The problem about the voting process is that a lot of people (not everyone) who vote don't wanna give the game they are playing a 6-7-8-9 score cause then they would be telling themselves their game has flaws and letting other potential games know this. People want their game to look like gold and get as many subs in so the game does better and improves and adds content faster. Anyways thats my 2 gil.
Why isn't the MMO with most subscribers way above the others? Because your hypothesis is wrong.
The chart is completely useless and the main reason is that what you say just isn't close to reality at all. DAoC has a fairly high rating and yet not many play it and especially in europe the servers are vacant. Why would you NOT play the MMO you think rocks... that is just beyond reason, as is using the chart for anything useful related to talking about the quality of the games.
It may or may not be a pointer for developers, but you would háve to consider who is voting, how often and why. It's a minority of the MMO population of the world that votes on that chart.
exactly, its a minority that votes, and I never said that the game with the most subs has the highest ratings. Please reread my statement, all I mentioned was that people don't like to admit that their new favorite game has flaws..
In any case, I believe in and all votes should have a 100-200 word minimum review to go with it to avoid the 0-10 givers, and also the votes should ahve to be screened firts before being counted. The fact that I can make countless accounts, write ten meaningless posts and sway the results makes no sense.
If someone lacks social skills to the point they create 10 accts to vote multiple times on a video game, theres some very deep seeded issues within that individual and I would A) stay away from them and let them vote 10 times. obviously that game means a great deal to them.
Your saying this like you think there is onyl a handful of multi-account users that justcreate them for the sake of voting. There is quite a few people who do this, and the results make the vote board very negative.
//"MMORPG voters don't know their ass from their elbow when it comes to what makes a good MMO."//
That's the most intelligent observation I've seen on these boards, ever. I come to these forums only because it makes me feel like a god or something. I truly feel like a man of great stature walking among lesser souls.
LOTRO is uninspired and deeply ordinary - yet there it is at the top of the ratings! Discuss.
What MMORP members do know is Forum Trolls.
Just in case it didnt cross your mind, creating a thread to insult everyone on this site, and then telling them that they are all wrong, is nothing but flamebait... and classic Trolling. That leaves nothing to discuss.
I gave my review to Lotro a few weeks ago. Personally I didn't like it, so I gave it low "fun" and "value" scores. But, as I was asked to review 8 diffirent aspects of the game and rate them separately, I had to be honest and give good scores to graphic, sound, performance, community, customer service, and role-playing, all of wich I do think are good and well done in Lotro.
I won't be playing a game, and I disliked it. But as only 2 of 8 aspects really had anything to do with how fun the game is, I ended up giving Lotro good overall score against my will.
I think mmorpg.com should add another option to those ratings, "overall score". Until that is done, I consider mmorpg.com's overall ratings to be complete crap.
I gave my review to Lotro a few weeks ago. Personally I didn't like it, so I gave it low "fun" and "value" scores. But, as I was asked to review 8 diffirent aspects of the game and rate them separately, I had to be honest and give good scores to graphic, sound, performance, community, customer service, and role-playing, all of wich I do think are good and well done in Lotro.
I won't be playing a game, and I disliked it. But as only 2 of 8 aspects really had anything to do with how fun the game is, I ended up giving Lotro good overall score against my will.
Against your will? If you gave it an overall good score and didn't want it to have one, why did you even vote?
I think mmorpg.com should add another option to those ratings, "overall score". Until that is done, I consider mmorpg.com's overall ratings to be complete crap.
That, I agree on.
_________________________________ JonMichael
Currently: AION, an MMO Beta under NDA Played: WAR, LOTRO, Hellgate: London, CoX, GW, SotNW, DAOC, EQ2, SWG, WoW, AO, Horizons, Second Life, There, TSO Beta'd: There, Second Life, EQ2, DAOC:LotM, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, Gods and Heroes, Hellgate: London, Requiem:Bloodymare, AoC, WAR, DDO, Fallen Earth
The problem about the voting process is that a lot of people (not everyone) who vote don't wanna give the game they are playing a 6-7-8-9 score cause then they would be telling themselves their game has flaws and letting other potential games know this. People want their game to look like gold and get as many subs in so the game does better and improves and adds content faster. Also, as far as the ratings go, the game has a high score simply because it launched well, and it was compared to some not to successful mmo launches. The problem here is that you simply cant vote based on your feelings on the past trend, but this is not something that will ever change. The game is very fun for some, very bland to others, but in all it has no real "impact" or "revolutionary ideas" on the mmo industry, and thats a reason why a lot of people are upset, is because this game didnt bring a whole lot to the table and was judge based on other mmos. Anyways thats my 2 gil.
The good thing is, Turbine never promised it to be 3rd generation, groundbreaking or revolutionary. What they did deliver is a solid, fun and immersive MMO that is fun to play and being enjoyed by a very large community.
The only way people can be upset is that they were expecting something that wasn't promised in the first place.
Your right here.
The problem with LotR is exactly what it *didnt* promise from the start... As I have discussed elsewhere here, it's willful underachieving is bewildering to me. The fact that then people crow about it as a plus point is doubly bewildering to me....
I guess the public gets what the public deserves. Oh, and btw, I really don't take the size of a community as an indicator for a good game. Look around you... the most popular of anything is usually (with notable exceptions) lowest common denominator porridgy dumbed down non thinking fast food for unimaginative sheep. I let you figure out how that appplies here.
Better to reach for the stars and fail then never to even try.
The problem about the voting process is that a lot of people (not everyone) who vote don't wanna give the game they are playing a 6-7-8-9 score cause then they would be telling themselves their game has flaws and letting other potential games know this. People want their game to look like gold and get as many subs in so the game does better and improves and adds content faster. Also, as far as the ratings go, the game has a high score simply because it launched well, and it was compared to some not to successful mmo launches. The problem here is that you simply cant vote based on your feelings on the past trend, but this is not something that will ever change. The game is very fun for some, very bland to others, but in all it has no real "impact" or "revolutionary ideas" on the mmo industry, and thats a reason why a lot of people are upset, is because this game didnt bring a whole lot to the table and was judge based on other mmos. Anyways thats my 2 gil.
The good thing is, Turbine never promised it to be 3rd generation, groundbreaking or revolutionary. What they did deliver is a solid, fun and immersive MMO that is fun to play and being enjoyed by a very large community.
The only way people can be upset is that they were expecting something that wasn't promised in the first place.
Your right here.
The problem with LotR is exactly what it *didnt* promise from the start... As I have discussed elsewhere here, it's willful underachieving is bewildering to me. The fact that then people crow about it as a plus point is doubly bewildering to me....
I guess the public gets what the public deserves. Oh, and btw, I really don't take the size of a community as an indicator for a good game. Look around you... the most popular of anything is usually (with notable exceptions) lowest common denominator porridgy dumbed down non thinking fast food for unimaginative sheep. I let you figure out how that appplies here.
