i myself need them to get imemrsed in the world and questing is a the best way to get involved in the stories and the world. I would not play an mmo withoth a long series of epic quests,
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
Lore and stories are great, you really feel part of middle earth during its most wellknown time
Too bad those parts do not play nice in an MMO setting.
This would be a great game... as a singleplayer or COOP experience.
As an MMO, the world feels too phased and instanced and fractured, articicial gates and invisible walls everywhere, and grouping is discouraged at every turn.
Thats why i play games like swtor tsw, lotro and WoW... Because they have great stories, story is the most important part of an RPG, and thats still what MMORPGs are, they are RPGs to enjoy with your friends online...
people like different things in games, calling stories in mmos a fail is only your perspective....
Erm, not really. Because the stories in MMOs do not measure up against stories in singleplayer games.
There is an entire genre of RPGs to play online with friends. Diablo, Titan's Quest, Neverwinter.
MMORPGs were always about things on a massive scale, hundreds of people playing together forming a larger story.
MMOs that try to do singleplayer stories always come out worse off because
a) the combat is worse than a singleplayer/coop game, because of net code limitations
b) the story is always worse because it is padded with fetch quests and constrained by the limited mechanics of the MMO genre. Also, the result of each quest is the same, and it NEVER impacts the game world.
c) Again, NO IMPACT ON THE GAME WORLD. Since everyone shares the same world, once you exit the instance, you influence ends.
I can't say a game has "great stories" when they force me to kill 10 wolves every 2 minutes to get the next chunk of "story".
Obviously you never played any of the MMOs i described... As there are many epic quests inthere way beyound killing ten donkeys.
still you dont see that the majorrity of players likes stories in mmos
There are plenty of epic quests, they're just all in intances and have no impact on the world. And the gameplay within said instances is very limited compared to the singleplayer games LotRO tries to emulate.
And if the majority of players liked stories in MMOs, SWTOR wouldn't have been the biggest failure in MMO history. And TSW wouldn't have failed. And AoC wouldn't have failed. Singleplayer storylines belong in singleplayer games.
Massive stories belong in MMOs. See: Asheron's Call. MMOs should be about simulating and evolving virtual world with thousands of others. Not about simulating a single scene from a movie with a bunch of bots and instances.
On the plus side it does a good job of immersing you in the story. There is a ton of content and some of the classes are interesting (although getting less so probably with the upcoming generic talent trees). Many of the graphics are also well done especially for 2007, although the toons themselves look kind of goofy unfortunately. The writing is also very good if you're willing to read through it all. I'd say LOTRO did a better job of capturing its IP than SWTOR did despite much less voice acting. [Although admittedly I'm a much bigger fan of LOTR than SW.]
On the negative side, I don't like the F2P model very much. Especially that they actually (used to?) sell stuff in the cash shop to raise your character stats. That was one thing that made me quit the game, just left a bad taste in my mouth, despite having a lifetime sub and getting it all for free myself. It also has some of the worst grinding I've seen (Don't like killing 10 wolves? try killing *500* which you have to do for your "virtues" in a few cases)
So I'd say if you like the lore and the world it is worth a playthrough. If you don't care about Middle Earth and are just looking for a F2P MMO to play, something like Rift is much better though.
And if the majority of players liked stories in MMOs, SWTOR wouldn't have been the biggest failure in MMO history. And TSW wouldn't have failed. And AoC wouldn't have failed.
I really wish players would stop using specious reasoning.
"SWToR has stylistic graphics and it didn't do well so any game that has stylistic graphics won't do well. TSW was set in the modern world and it didn't do well so any game that is set in the Modern World won't do well."
"Age of Conan has more "adult themes" and an art design that favors a more brutal sexualized world and it didn't do well so any game that has these elements won't do well."
just silly, off the cuff examples but you get the point.
Or perhaps there is the actual truth.
SWToR was enjoyed by quite a lot of players who weren't looking for SWG 2 but there wasn't much to do with the game once you got to level cap therefore players left.
