You guys don't know anything about LOTRO yet. Actually, I'll be honest and say Vanguard looks better. As does Gods and Heroes, Pirates of the Burning Sea, and heck even Darkfall (even though I loath PvP).
But even I know better than to rely on the extremely limited amount of information released about any of those games.
Wait until the NDA is lifted. Then decide based on other peoples personal experience. Right now, what you have is the equivelent to rumors.
Originally posted by Moirae Wait until the NDA is lifted. Then decide based on other peoples personal experience. Right now, what you have is the equivelent to rumors.
How are you going to tell us to wait and base our opinions on other peoples experience when you got all in my butt about SWG i think your just making issues like i am right now OH and here is your quote for when you were being a pain
Originally posted by Moirae
And frankly, if you've never played a game and are just relying on other peoples reports about it, then how do you know? That's pretty sad that you think you can judge even though you have no experience at all.
So like it is okay for you to do it now? but what no more than a week ago you were saying how sad it was for people to base judgements on games with out ever really playing them? so what is your real feelings on this? Please help me out here really....
Originally posted by sly220 Originally posted by Moirae Wait until the NDA is lifted. Then decide based on other peoples personal experience. Right now, what you have is the equivelent to rumors.How are you going to tell us to wait and base our opinions on other peoples experience when you got all in my butt about SWG i think your just making issues like i am right now OH and here is your quote for when you were being a pain Originally posted by Moirae
And frankly, if you've never played a game and are just relying on other peoples reports about it, then how do you know? That's pretty sad that you think you can judge even though you have no experience at all.
So like it is okay for you to do it now? but what no more than a week ago you were saying how sad it was for people to base judgements on games with out ever really playing them? so what is your real feelings on this? Please help me out here really.... rofl. Nice try twisting what I said. I just said the exact same thing I've been saying all along. That all you have is rumor and you should wait to judge whether you think it will be a good game.
Have you been smoking something? Or are you just trying to bait and troll?
Originally posted by Moirae Wait until the NDA is lifted. Then decide based on other peoples personal experience. Right now, what you have is the equivelent to rumors. How are you going to tell us to wait and base our opinions on other peoples experience when you got all in my butt about SWG i think your just making issues like i am right now OH and here is your quote for when you were being a pain
Originally posted by Moirae
And frankly, if you've never played a game and are just relying on other peoples reports about it, then how do you know? That's pretty sad that you think you can judge even though you have no experience at all.
So like it is okay for you to do it now? but what no more than a week ago you were saying how sad it was for people to base judgements on games with out ever really playing them? so what is your real feelings on this? Please help me out here really....
rofl. Nice try twisting what I said. I just said the exact same thing I've been saying all along. That all you have is rumor and you should wait to judge whether you think it will be a good game.
Have you been smoking something? Or are you just trying to bait and troll?
I would go mostly trolling but i didnt twist any words of yours you said what you said.your statement happen to be directed at me and thats the reason i brought it to your attention. I didnt twist any of your words just quoted you thats all so wiggle your way out of your own words. but hey good luck in any game you choose..
i dont know if this helps and it depends on others opinions. i have two people i have been guildmates with since the old days. one got into lord of the rings and the other got into vanguard. the guildmate in the rings beta says that the game is dry, drab and boring and was sad he didnt get into vanguard so went back to a game called rappelz which imo is not the best. the other friend in vanguard syas the content is promising and looks fun but h feels that the game needs much more work even for a beta and wished he had got into lord of the rings so went back to eve.
my whole point of this response is even with my trust in these peoples judments i will try both for myself because everyone has different tastes and any review will be colored by those tastes. i think at this point it is best for you to look at the features of both games and make the best choice you can and then cross your fingers and never look back. i am not saying either is best but i am sure you will find the one you like.
heck i even know a guy who still says dark and light will be one of the best games ever when the bugs are worked out.
Originally posted by tomfred81 Um, I do know what im talking about. If you read more than one line in the post i said I understand that they dont want everyone to be a jedi like happened in SWG-there should be limited amounts. And if you read my previous post you would see that I read all the books too and therefore do understand there are a limited number of wizards in ME. I didn't say LOTRO should have wizards, I just said they could have had them in the game and not have it limited it to only 4 races.
Seriously people, read entire posts and know the context before you respond...an attempt to make yourself look superior often results in making yourself look like an ass. Congrats. Careful you are starting to come off like MAWorking, the fattest ass (in more than one way) I've ever seen in any forum out there.
No, actually you don't know what you're talking about. Turbine has licensed LOTR from Tolkein Enterprises and is under contract to keep the game true to Tolkein's books. Turbine can't just decide to have evil races in regular gameplay, the whole crux of the story is about a specific 4 races saving the world of Middle-earth. This is why Turbine developed PvMP, Player vs Monster Play, so that players can experience playing bad guys without upsetting the lore. And Turbine can't just decide to have wizard player characters, because according to Tolkein, wizards were demi-gods. No players will get to play demi-gods. No player will play Gandalf or Elrond or Galadriel or Aragorn or Arwen, or Frodo or Samwise for that matter. Players will be working toward the same goals as the book characters, aiding the cause in whatever ways Turbine designs for them to aid that cause. Turbine has experts in the lore to help them keep things true to the written works, and the game undergos reviews by Tolkein Enterprises to be sure that they are.