Better to reach for the stars and fail then never to even try.
Underacheiving? Why must a game be groundbreaking, revolutionary and 3rd generation to achieve?
Let's look at the MMO market in the last year. Any game that considered itself to be revolutionary or groundbreaking has failed miserably.
I'd much rather play a stable, enjoyable, immersive game than pay to beta test a buggy game that can't fulfill the promises the company made to it's prospective customers.
That's underachieving.
It's fine to reach for the stars, but at least have an idea of how to get there, first... or else you're just grabbing at thin air.
_________________________________ JonMichael
Currently: AION, an MMO Beta under NDA Played: WAR, LOTRO, Hellgate: London, CoX, GW, SotNW, DAOC, EQ2, SWG, WoW, AO, Horizons, Second Life, There, TSO Beta'd: There, Second Life, EQ2, DAOC:LotM, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, Gods and Heroes, Hellgate: London, Requiem:Bloodymare, AoC, WAR, DDO, Fallen Earth
The problem about the voting process is that a lot of people (not everyone) who vote don't wanna give the game they are playing a 6-7-8-9 score cause then they would be telling themselves their game has flaws and letting other potential games know this. People want their game to look like gold and get as many subs in so the game does better and improves and adds content faster. Also, as far as the ratings go, the game has a high score simply because it launched well, and it was compared to some not to successful mmo launches. The problem here is that you simply cant vote based on your feelings on the past trend, but this is not something that will ever change. The game is very fun for some, very bland to others, but in all it has no real "impact" or "revolutionary ideas" on the mmo industry, and thats a reason why a lot of people are upset, is because this game didnt bring a whole lot to the table and was judge based on other mmos. Anyways thats my 2 gil.
The good thing is, Turbine never promised it to be 3rd generation, groundbreaking or revolutionary. What they did deliver is a solid, fun and immersive MMO that is fun to play and being enjoyed by a very large community.
The only way people can be upset is that they were expecting something that wasn't promised in the first place.
Your right here.
The problem with LotR is exactly what it *didnt* promise from the start... As I have discussed elsewhere here, it's willful underachieving is bewildering to me. The fact that then people crow about it as a plus point is doubly bewildering to me....
I guess the public gets what the public deserves. Oh, and btw, I really don't take the size of a community as an indicator for a good game. Look around you... the most popular of anything is usually (with notable exceptions) lowest common denominator porridgy dumbed down non thinking fast food for unimaginative sheep. I let you figure out how that appplies here.
Better to reach for the stars and fail then never to even try.
Underacheiving? Why must a game be groundbreaking, revolutionary and 3rd generation to achieve?
Let's look at the MMO market in the last year. Any game that considered itself to be revolutionary or groundbreaking has failed miserably.
I'd much rather play a stable, enjoyable, immersive game than pay to beta test a buggy game that can't fulfill the promises the company made to it's prospective customers.
That's underachieving.
It's fine to reach for the stars, but at least have an idea of how to get there, first... or else you're just grabbing at thin air.
Maybe so
But yeah, to enthuse me and inspire me, a game has to be made by people who at least seem to have been enthusiastic and inspired. Nothing, but nothing, in LotR makes me feel this, but I stress this is a personal opinion. I probably just demand more then most of games, which may not be fair to games such as this title that are aiming themselves squarely at the middle road.
I would agree totally on the last year or so of MMORPGs... they have been pretty crappy. I need something to come along and break the dry streak before I give up on this genre altogether. Of course all games should be stable, thats a given, and I am not defending those that are not, but should devs stop taking risks to ensure it? I am not so sure. 'Solid' and 'stable' simply arnt enough for me on their own, and as far as I can see LotR offers very little else over most MMORPGs out there. But thats just me, and I have discussed that at length elsewhere.
I believe a game can be all both exciting, innovative, *and* stable, and I am hoping that AoC can prove that to the unbelievers.
I don't include an abstract such as 'fun' in this myself because it's such an abstract... The things that most people find fun in this life boggle me at best
LOTRO is uninspired and deeply ordinary - yet there it is at the top of the ratings! Discuss.
Discuss what Vonbek?
You don't give us any reason's as to why your statement is anything but a personal opinion on the game. Maybe if you back the statement up with some reason we'll have a topic to discuss.
i'm sure it's fun and people enjoy it, good for you. I just love PVP too much, and LOTRO monster player aint my idea of fun PVP.
/nod.... I understand, you like to gank.... you're right..none of that in LotRO.
As to ratings, I haven't voted yet, because I think I should get a bit further into the game than level 22 to make a truely informed rating of the game......
Even though I like it... I won't be dropping all 9's / 10's on the game.... its not perfect....but it is pretty fun at times....
I like to gank? How did you figure that one out boss? Magic?
I play on a PVE server because I can't STAND gankers. I refer to consensual world PVP, Arena competition, and the battleground system as my love for PVP. I am totally against full, open PVP unless it's done on a completely level playing field...
So no, I don't gank. I like to compete. If you actually read my post, I said "i'm sure it's fun and people enjoy it, good for you." That wasn't sacrasm, if you enjoy it, play it. You'd be an idiot to play something you don't enjoy, or not play something you do enjoy.
I am no idiot. I play WoW for raiding and PVP because I enjoy raiding and PVP. I don't play LOTRO because I wasn't impressed with it during beta. I admit, I didn't play up to a high level or anything, but it simply wasn't what I was looking for.
Back to the ORIGINAL topic here, why it has such a high rating, is because it probably is a good game. The OP is just as much of an arrogant "I know everything and my opinion is more correct then yours is" A-HOLE as you are
The problem about the voting process is that a lot of people (not everyone) who vote don't wanna give the game they are playing a 6-7-8-9 score cause then they would be telling themselves their game has flaws and letting other potential games know this. People want their game to look like gold and get as many subs in so the game does better and improves and adds content faster. Also, as far as the ratings go, the game has a high score simply because it launched well, and it was compared to some not to successful mmo launches. The problem here is that you simply cant vote based on your feelings on the past trend, but this is not something that will ever change. The game is very fun for some, very bland to others, but in all it has no real "impact" or "revolutionary ideas" on the mmo industry, and thats a reason why a lot of people are upset, is because this game didnt bring a whole lot to the table and was judge based on other mmos. Anyways thats my 2 gil.
The good thing is, Turbine never promised it to be 3rd generation, groundbreaking or revolutionary. What they did deliver is a solid, fun and immersive MMO that is fun to play and being enjoyed by a very large community.
The only way people can be upset is that they were expecting something that wasn't promised in the first place.
Your right here.
The problem with LotR is exactly what it *didnt* promise from the start... As I have discussed elsewhere here, it's willful underachieving is bewildering to me. The fact that then people crow about it as a plus point is doubly bewildering to me....