TSW is more of a "horror" game with puzzles/quests that require more effort on the part of the player. I remember thinking "good for them for creating a niche game they will probably get 250k players". And they got 300k players and called it a failure. Even though the writing was on the walls that it wouldn't appeal to vast audiences. "yes" horror books and movies get big draws but horror video games don't usually get huge amounts of people.
Age of Conan had huge issues, required higher end computers, Tortage was not indicative of the rest of the game, there were parts of the game that lacked content and what content you could find was not like the "acted out storied" presentation of level 1- 20.
You've got to look at the actual issues not elements that you don't like and therefore you think everyone else doesn't like them.
I do agree with your assessment of LOTRO though as far as it being "open" when the reality is there is a lot closed.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
LOTRO is one of the truely "free" to play mmos, in that you can sacrifice immense amounts of gametime doing repetitivive tasks to never have to pay a dime to play every bit of it. But unless your too young to have a job of any sort, it's like getting paid $0.01 an hour doing a menial task, still... they at least give you the option.
Now as for gameplay, that part it kinda sucks at, at least in my opinion, it just wasn't fun. I did love the monsterplay aspect of the game, before they killed it.
To find an intelligent person in a PUG is not that rare, but to find a PUG made up of "all" intelligent people is one of the rarest phenomenons in the known universe.
Originally posted by Po_gg Grouping is still there of course, there were changes indeed to help the solo gameplay but to call it "grouping is discouraged"... it's a bit of an exaggeration
haha WHAT?
Try to swim the Brandywine, you hit an invisible wall. Try to climb a mountain, invisible wall.
Find a dungeon? "You can't enter here without the right quest!" If you find one you can enter, it's instanced.
Find a building? Most you can't enter, the ones you can, require loading screens.
Archet is phased, as are many other areas.
Want to explore? The game insta kills you if you explore certain regions, and locks others, unless you complete level 50 quests.
.... And then as soon as the quest step finishes, they'll degroup and wander away, because this game actively discourages grouping by not rewarding it.
True, I play more with friends and less with pugs, and maybe my english isn't top notch either, but to me "grouping discouraged" means that solo play is better, have more rewards, encouraged - which is clearly not the case, that's why I wrote exaggeration.
Grouping is still there, it's still fun, nothing changed on that matter, only solo play got a few more options and become easier. It's still the player's choice how s/he is playing, and if they are leaving the group, that's their decision, not the game's fault... Maybe that's just me, but I like games which are giving options and not forcing me into a playstyle. I supported IG because I believe forced grouping sucks big time. I'm still playing in groups, regardless of IG... It's only matter of choice.
To the first part, every gameworld has its borders usually with steep mountains, or rocks and waterfalls like with Bruinen on the southern part of the Trollshaws. In case of Brandywine, which is a wide and calm river, both would've been odd, so invisible wall it is, since there's no gameworld south of that.
Mountains, you can't climb the steep ones, but you can on the rest. I'm a big climber, and I agree it became restrictive during the years as Turbine closed all the routes and gaps... but it's still possible to climb most of them, just like the rooftops, etc
Instanced interiors, I wrote it earlier that I don't have a problem with those (maybe it's a matter of taste).
Archet tutorial is before the game's present time, that's why it's phased, just like the session plays. A few years ago dwarves and elves started the game with Skorgrím's death, which was hundreds of years before the game's present, -surprise- that was phased as well
Insta kill, both had backed with the story and was placed with a reason. There's a whole storyline to find a solution and counter it in Angmar's case (and the Lórien one is removed now, that needed only rep grind)
LOTRO has some of the best environmental art around and remains true to the book lore while providing a way for the player to engage with the story.
Oh yes, true to the book lore... like with hobbits running all over the place, tanking Balrogs, elves riding through Bree on giant goats to have a drink at the Prancing Pony, a class named "Runekeeper" which farts more lightning than an angry Sith Lord, and to finish this nice picture, a group of random nobodies entering Orthanc and defeating Saruman in his own home.
Awesome respect of the book lore indeed.
It also has one of the friendliest and most generous player communities - anywhere. Good luck.
As long as you praise every aspect of their game, they are friendly indeed... they become pretty aggressive if you dare to point out a problem, like lag, the "pay to win" mechanism for legendaries, or even complain about the many lore breaches Turbine made. They are friendly as long as you agree with them that their game is perfect.
Well, first I'd like to say thanks for all of your replies. And I think I should address a few things.
The reason I'm playing LotRO, is because I have a, for the lack of better words, shitty computer. I can't play most high graphic MMO's and I don't really have much memory in my HDD.
But, if any of you have a suggestion for an MMO I should be able to play if I can play LotRO, by all means, go ahead. I just want a good MMO thats fun and I can play often.
Comments
Too bad those parts do not play nice in an MMO setting.
This would be a great game... as a singleplayer or COOP experience.
As an MMO, the world feels too phased and instanced and fractured, articicial gates and invisible walls everywhere, and grouping is discouraged at every turn.
Thats why i play games like swtor tsw, lotro and WoW... Because they have great stories, story is the most important part of an RPG, and thats still what MMORPGs are, they are RPGs to enjoy with your friends online...
people like different things in games, calling stories in mmos a fail is only your perspective....
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
I admit I'm not quite understand what you mean with "too phased and instanced and fractured"... LotRO has one of most open worlds in mmo's - especially with the last few year's "instance everything" trend - it's definitely on par with its fellow games from that time. You don't see any loading screens in the whole SoA region (except entering in a building of course), you can easily ride up and down for an hour without any border, right until the Gates of Moria.
Grouping is still there of course, there were changes indeed to help the solo gameplay but to call it "grouping is discouraged"... it's a bit of an exaggeration
Every single building you can enter (when you can enter at all) has a loading screen indeed, even the smallest farm house. The interiors also never fit the outside design of the building.That definitely contributes to that amazing "open world" feeling this game provides...
(end of sarcasm)
PS: SoA isn't seamless either. You have a loading screen between The Shire and Ered Luin.
My computer is better than yours.
PS. There isn't any loading screen, just walk / ride up to Needlehole, follow the Water, through the bridge and you'll find yourself near Falathorn in Ered Luin. (the elven homesteads, next to Duillond)
I have only just gotten into playing MMO's Again after not playing any for months. Lotro i logged into and let me tell you it's one hell of a bore. It's sparse with quest compared to wow. You cant just begin to skip quest otherwise you will never lvl up. Quest variety is very narrow, not unlike wow where you got so many more different types of quests.
Imo the toons in lotro looks deform and uninspiring. The landscapes looks bland, just look at the ground and sprite like trees from distance. When you get to Eregion the graphics start to look better. Also it starts to feel like a heavy grind doing the same 5 differetn quest every lvl from 35+.
Whatever you do dont buy quest packs, go for the subscribtion. It is much cheaper somehow with a sub if you plan to play it for long unless you keep rerolling at lvl 40. Also I mentioned how few quests there is so if you buy one quest pack it doesnt leave you with much freedom.
The combat isnt that great but better than let say SWTOR. With guardian class you spam 10 or more abilities a mob, not doing much dmg and with hunter its just the same 4 shots over and over. Lore master is more fun but the pet is a horrible tanker, you have to time stuns and stuff while grinding. Runemasters class I found annoying while warden was more fun. I also played captain to 27 and that was more of a success.
For a first time play its is fun enough but it gets very boring the second time since the path is very linear not unlike wow where you have so many areas to explore and lvl up in. Mind you Im not playing WoW anymore but that game does so many Things right and its untedious compared to Lotro.
So just play up to L35 and decide. That is already a lot of free fun.
If you're like the majority of us, looking for that MMO while hopping from current MMO's.. This isn't the one. If you're looking for a game to fill that "MMORPG" hole, this isn't the game. It's your basic run of the mill themepark MMORPG set in middle earth. Nothing breath-taking, nothing new really.. just a different setting.