This statement is bewildering to me. Willful underachieving? As I have stated in other posts, Turbine has an extremely solid base from which to add to. Because LOTRO is not a "Next Generation" game, (Exactly what that is, is to be determined as those companies that have attempted it have failed miserably) Turbine is guilty of willful underachieving? I'm more inclined to think they used a proven template and added personal touches worth crowing about. Graphics that are well above the rest, PvM (Which what little I have done seems very cool), player music system, a game accessable to those not inclined to buy a new computer every year...etc. Again, a good/fun solid base that can/will be fine tuned and added to.
I guess the public gets what the public deserves. Oh, and btw, I really don't take the size of a community as an indicator for a good game. Look around you... the most popular of anything is usually (with notable exceptions) lowest common denominator porridgy dumbed down non thinking fast food for unimaginative sheep. I let you figure out how that appplies here.
I wish the public got what they deserved...typically they get what they pay for. In the world of MMORPGs, more often than not, getting what you pay for is a stretch. Apparently....wtf....*cough...*cough....BAAAAHAAAH! Hardly, but if it works and I'm having fun....I'll pay for it.
Better to reach for the stars and fail then never to even try.
A large company with tens of millions of dollars and multiple years at stake cannot adopt this logic.
Originally posted by JonMichaelOriginally posted by Gangster-Man
Maybe so
But yeah, to enthuse me and inspire me, a game has to be made by people who at least seem to have been enthusiastic and inspired. Nothing, but nothing, in LotR makes me feel this, but I stress this is a personal opinion. I probably just demand more then most of games, which may not be fair to games such as this title that are aiming themselves squarely at the middle road.
I would agree totally on the last year or so of MMORPGs... they have been pretty crappy. I need something to come along and break the dry streak before I give up on this genre altogether. Of course all games should be stable, thats a given, and I am not defending those that are not, but should devs stop taking risks to ensure it? I am not so sure. 'Solid' and 'stable' simply arnt enough for me on their own, and as far as I can see LotR offers very little else over most MMORPGs out there. But thats just me, and I have discussed that at length elsewhere.
I believe a game can be all both exciting, innovative, *and* stable, and I am hoping that AoC can prove that to the unbelievers.
I don't include an abstract such as 'fun' in this myself because it's such an abstract... The things that most people find fun in this life boggle me at best
I understand exactly how you feel, most do I believe. SWG was the game for me...so completely and totally it still irks me. There were a few changes in the game and it became....not fun anymore (For me). Since then I have jumped around wasting hundreds of dollars trying to find that replacement game. For whatever reason LotRO seems to bring out those "havin fun" feelings again.
I truely hope AOC doesn't turn into another let down for people. Way to much of that going around. Best of luck in your search........
The problem with LotR is exactly what it *didnt* promise from the start... As I have discussed elsewhere here, it's willful underachieving is bewildering to me. The fact that then people crow about it as a plus point is doubly bewildering to me....
I guess the public gets what the public deserves. Oh, and btw, I really don't take the size of a community as an indicator for a good game. Look around you... the most popular of anything is usually (with notable exceptions) lowest common denominator porridgy dumbed down non thinking fast food for unimaginative sheep. I let you figure out how that appplies here.
Better to reach for the stars and fail then never to even try.
Why is underachieving a bad thing? Why does every new product that comes out have to be groundbreaking and revolutionary? I honestly don't get it. I understand that sometimes its a good thing but not all the time. I much rather buy a product that has been perfected than one that's new and still need to work out all the bugs.
I am not asking for groundbreaking and revolutionary, I am asking for inspired and imaginative. They arnt the same thing, though at times they can be of course
As I have said before, stability is good, but when it becomes the only recommendation for a game, that isnt a good sign for that game.
I know many people (well about 5-10% of the population) are innovators and will run out and buy the next big thing and desire to be the first person on their block with it. These are the people who pay double for an item and wait in line all night to get it. These people are a marketers dream and companies make a huge profot off of them. How much was the PS2 when it first came out? And how much is it now?
I am not this necessarily, though of course I have been at times, as I am sure most have. It is never done with a desire to be the first on my block, as you put it, but because something genuinly excites me and makes me not wanna wait to play/ use it.
As far as MMOs go, I think its best at this point in time to not be ground breaking or revolutionary. Why? Because you have got to compete with WOW. Now I am not calling WOW the best game out there or anything like that, but in terms of success (and yes in the business world profit IS success, therefore paying customers=success), WOW is the most successful MMO in history. It is the big kid on the block andany game that comes out must compete with it. Therefore, you model your game plan on it.
You see, I think this is where we just see it differently, for better or worse.... The point is you *don't* have to compete with WoW. Hell... why would you even try to do that? It's insane, and right now the best you can do is hope to skim some of that game's subs.This kind of thinking can only force us down a design ghetto where dumbed down mediocre middle of the road offerings are the future.
Each game released sets it's own success conditions. All a dev has to do is be brave enough to stay true to them. This is called integrity, and belive it or not it isnt dead out there in the wilderness.
Let me explain.
Please do
You want subscribers for their profit.
Yeah?
Who cares how you get it as long as you get it.
Erm... any dev with the enthusiasm for their concept, love of the genre and it's potentiol, and the integrity to sustain it all?
So you release a game that markets itself to a lot of players.
ok, I am with you so far....
What is the most common MMO player today? Casual. You make the game more simple than you difficult (weak death penalty, easy to understand and explore, etc...). Will a small segment of the population scream at it being so easy and not hardcore? Sure but who cares. They will leave when they get bored and they will be the first to leave because they get bored first. You do not design a game to please them.
Erm... how about designing a game that appeals to these players that you label 'hardcore' (a term I don't agree with btw... just because a player demands depth, challenge, and a learning curve dosent make them 'hardcore'... a casual player can demand all this and still be casual). EQ1 is still around after 8 years, UO more, based on appealing to these types. I bet both have been in profits for a long long time. Dosent seem like a bad buisness plan to me...?
I hope you can understand that I am hinting at Turbine's game plan. They make the game casual. They make the game something we have seen before instead of trying new and revolutionizing ideas. They make the game as much like the Tolkien universe as possible. There ya go! You have a game. Is it revolutionary? Nope. But you don't care, you want to make a profit and if it sells and you have subscribers, then it is a success. I am not critizing Turbine at all because they did an amazing job with the game but that's the business world.
Oh, trust me, I get the game plan, and that's a massive part of my issues with this game. Anything created as part of a game plan to suck money out of my wallet first and out of a creative love second is never gonna win me over. LotR is such a cynical and exploitive game it chills me, and it shows in every crack and cranny of it's world to my eyes.
Buy into that if you wanna, who am I to say whats right for you, but it isnt for me.
Look at the chaos that SIgil and Vanguard are in. They "reached for the stars" and they failed. Now its costing them money and they are in crisis mode. So from a business point of view, what would you prefer? A bland success cash cow or a revolutionary game that isn't paying the bills?
How about a inspired, imaginative cash cow that pays the bills? Really... you ask for too little and you deserve better, even if you don't think so.
I am not going to debate a "good game" because good is a subjective term. Good is defined by your position in life. Turbine's and Blizzard's definition of good is one that makes money. Your defintion of good is one that is revolutionary. My defintion of good is one that my computer can run and I have fun with. See? Good is subjective. Success and profit are objective and that is why LOTRO is not revolutionary.
I agree with not debating the meaning of 'good'
No, again, I have never asked for revolutionary... I have only asked for imaginitive, inspired, and challenging.
Let me put it this way: What is still the most played and one of the best selling RTS games on the market? That's right - Age of Empires 2.
You are way too obessed with sales figures imho... by your reckoning all restaurants should be McDonalds, all bands should sound like Coldplay, and all movies be Titanic...
The expansion came out in 1999! 8 years ago! But is still the big kid. Why? Because it improved on the genre and perfected what it had. Revolutionary RTS games have come and gone since but its still around and is still big. That is why not always being revolutionary or groundbreaking is a good thing.
I won't repeat myself again here
And I promise you, none of the MMO's scheduled to come out in the near future will be revolutionary either. Age of Conan, Warhammer Online, Star Trek Online - they will all base themselves off of the model that EQ set forth and be similar. They may have revolutionary ideas on a limited scale but for the most part they will be the same thing we have seen before. Why? Because it is safe business practice and in the end, for companies that want to make a profit, safe is better.
Overall, you arguments have been based on a misunderstanding of what I am asking, so I will leave these final notes;
I am not asking for a revolution, I am asking for imagination, challenge, and integrity.
I believe you can have all these and be a mainstream hit.
I believe anything that dosent offer you these and is cynically designed to drain the mainstream off it's money by basing itself around a popular IP first and everything else second is letting you down. By buying into it, in my view, you are letting yourself down.
I belive that if you ask for less, and defend less, you will get less.
Originally posted by JonMichaelOriginally posted by Gangster-Man
Maybe so
But yeah, to enthuse me and inspire me, a game has to be made by people who at least seem to have been enthusiastic and inspired. Nothing, but nothing, in LotR makes me feel this, but I stress this is a personal opinion. I probably just demand more then most of games, which may not be fair to games such as this title that are aiming themselves squarely at the middle road.
I would agree totally on the last year or so of MMORPGs... they have been pretty crappy. I need something to come along and break the dry streak before I give up on this genre altogether. Of course all games should be stable, thats a given, and I am not defending those that are not, but should devs stop taking risks to ensure it? I am not so sure. 'Solid' and 'stable' simply arnt enough for me on their own, and as far as I can see LotR offers very little else over most MMORPGs out there. But thats just me, and I have discussed that at length elsewhere.
I believe a game can be all both exciting, innovative, *and* stable, and I am hoping that AoC can prove that to the unbelievers.
I don't include an abstract such as 'fun' in this myself because it's such an abstract... The things that most people find fun in this life boggle me at best
I understand exactly how you feel, most do I believe. SWG was the game for me...so completely and totally it still irks me. There were a few changes in the game and it became....not fun anymore (For me). Since then I have jumped around wasting hundreds of dollars trying to find that replacement game. For whatever reason LotRO seems to bring out those "havin fun" feelings again.
I truely hope AOC doesn't turn into another let down for people. Way to much of that going around. Best of luck in your search........
you know what...
I have often asked pre NBG SWG players to stop moaning about the event in public forums and move on (somethines politely, sometimes not... ), but this short post has helped me understand how you guys feel.
One thing that bothers me for sure about LOTRO is the lack of attention that was put into the PvM system... As a max'd out monster you get about 5 useable skills, have fewer Health, less damage, and worse buffs than any of the player classes.... This means that to take down say a champion - you need about 4 -5 player monsters minimum.... That's a little much, not to mention burglars are going to eat monster face off while traveling anywhere.... Balance in the game is off tilt for monster play because they always want the monsters to only win with numbers.... Small scale fights happen, if you play a monster in them - you are throwing yourself onto a sword.....
All of this was brougth up in beta and never addressed.... It's just sad that I think monster play is going to be popular anyways and they still arent going to put any effert into it.
This game is not a great game and should not be that high on the list. The rating system is quite skewed and should not be taken with any credibility. That is all.
I've played or beta tested just about every notable MMORPG over the last six years. Though this game so far is not jaw dropping in any way for me personally, when I compare the game and the play experience objectively to each of the previous games I've played, I can honestly say this is one of the most solid products of the bunch and most certainly deserves to be among the highest rated.
The game setting is a bit "subdued", in that it more a "realistic" fantasy setting than an over the top, dream like gaming experience. I think for many people with negative feelings about this game, this is one of the factors influencing their opinions, conciously or not.
That's why I've often said I think this game is better suited for "mature" players (mentally vs. chronologically). The game world is very immersive, the quests are the best of any MMO I've played, the game mechanics are good and there is a lot more depth beneath the surface with deeds and virtues than can be explained giving the most basic descriptions of those dynamics. It's fun and addictive, but it's also a game and game world that takes itself very seriously, which is very counter to the "king" of MMORPGs WoW, which seems almost like a satire of fantasy MMORPGs in comparison.
So, to the OP, I can understand why he and others don't like the game, but if someone is to honestly score the individual categories, the game deserves a high score, even from someone who personally scores it low on the "Fun" scale.
I still have room for an "over the top" MMORPG. A number of the most promising upcoming titles look like they could be a lot of fun, assuming they succeed at the fundamentals and I'm sure that one of them will earn my playing time. However, I love LotRO, am very immersed in the world and am very much looking forward to the monthly expansion of that world over the next few years.
I get why some people used to more "colorful" games may be bored with this one, but the only MMORPG voters who match the OPs subject line are those who refuse to see this games clear merits because the game runs contrary to their personal taste (or more cynically in some cases, because it offers solid competition to their own preferred title).
The problem about the voting process is that a lot of people (not everyone) who vote don't wanna give the game they are playing a 6-7-8-9 score cause then they would be telling themselves their game has flaws and letting other potential games know this. People want their game to look like gold and get as many subs in so the game does better and improves and adds content faster.
Also, as far as the ratings go, the game has a high score simply because it launched well, and it was compared to some not to successful mmo launches. The problem here is that you simply cant vote based on your feelings on the past trend, but this is not something that will ever change.
The game is very fun for some, very bland to others, but in all it has no real "impact" or "revolutionary ideas" on the mmo industry, and thats a reason why a lot of people are upset, is because this game didnt bring a whole lot to the table and was judge based on other mmos.
Anyways thats my 2 gil.
The good thing is, Turbine never promised it to be 3rd generation, groundbreaking or revolutionary. What they did deliver is a solid, fun and immersive MMO that is fun to play and being enjoyed by a very large community.
The only way people can be upset is that they were expecting something that wasn't promised in the first place.
Your right here.
The problem with LotR is exactly what it *didnt* promise from the start... As I have discussed elsewhere here, it's willful underachieving is bewildering to me. The fact that then people crow about it as a plus point is doubly bewildering to me....