Just wait for Wildstar, TESO, and EQ:N. And keep your fingers crossed.
Erm, not really. Because the stories in MMOs do not measure up against stories in singleplayer games.
There is an entire genre of RPGs to play online with friends. Diablo, Titan's Quest, Neverwinter.
MMORPGs were always about things on a massive scale, hundreds of people playing together forming a larger story.
MMOs that try to do singleplayer stories always come out worse off because
a) the combat is worse than a singleplayer/coop game, because of net code limitations
b) the story is always worse because it is padded with fetch quests and constrained by the limited mechanics of the MMO genre. Also, the result of each quest is the same, and it NEVER impacts the game world.
c) Again, NO IMPACT ON THE GAME WORLD. Since everyone shares the same world, once you exit the instance, you influence ends.
I can't say a game has "great stories" when they force me to kill 10 wolves every 2 minutes to get the next chunk of "story".
haha WHAT?
Try to swim the Brandywine, you hit an invisible wall. Try to climb a mountain, invisible wall.
Find a dungeon? "You can't enter here without the right quest!" If you find one you can enter, it's instanced.
Find a building? Most you can't enter, the ones you can, require loading screens.
Archet is phased, as are many other areas.
Want to explore? The game insta kills you if you explore certain regions, and locks others, unless you complete level 50 quests.
If you think this is an open game, you must not have played many MMOs.
MMOs in the 90s and early 00s were a thousand times more open than LotRO. It's one of the least open MMOs I've ever played. Hell, some MMOs that came out around the same time, like Vanguard, didn't have a single loading screen. No invisible walls. See a mountain? Climb to it. See a dungeon? Walk right in no loading at all.
And it discourages grouping in a big way. Want to group with friends? Sure! Well what can you do together? Well you can mindlessly kill monsters... except XP is so nill from that that it isn't a viable way to play. So you have to quest.
You all have different qualifications for different quests. You can either grab a bunch of mindless filler fetch quests and be bored, or do the long tedious quest chains hoping to get to go into an instanced dungeon. Problem is, you'll all be on different steps. So unless you have a dedicated group of real life friends, that all play at the same time every day, you aren't going to group with friends. You're going to have to attempt to find randoms. And then as soon as the quest step finishes, they'll degroup and wander away, because this game actively discourages grouping by not rewarding it.
So? Not all the stories in every SP game is equal either. MMO stories provide some more variety. Is there a reason game with a marvel comic book story? No, except Marvel Heroes. That is one reason to play marvel heroes.
And yes, there is entire genre of RPGs to play online with friends. So? MMO is just another to do so. You are like saying if i enjoy a story in a FPS, i cannot do so in a point-and-click adventure. That is of course false. If i enjoy one style in one genre, i can do so in another.
MMORPGs are not massive anymore. Much of the gameplay is in instances. Don't tell me you think a 10 man instance is massive.
Wrong
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
This is correct.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
You're relying on this excuse way too much. This is to do with the IP, not the genre.
If you ask "Would this game be better if it wasn't an MMO?" and the answer is yes? The devs fucked up somewhere.
Another genre would be better suited for SWTOR. Another genre would have been better suited for TSW.
In fact, both games started off as singleplayer games in concept. And it shows. Neither retained players. Both were changed to MMOs because the companies behind them wanted to be justified in charging a monthly fee.
So? The point is that IP and playstyle is more important, to me, than genre. If you want to call Marvel Heroes a different label, it does not change the game, or if it is fun for me.
And yes, some of these games are better as non-MMORPGs. Again .. so? Even if the dev makes an error in putting it in a different genre, it does not mean i should not play it. I do think MH is better to take out all the MMO stuff ... but no game is perfect. It is just like i think Splinter Cell Blacklist will be better if it allows for more building climbing .. but i am not going to avoid playing it just because it is not perfect.
Love it or hate it, LOTRO has a really passionate player base.
To the OP, the world is wide open to you until about level 50. Until then, you can explore all you like but questing content is gated by a paywall at about level 30. There are a number of excellent guides re how to maximize your game currency for questing to level up, and most of them recommend subscribing for 30 days to permanently acquire some benefits such as swift travel, AH access, extra bags, free riding skill, extra character slot, etc.
All players need to buy expansions in order to access the questing content, instances and raids in them. But it is possible to pay for them with game currency, or to skip content and grind on mobs if you want to wait until you are closer to the level cap to buy an expansion. You can totally play LOTRO without spending a dime as long as you are patient and persistent, and willing to grind out the game currency for what you want.
LOTRO has some of the best environmental art around and remains true to the book lore while providing a way for the player to engage with the story. It also has one of the friendliest and most generous player communities - anywhere. Good luck.
I've been away for about a year playing GW2 and just recently returned due to the soon to launch Helm's Deep. I find myself falling in love with LOTRO all over again! I am running the game on max settings with the high res client. I find the game is still looking good for a game that came out in 2007. In my opinion no other game beats the epic story you get to play in LOTRO. I envy a new player who has yet to experience it and is starting from the beginning. There is just so much story without even mentioning the other content available. I can't really speak about the f2p model since I am a lifer from the early days. One of the est investments I ever made. I have friends who play tne f2p model who regret not getting the lifetime when it it was offered.
I am a huge Tolkien fan as are my friends. If you are not a fan of Tolkien and Middle Earth this game might appear uninteresting to you I imagine. I guess I can count myself fortunate there are many Tolkien fans still playing this game.
Obviously you never played any of the MMOs i described... As there are many epic quests inthere way beyound killing ten donkeys.
still you dont see that the majorrity of players likes stories in mmos, i myself need them to get imemrsed in the world and questing is a the best way to get involved in the stories and the world. I would not play an mmo withoth a long series of epic quests,
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
There are plenty of epic quests, they're just all in intances and have no impact on the world. And the gameplay within said instances is very limited compared to the singleplayer games LotRO tries to emulate.
And if the majority of players liked stories in MMOs, SWTOR wouldn't have been the biggest failure in MMO history. And TSW wouldn't have failed. And AoC wouldn't have failed. Singleplayer storylines belong in singleplayer games.
Massive stories belong in MMOs. See: Asheron's Call. MMOs should be about simulating and evolving virtual world with thousands of others. Not about simulating a single scene from a movie with a bunch of bots and instances.
On the plus side it does a good job of immersing you in the story. There is a ton of content and some of the classes are interesting (although getting less so probably with the upcoming generic talent trees). Many of the graphics are also well done especially for 2007, although the toons themselves look kind of goofy unfortunately. The writing is also very good if you're willing to read through it all. I'd say LOTRO did a better job of capturing its IP than SWTOR did despite much less voice acting. [Although admittedly I'm a much bigger fan of LOTR than SW.]
On the negative side, I don't like the F2P model very much. Especially that they actually (used to?) sell stuff in the cash shop to raise your character stats. That was one thing that made me quit the game, just left a bad taste in my mouth, despite having a lifetime sub and getting it all for free myself. It also has some of the worst grinding I've seen (Don't like killing 10 wolves? try killing *500* which you have to do for your "virtues" in a few cases)
So I'd say if you like the lore and the world it is worth a playthrough. If you don't care about Middle Earth and are just looking for a F2P MMO to play, something like Rift is much better though.
I really wish players would stop using specious reasoning.
"SWToR has stylistic graphics and it didn't do well so any game that has stylistic graphics won't do well. TSW was set in the modern world and it didn't do well so any game that is set in the Modern World won't do well."
"Age of Conan has more "adult themes" and an art design that favors a more brutal sexualized world and it didn't do well so any game that has these elements won't do well."
just silly, off the cuff examples but you get the point.
Or perhaps there is the actual truth.
SWToR was enjoyed by quite a lot of players who weren't looking for SWG 2 but there wasn't much to do with the game once you got to level cap therefore players left.