This statement is bewildering to me. Willful underachieving?
Yeppers, willfully underachieving. As in a cynical product deliberatly created with the least investment possible for it's type to rely on a popular IP to shift units.
As I have stated in other posts, Turbine has an extremely solid base from which to add to. Because LOTRO is not a "Next Generation" game, (Exactly what that is, is to be determined as those companies that have attempted it have failed miserably) Turbine is guilty of willful underachieving? I'm more inclined to think they used a proven template and added personal touches worth crowing about. Graphics that are well above the rest, PvM (Which what little I have done seems very cool), player music system, a game accessable to those not inclined to buy a new computer every year...etc. Again, a good/fun solid base that can/will be fine tuned and added to.
I have never asked for revolutionary, but see my other posts for what I *do* ask for.. I havent the will to repeat them again
Graphics well above the rest? Environmental graphics are decent sure, character models are honestly fugly... Even this site with it's skewed rating system rates a 2.5 year old game higher visually then LotR...
Again with that word 'solid'... /shudder
I guess the public gets what the public deserves. Oh, and btw, I really don't take the size of a community as an indicator for a good game. Look around you... the most popular of anything is usually (with notable exceptions) lowest common denominator porridgy dumbed down non thinking fast food for unimaginative sheep. I let you figure out how that appplies here.
I wish the public got what they deserved...typically they get what they pay for. In the world of MMORPGs, more often than not, getting what you pay for is a stretch. Apparently....wtf....*cough...*cough....BAAAAHAAAH! Hardly, but if it works and I'm having fun....I'll pay for it.
No, they get what they deserve *and* pay for... if you understand the meaning of the saying.
The mass market's taste is rarely the stuff of excellence, it is usually the very opposite.
Better to reach for the stars and fail then never to even try.
A large company with tens of millions of dollars and multiple years at stake cannot adopt this logic.
Sure they can, but they won't as long as you let them not.
The problem about the voting process is that a lot of people (not everyone) who vote don't wanna give the game they are playing a 6-7-8-9 score cause then they would be telling themselves their game has flaws and letting other potential games know this. People want their game to look like gold and get as many subs in so the game does better and improves and adds content faster. Also, as far as the ratings go, the game has a high score simply because it launched well, and it was compared to some not to successful mmo launches. The problem here is that you simply cant vote based on your feelings on the past trend, but this is not something that will ever change. The game is very fun for some, very bland to others, but in all it has no real "impact" or "revolutionary ideas" on the mmo industry, and thats a reason why a lot of people are upset, is because this game didnt bring a whole lot to the table and was judge based on other mmos. Anyways thats my 2 gil.
The good thing is, Turbine never promised it to be 3rd generation, groundbreaking or revolutionary. What they did deliver is a solid, fun and immersive MMO that is fun to play and being enjoyed by a very large community.
The only way people can be upset is that they were expecting something that wasn't promised in the first place.
Your right here.
The problem with LotR is exactly what it *didnt* promise from the start... As I have discussed elsewhere here, it's willful underachieving is bewildering to me. The fact that then people crow about it as a plus point is doubly bewildering to me....
This statement is bewildering to me. Willful underachieving?
Yeppers, willfully underachieving. As in a cynical product deliberatly created with the least investment possible for it's type to rely on a popular IP to shift units.
Willfully underachieving=playing it safe. Yes, they did stick to a proven model concerning game mechanics. The model happens to be the one that was adopted back when most people were connecting to the net @ 56k (more or less turn based button mashing) Companys have tried to alter this system and the failure rate is substantial. The so-called "Next Gen" games are the ones that will address this. A better way is to be determined. As far a relying on a popular IP to sell a game created with the least investment possible. How can that be when I'm having so much fun playing it? Lol....back to the sheep thing, right? I will admit....having that IP certainly doesnt hurt the game. It does not mean they relied solely on the IP to push it. We have all played those games that rely solely on the IP.....LotRo is not one of them.
As I have stated in other posts, Turbine has an extremely solid base from which to add to. Because LOTRO is not a "Next Generation" game, (Exactly what that is, is to be determined as those companies that have attempted it have failed miserably) Turbine is guilty of willful underachieving? I'm more inclined to think they used a proven template and added personal touches worth crowing about. Graphics that are well above the rest, PvM (Which what little I have done seems very cool), player music system, a game accessable to those not inclined to buy a new computer every year...etc. Again, a good/fun solid base that can/will be fine tuned and added to.
I have never asked for revolutionary, but see my other posts for what I *do* ask for.. I havent the will to repeat them again
I do know what you are after, you want the next step in online gaming. Not necessarily revolutionary, just the next innovative step (effort in that direction). Again, LotRo never claimed even be taking that next step. Therefore, anyone who purchased the game expecting this, set themselves up for the let down.
Graphics well above the rest? Environmental graphics are decent sure, character models are honestly fugly... Even this site with it's skewed rating system rates a 2.5 year old game higher visually then LotR...
Yes, environmentally for sure and character graphics are far from fugly. Graphics are a tough one.....personal preference weighs heavy here. Hell, I've heard people say that WoW graphics are top notch .... I never saw it. I would of liked to have seen more options in the character creation area with LotRO. The Devs certainly arn't working on repairing a buggy mess of a game. I'm sure the lack of options at the character creation menu are/will being addressed...back to the polish thing.
Again with that word 'solid'... /shudder
Lol...I like solid...most do.
I guess the public gets what the public deserves. Oh, and btw, I really don't take the size of a community as an indicator for a good game. Look around you... the most popular of anything is usually (with notable exceptions) lowest common denominator porridgy dumbed down non thinking fast food for unimaginative sheep. I let you figure out how that appplies here.
I wish the public got what they deserved...typically they get what they pay for. In the world of MMORPGs, more often than not, getting what you pay for is a stretch. Apparently....wtf....*cough...*cough....BAAAAHAAAH! Hardly, but if it works and I'm having fun....I'll pay for it.
No, they get what they deserve *and* pay for... if you understand the meaning of the saying.
Sure, I'm just not inclined to bellyache about a game I have no problems with.
The mass market's taste is rarely the stuff of excellence, it is usually the very opposite.
/agree
Better to reach for the stars and fail then never to even try.
A large company with tens of millions of dollars and multiple years at stake cannot adopt this logic.
Sure they can, but they won't as long as you let them not.
Failure hits hard....as it should. Turbine has been there. At this point I respect Turbine and what they have done with the LotRO IP. They have done their part in creating a worthwhile game, I have done my part by purchasing it. As I have said in other posts....it's now up to Turbine to keep me playing. Time will tell.
I see a lot of posts that say LOTRO was never advertised as being revolutionary, groundbreaking, next gen, etc. Sure, I'll go with that.
I see posts that say LOTRO has some good things going for it, like good graphics, a stable launch, no serious game breaking bugs, etc. I'll go with that as well.
Taken into account what seem to be the most important factors in an MMORPG receiving 9.5 type reviews, and being labeled as a "Masterpiece", its pretty obvious that the MMORPG voters, and the voting system itself, absolutely don't know their ass from their elbow. As another poster pointed out, even if you disliked the game's core dynamics enough to not purchase it, you still end up giving it a very positive review by the categories listed here.
I am very much going to enjoy reading the posts in the coming months when people get over the initial bedazzlement of the graphics, the relatively stable launch, or the game not trying to be revolutionary. At that moment, when they realize they paid $200 non-refundable for a lifetime subscription to a game that does nothing more than look good, not crash often, and not bring anything new to the genre... thats when wading through all this fanboi drek will be worth it.
Comments
Why isn't the MMO with most subscribers way above the others? Because your hypothesis is wrong.
The chart is completely useless and the main reason is that what you say just isn't close to reality at all. DAoC has a fairly high rating and yet not many play it and especially in europe the servers are vacant. Why would you NOT play the MMO you think rocks... that is just beyond reason, as is using the chart for anything useful related to talking about the quality of the games.
It may or may not be a pointer for developers, but you would háve to consider who is voting, how often and why. It's a minority of the MMO population of the world that votes on that chart.
exactly, its a minority that votes, and I never said that the game with the most subs has the highest ratings. Please reread my statement, all I mentioned was that people don't like to admit that their new favorite game has flaws..
In any case, I believe in and all votes should have a 100-200 word minimum review to go with it to avoid the 0-10 givers, and also the votes should ahve to be screened firts before being counted. The fact that I can make countless accounts, write ten meaningless posts and sway the results makes no sense.
If someone lacks social skills to the point they create 10 accts to vote multiple times on a video game, theres some very deep seeded issues within that individual and I would A) stay away from them and
Your saying this like you think there is onyl a handful of multi-account users that justcreate them for the sake of voting. There is quite a few people who do this, and the results make the vote board very negative.
//"MMORPG voters don't know their ass from their elbow when it comes to what makes a good MMO."//
That's the most intelligent observation I've seen on these boards, ever. I come to these forums only because it makes me feel like a god or something. I truly feel like a man of great stature walking among lesser souls.
What MMORP members do know is Forum Trolls.
Just in case it didnt cross your mind, creating a thread to insult everyone on this site, and then telling them that they are all wrong, is nothing but flamebait... and classic Trolling. That leaves nothing to discuss.
I won't be playing a game, and I disliked it. But as only 2 of 8 aspects really had anything to do with how fun the game is, I ended up giving Lotro good overall score against my will.
I think mmorpg.com should add another option to those ratings, "overall score". Until that is done, I consider mmorpg.com's overall ratings to be complete crap.
_________________________________
JonMichael
Currently: AION, an MMO Beta under NDA
Played: WAR, LOTRO, Hellgate: London, CoX, GW, SotNW, DAOC, EQ2, SWG, WoW, AO, Horizons, Second Life, There, TSO
Beta'd: There, Second Life, EQ2, DAOC:LotM, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, Gods and Heroes, Hellgate: London, Requiem:Bloodymare, AoC, WAR, DDO, Fallen Earth
The good thing is, Turbine never promised it to be 3rd generation, groundbreaking or revolutionary. What they did deliver is a solid, fun and immersive MMO that is fun to play and being enjoyed by a very large community.
The only way people can be upset is that they were expecting something that wasn't promised in the first place.
Your right here.
The problem with LotR is exactly what it *didnt* promise from the start... As I have discussed elsewhere here, it's willful underachieving is bewildering to me. The fact that then people crow about it as a plus point is doubly bewildering to me....
I guess the public gets what the public deserves. Oh, and btw, I really don't take the size of a community as an indicator for a good game. Look around you... the most popular of anything is usually (with notable exceptions) lowest common denominator porridgy dumbed down non thinking fast food for unimaginative sheep. I let you figure out how that appplies here.
Better to reach for the stars and fail then never to even try.
The good thing is, Turbine never promised it to be 3rd generation, groundbreaking or revolutionary. What they did deliver is a solid, fun and immersive MMO that is fun to play and being enjoyed by a very large community.
The only way people can be upset is that they were expecting something that wasn't promised in the first place.
Your right here.
The problem with LotR is exactly what it *didnt* promise from the start... As I have discussed elsewhere here, it's willful underachieving is bewildering to me. The fact that then people crow about it as a plus point is doubly bewildering to me....
I guess the public gets what the public deserves. Oh, and btw, I really don't take the size of a community as an indicator for a good game. Look around you... the most popular of anything is usually (with notable exceptions) lowest common denominator porridgy dumbed down non thinking fast food for unimaginative sheep. I let you figure out how that appplies here.
Better to reach for the stars and fail then never to even try.
Underacheiving? Why must a game be groundbreaking, revolutionary and 3rd generation to achieve?
Let's look at the MMO market in the last year. Any game that considered itself to be revolutionary or groundbreaking has failed miserably.
I'd much rather play a stable, enjoyable, immersive game than pay to beta test a buggy game that can't fulfill the promises the company made to it's prospective customers.
That's underachieving.
It's fine to reach for the stars, but at least have an idea of how to get there, first... or else you're just grabbing at thin air.
_________________________________
JonMichael
Currently: AION, an MMO Beta under NDA
Played: WAR, LOTRO, Hellgate: London, CoX, GW, SotNW, DAOC, EQ2, SWG, WoW, AO, Horizons, Second Life, There, TSO
Beta'd: There, Second Life, EQ2, DAOC:LotM, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, Gods and Heroes, Hellgate: London, Requiem:Bloodymare, AoC, WAR, DDO, Fallen Earth
The good thing is, Turbine never promised it to be 3rd generation, groundbreaking or revolutionary. What they did deliver is a solid, fun and immersive MMO that is fun to play and being enjoyed by a very large community.
The only way people can be upset is that they were expecting something that wasn't promised in the first place.
Your right here.
The problem with LotR is exactly what it *didnt* promise from the start... As I have discussed elsewhere here, it's willful underachieving is bewildering to me. The fact that then people crow about it as a plus point is doubly bewildering to me....
I guess the public gets what the public deserves. Oh, and btw, I really don't take the size of a community as an indicator for a good game. Look around you... the most popular of anything is usually (with notable exceptions) lowest common denominator porridgy dumbed down non thinking fast food for unimaginative sheep. I let you figure out how that appplies here.
Better to reach for the stars and fail then never to even try.
Underacheiving? Why must a game be groundbreaking, revolutionary and 3rd generation to achieve?
Let's look at the MMO market in the last year. Any game that considered itself to be revolutionary or groundbreaking has failed miserably.
I'd much rather play a stable, enjoyable, immersive game than pay to beta test a buggy game that can't fulfill the promises the company made to it's prospective customers.
That's underachieving.