TSW is more of a "horror" game with puzzles/quests that require more effort on the part of the player. I remember thinking "good for them for creating a niche game they will probably get 250k players". And they got 300k players and called it a failure. Even though the writing was on the walls that it wouldn't appeal to vast audiences. "yes" horror books and movies get big draws but horror video games don't usually get huge amounts of people.
Age of Conan had huge issues, required higher end computers, Tortage was not indicative of the rest of the game, there were parts of the game that lacked content and what content you could find was not like the "acted out storied" presentation of level 1- 20.
You've got to look at the actual issues not elements that you don't like and therefore you think everyone else doesn't like them.
I do agree with your assessment of LOTRO though as far as it being "open" when the reality is there is a lot closed.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
LOTRO is one of the truely "free" to play mmos, in that you can sacrifice immense amounts of gametime doing repetitivive tasks to never have to pay a dime to play every bit of it. But unless your too young to have a job of any sort, it's like getting paid $0.01 an hour doing a menial task, still... they at least give you the option.
Now as for gameplay, that part it kinda sucks at, at least in my opinion, it just wasn't fun. I did love the monsterplay aspect of the game, before they killed it.
To find an intelligent person in a PUG is not that rare, but to find a PUG made up of "all" intelligent people is one of the rarest phenomenons in the known universe.
True, I play more with friends and less with pugs, and maybe my english isn't top notch either, but to me "grouping discouraged" means that solo play is better, have more rewards, encouraged - which is clearly not the case, that's why I wrote exaggeration.
Grouping is still there, it's still fun, nothing changed on that matter, only solo play got a few more options and become easier. It's still the player's choice how s/he is playing, and if they are leaving the group, that's their decision, not the game's fault... Maybe that's just me, but I like games which are giving options and not forcing me into a playstyle. I supported IG because I believe forced grouping sucks big time. I'm still playing in groups, regardless of IG... It's only matter of choice.
To the first part, every gameworld has its borders
usually with steep mountains, or rocks and waterfalls like with Bruinen on the southern part of the Trollshaws. In case of Brandywine, which is a wide and calm river, both would've been odd, so invisible wall it is, since there's no gameworld south of that.
Mountains, you can't climb the steep ones, but you can on the rest. I'm a big climber, and I agree it became restrictive during the years as Turbine closed all the routes and gaps... but it's still possible to climb most of them, just like the rooftops, etc
Instanced interiors, I wrote it earlier that I don't have a problem with those (maybe it's a matter of taste).
Archet tutorial is before the game's present time, that's why it's phased, just like the session plays. A few years ago dwarves and elves started the game with Skorgrím's death, which was hundreds of years before the game's present, -surprise- that was phased as well
Insta kill, both had backed with the story and was placed with a reason. There's a whole storyline to find a solution and counter it in Angmar's case (and the Lórien one is removed now, that needed only rep grind)
Edit: and I agree, Vanguard is more open.
Oh yes, true to the book lore... like with hobbits running all over the place, tanking Balrogs, elves riding through Bree on giant goats to have a drink at the Prancing Pony, a class named "Runekeeper" which farts more lightning than an angry Sith Lord, and to finish this nice picture, a group of random nobodies entering Orthanc and defeating Saruman in his own home.
Awesome respect of the book lore indeed.
As long as you praise every aspect of their game, they are friendly indeed... they become pretty aggressive if you dare to point out a problem, like lag, the "pay to win" mechanism for legendaries, or even complain about the many lore breaches Turbine made. They are friendly as long as you agree with them that their game is perfect.My computer is better than yours.
Well, first I'd like to say thanks for all of your replies. And I think I should address a few things.
The reason I'm playing LotRO, is because I have a, for the lack of better words, shitty computer. I can't play most high graphic MMO's and I don't really have much memory in my HDD.
But, if any of you have a suggestion for an MMO I should be able to play if I can play LotRO, by all means, go ahead. I just want a good MMO thats fun and I can play often.