It's fine to reach for the stars, but at least have an idea of how to get there, first... or else you're just grabbing at thin air.
Maybe so
But yeah, to enthuse me and inspire me, a game has to be made by people who at least seem to have been enthusiastic and inspired. Nothing, but nothing, in LotR makes me feel this, but I stress this is a personal opinion. I probably just demand more then most of games, which may not be fair to games such as this title that are aiming themselves squarely at the middle road.
I would agree totally on the last year or so of MMORPGs... they have been pretty crappy. I need something to come along and break the dry streak before I give up on this genre altogether. Of course all games should be stable, thats a given, and I am not defending those that are not, but should devs stop taking risks to ensure it? I am not so sure. 'Solid' and 'stable' simply arnt enough for me on their own, and as far as I can see LotR offers very little else over most MMORPGs out there. But thats just me, and I have discussed that at length elsewhere.
I believe a game can be all both exciting, innovative, *and* stable, and I am hoping that AoC can prove that to the unbelievers.
I don't include an abstract such as 'fun' in this myself because it's such an abstract... The things that most people find fun in this life boggle me at best
I played LOTRO in beta and while it was not the type of game i like to play it really is a good mmo.
I currently play SWG and im having fun,some players would disagree with me im sure but it has everything i want in a scifi setting.
To each his own.
What is your physical limit?
You don't give us any reason's as to why your statement is anything but a personal opinion on the game. Maybe if you back the statement up with some reason we'll have a topic to discuss.
As to ratings, I haven't voted yet, because I think I should get a bit further into the game than level 22 to make a truely informed rating of the game......
Even though I like it... I won't be dropping all 9's / 10's on the game.... its not perfect....but it is pretty fun at times....
I like to gank? How did you figure that one out boss? Magic?
I play on a PVE server because I can't STAND gankers. I refer to consensual world PVP, Arena competition, and the battleground system as my love for PVP. I am totally against full, open PVP unless it's done on a completely level playing field...
So no, I don't gank. I like to compete. If you actually read my post, I said "i'm sure it's fun and people enjoy it, good for you." That wasn't sacrasm, if you enjoy it, play it. You'd be an idiot to play something you don't enjoy, or not play something you do enjoy.
I am no idiot. I play WoW for raiding and PVP because I enjoy raiding and PVP. I don't play LOTRO because I wasn't impressed with it during beta. I admit, I didn't play up to a high level or anything, but it simply wasn't what I was looking for.
Back to the ORIGINAL topic here, why it has such a high rating, is because it probably is a good game. The OP is just as much of an arrogant "I know everything and my opinion is more correct then yours is" A-HOLE as you are
The good thing is, Turbine never promised it to be 3rd generation, groundbreaking or revolutionary. What they did deliver is a solid, fun and immersive MMO that is fun to play and being enjoyed by a very large community.
The only way people can be upset is that they were expecting something that wasn't promised in the first place.
Your right here.
The problem with LotR is exactly what it *didnt* promise from the start... As I have discussed elsewhere here, it's willful underachieving is bewildering to me. The fact that then people crow about it as a plus point is doubly bewildering to me....
This statement is bewildering to me. Willful underachieving? As I have stated in other posts, Turbine has an extremely solid base from which to add to. Because LOTRO is not a "Next Generation" game, (Exactly what that is, is to be determined as those companies that have attempted it have failed miserably) Turbine is guilty of willful underachieving? I'm more inclined to think they used a proven template and added personal touches worth crowing about. Graphics that are well above the rest, PvM (Which what little I have done seems very cool), player music system, a game accessable to those not inclined to buy a new computer every year...etc. Again, a good/fun solid base that can/will be fine tuned and added to.
I guess the public gets what the public deserves. Oh, and btw, I really don't take the size of a community as an indicator for a good game. Look around you... the most popular of anything is usually (with notable exceptions) lowest common denominator porridgy dumbed down non thinking fast food for unimaginative sheep. I let you figure out how that appplies here.
I wish the public got what they deserved...typically they get what they pay for. In the world of MMORPGs, more often than not, getting what you pay for is a stretch. Apparently....wtf....*cough...*cough....BAAAAHAAAH! Hardly, but if it works and I'm having fun....I'll pay for it.
Better to reach for the stars and fail then never to even try.
A large company with tens of millions of dollars and multiple years at stake cannot adopt this logic.
http://www.straightdope.com/
Maybe so
But yeah, to enthuse me and inspire me, a game has to be made by people who at least seem to have been enthusiastic and inspired. Nothing, but nothing, in LotR makes me feel this, but I stress this is a personal opinion. I probably just demand more then most of games, which may not be fair to games such as this title that are aiming themselves squarely at the middle road.
I would agree totally on the last year or so of MMORPGs... they have been pretty crappy. I need something to come along and break the dry streak before I give up on this genre altogether. Of course all games should be stable, thats a given, and I am not defending those that are not, but should devs stop taking risks to ensure it? I am not so sure. 'Solid' and 'stable' simply arnt enough for me on their own, and as far as I can see LotR offers very little else over most MMORPGs out there. But thats just me, and I have discussed that at length elsewhere.
I believe a game can be all both exciting, innovative, *and* stable, and I am hoping that AoC can prove that to the unbelievers.
I don't include an abstract such as 'fun' in this myself because it's such an abstract... The things that most people find fun in this life boggle me at best
I understand exactly how you feel, most do I believe. SWG was the game for me...so completely and totally it still irks me. There were a few changes in the game and it became....not fun anymore (For me). Since then I have jumped around wasting hundreds of dollars trying to find that replacement game. For whatever reason LotRO seems to bring out those "havin fun" feelings again.I truely hope AOC doesn't turn into another let down for people. Way to much of that going around. Best of luck in your search........
http://www.straightdope.com/
Maybe so
But yeah, to enthuse me and inspire me, a game has to be made by people who at least seem to have been enthusiastic and inspired. Nothing, but nothing, in LotR makes me feel this, but I stress this is a personal opinion. I probably just demand more then most of games, which may not be fair to games such as this title that are aiming themselves squarely at the middle road.
I would agree totally on the last year or so of MMORPGs... they have been pretty crappy. I need something to come along and break the dry streak before I give up on this genre altogether. Of course all games should be stable, thats a given, and I am not defending those that are not, but should devs stop taking risks to ensure it? I am not so sure. 'Solid' and 'stable' simply arnt enough for me on their own, and as far as I can see LotR offers very little else over most MMORPGs out there. But thats just me, and I have discussed that at length elsewhere.
I believe a game can be all both exciting, innovative, *and* stable, and I am hoping that AoC can prove that to the unbelievers.
I don't include an abstract such as 'fun' in this myself because it's such an abstract... The things that most people find fun in this life boggle me at best
I understand exactly how you feel, most do I believe. SWG was the game for me...so completely and totally it still irks me. There were a few changes in the game and it became....not fun anymore (For me). Since then I have jumped around wasting hundreds of dollars trying to find that replacement game. For whatever reason LotRO seems to bring out those "havin fun" feelings again.I truely hope AOC doesn't turn into another let down for people. Way to much of that going around. Best of luck in your search........
you know what...
I have often asked pre NBG SWG players to stop moaning about the event in public forums and move on (somethines politely, sometimes not...
), but this short post has helped me understand how you guys feel.
Nice.
All of this was brougth up in beta and never addressed.... It's just sad that I think monster play is going to be popular anyways and they still arent going to put any effert into it.
The game setting is a bit "subdued", in that it more a "realistic" fantasy setting than an over the top, dream like gaming experience. I think for many people with negative feelings about this game, this is one of the factors influencing their opinions, conciously or not.
That's why I've often said I think this game is better suited for "mature" players (mentally vs. chronologically). The game world is very immersive, the quests are the best of any MMO I've played, the game mechanics are good and there is a lot more depth beneath the surface with deeds and virtues than can be explained giving the most basic descriptions of those dynamics. It's fun and addictive, but it's also a game and game world that takes itself very seriously, which is very counter to the "king" of MMORPGs WoW, which seems almost like a satire of fantasy MMORPGs in comparison.
So, to the OP, I can understand why he and others don't like the game, but if someone is to honestly score the individual categories, the game deserves a high score, even from someone who personally scores it low on the "Fun" scale.
I still have room for an "over the top" MMORPG. A number of the most promising upcoming titles look like they could be a lot of fun, assuming they succeed at the fundamentals and I'm sure that one of them will earn my playing time. However, I love LotRO, am very immersed in the world and am very much looking forward to the monthly expansion of that world over the next few years.
I get why some people used to more "colorful" games may be bored with this one, but the only MMORPG voters who match the OPs subject line are those who refuse to see this games clear merits because the game runs contrary to their personal taste (or more cynically in some cases, because it offers solid competition to their own preferred title).
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
The good thing is, Turbine never promised it to be 3rd generation, groundbreaking or revolutionary. What they did deliver is a solid, fun and immersive MMO that is fun to play and being enjoyed by a very large community.
The only way people can be upset is that they were expecting something that wasn't promised in the first place.
Your right here.
The problem with LotR is exactly what it *didnt* promise from the start... As I have discussed elsewhere here, it's willful underachieving is bewildering to me. The fact that then people crow about it as a plus point is doubly bewildering to me....
This statement is bewildering to me. Willful underachieving?
Yeppers, willfully underachieving. As in a cynical product deliberatly created with the least investment possible for it's type to rely on a popular IP to shift units.
Willfully underachieving=playing it safe. Yes, they did stick to a proven model concerning game mechanics. The model happens to be the one that was adopted back when most people were connecting to the net @ 56k (more or less turn based button mashing) Companys have tried to alter this system and the failure rate is substantial. The so-called "Next Gen" games are the ones that will address this. A better way is to be determined. As far a relying on a popular IP to sell a game created with the least investment possible. How can that be when I'm having so much fun playing it? Lol....back to the sheep thing, right? I will admit....having that IP certainly doesnt hurt the game. It does not mean they relied solely on the IP to push it. We have all played those games that rely solely on the IP.....LotRo is not one of them.
As I have stated in other posts, Turbine has an extremely solid base from which to add to. Because LOTRO is not a "Next Generation" game, (Exactly what that is, is to be determined as those companies that have attempted it have failed miserably) Turbine is guilty of willful underachieving? I'm more inclined to think they used a proven template and added personal touches worth crowing about. Graphics that are well above the rest, PvM (Which what little I have done seems very cool), player music system, a game accessable to those not inclined to buy a new computer every year...etc. Again, a good/fun solid base that can/will be fine tuned and added to.
I have never asked for revolutionary, but see my other posts for what I *do* ask for.. I havent the will to repeat them again
I do know what you are after, you want the next step in online gaming. Not necessarily revolutionary, just the next innovative step (effort in that direction). Again, LotRo never claimed even be taking that next step. Therefore, anyone who purchased the game expecting this, set themselves up for the let down.
Graphics well above the rest? Environmental graphics are decent sure, character models are honestly fugly... Even this site with it's skewed rating system rates a 2.5 year old game higher visually then LotR...
Yes, environmentally for sure and character graphics are far from fugly. Graphics are a tough one.....personal preference weighs heavy here. Hell, I've heard people say that WoW graphics are top notch .... I never saw it. I would of liked to have seen more options in the character creation area with LotRO. The Devs certainly arn't working on repairing a buggy mess of a game. I'm sure the lack of options at the character creation menu are/will being addressed...back to the polish thing.
Again with that word 'solid'... /shudder
Lol...I like solid...most do.
I guess the public gets what the public deserves. Oh, and btw, I really don't take the size of a community as an indicator for a good game. Look around you... the most popular of anything is usually (with notable exceptions) lowest common denominator porridgy dumbed down non thinking fast food for unimaginative sheep. I let you figure out how that appplies here.
I wish the public got what they deserved...typically they get what they pay for. In the world of MMORPGs, more often than not, getting what you pay for is a stretch. Apparently....wtf....*cough...*cough....BAAAAHAAAH! Hardly, but if it works and I'm having fun....I'll pay for it.
No, they get what they deserve *and* pay for... if you understand the meaning of the saying.
Sure, I'm just not inclined to bellyache about a game I have no problems with.
The mass market's taste is rarely the stuff of excellence, it is usually the very opposite.
/agree
Better to reach for the stars and fail then never to even try.
A large company with tens of millions of dollars and multiple years at stake cannot adopt this logic.
Sure they can, but they won't as long as you let them not.
Failure hits hard....as it should. Turbine has been there. At this point I respect Turbine and what they have done with the LotRO IP. They have done their part in creating a worthwhile game, I have done my part by purchasing it. As I have said in other posts....it's now up to Turbine to keep me playing. Time will tell.
http://www.straightdope.com/
Hairy, we might never see eye to eye on this game, but you argue a good case and your posts are amusing
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
I miss DAoC
I see posts that say LOTRO has some good things going for it, like good graphics, a stable launch, no serious game breaking bugs, etc. I'll go with that as well.
Taken into account what seem to be the most important factors in an MMORPG receiving 9.5 type reviews, and being labeled as a "Masterpiece", its pretty obvious that the MMORPG voters, and the voting system itself, absolutely don't know their ass from their elbow. As another poster pointed out, even if you disliked the game's core dynamics enough to not purchase it, you still end up giving it a very positive review by the categories listed here.
I am very much going to enjoy reading the posts in the coming months when people get over the initial bedazzlement of the graphics, the relatively stable launch, or the game not trying to be revolutionary. At that moment, when they realize they paid $200 non-refundable for a lifetime subscription to a game that does nothing more than look good, not crash often, and not bring anything new to the genre... thats when wading through all this fanboi drek will be worth it.
Cya then
Equal opportunity troll.