One thing is certain, and I can say this without having played either game: some players will love LOTRO and hate Vanguard. Some players will love Vanguard and hate LOTRO. Some players will love both. Some players will hate both. Just how many land in which camp is what everyone wants to know, and no one will know until the games ship. All the rest of it is speculation and prediction. But you knew that already, didn't you?
i dont know if this helps and it depends on others opinions. i have two people i have been guildmates with since the old days. one got into lord of the rings and the other got into vanguard. the guildmate in the rings beta says that the game is dry, drab and boring and was sad he didnt get into vanguard so went back to a game called rappelz which imo is not the best. the other friend in vanguard syas the content is promising and looks fun but h feels that the game needs much more work even for a beta and wished he had got into lord of the rings so went back to eve.
my whole point of this response is even with my trust in these peoples judments i will try both for myself because everyone has different tastes and any review will be colored by those tastes. i think at this point it is best for you to look at the features of both games and make the best choice you can and then cross your fingers and never look back. i am not saying either is best but i am sure you will find the one you like.
heck i even know a guy who still says dark and light will be one of the best games ever when the bugs are worked out.
What a great post kalistar! Made me chuckle. Ain't it just the way, you beg and beg for something, and when you get it you then realize you wanted something else? Glad to hear you're going to take it all in with an open mind and then decide for yourself. Me too!
Originally posted by Cerion I disagree. LOTRO could have involved evil races and didnt. They also could have had a wizard race if they wanted too, though they arent b/c they dont want everyone being a jedi...
Originally posted by tomfred81 This is an excellent question, one that i myself was wrestling with a month ago-which game would I play? LOTRO or Vanguard Saga of Heroes? And here is the answer: LOTRO doesnt have much that Vanguard doesnt-its really the other way around. Vanguard has tons that LOTRO doesn't...allow me to elaborate
LOTRO Vanguard Saga of Heroes
well followed story and lore, die hard fans new make believe world, die hard EQ fans
4 races 19 races
7 classes 15 classes
1 continent 3 continents
big world enormous world-biggest ever
short-medium game lifespan 7 years of planned content
die-durability penalty die, have to retrieve your corpse
button mashing combat combat system that will require thinking
fast travel intervals of fast travel, but mostly on your own
no mounts at launch mounts at lvl 10, better mounts as u progress
again no mounts at launch flying mounts you can direct and fly anywhere
again, just walking and fast travel can craft and own boats (can name them too)
no player housing player housing at launch (can sell wares in home)
instanced seamless world, can go anywhere u can see
different PvP-monster play straightforward PvP, but offer PvE servers too
easier gameplay challenging gameplay, harder for a noob
crafting system as well as adventuring spheres of adventuring, crafting, & diplomacy
average character creation many features to make your character unique
Gosh, and this is just off the top of my head. Lets just say from what I've "seen" of LOTRO over the last month I will not be playing LOTRO at launch. Even looking at ebay last week, LOTRO beta keys were goin for like $40 and Vanguard beta keys for like $200 a shot and they had been bid on multiple times...im not even kidding. Tells you something right there. Vanguard is the game that I am going to invest my time and money in. Preordered it from GameSpot the other day.
Though not biased, this post is a bit misleading (whether intentional or not does not matter).
Races: For the most part, Tolkien only gives us 4 races, so that comparison is rather disingenuine.
I disagree. Turbine could have made a game with evil races, but elected not to. Also, they could have had a wizard class, though i understand that they dont want everyone to be a jedi...
Evil races would not fit in with lore. Despite the current fade that evil is cool, Tolkien says different. Sticking with the side of Good allows Turbine to have thematic content that jibes with Tolkien. You mention all these things they 'could have had.' Well they could have had playable Dragons, but like your suggestions, they chose not too. So? Proves nothing except the devs have restraint.
Continents: Middle Earth in the lore is huge. The number of continents is irrelevant.
The number of continents IS relevant. Middle Earth may be huge in the lore, but LOTRO is launching with only a sliver of Middle Earth-the NW portion of Eriador. We are not talking about small continents in Vanguard, but huge continents. Furthermore, they are seperated by vast oceans that one can explore on their own ships. Content is out there to be discovered. Each continent is home to its own set of races and has a different theme. Any way you look at it, there is more content in Vanguard
Look, there's no way Turbine could implement continents for LOTRO. The number of continents a ridiculous comparison drummed up simply to add an additional 'feature' to the OP list. I'm sure Eriador has 'content to be discovered' and different areas with a different theme. Angmar comes to mind which I imagine is thematically different than the Shire which will likely be thematically different than the Dwarven area.
Instanced: LOTRO devs have said only about 10 to 20 percent of the world is instanced. A blanket statement of 'instanced' vs Vanguards non-instanced is false.
K, if you are going to nitpick on that comment, perhaps I should have said LOTRO will have instancing instead of being "instanced", and Vanguard will not have instancing at all
Well, it isn't a nit-pick, it's an egregious mis-characterisation.
Game life span: You really can't tell from a pre-launch perspective what sort of lifespan these games will have.
OMG, it might be speculative at this point but I absolutely guarantee 100% that Vanguard will have a bigger following than LOTRO and outlast it. Turbine has failed at everything they've touched since AC 1, while the guys who designed the mother of all MMORPG's in Everquest are making this game...do you really think LOTRO will outlast Vanguard? Wishful thinking. For goodness sake, people are STILL playing EQ 1 today!
Each game will have its following. Unlike you, I'm not here to measure epeens, and trash one game over the other. I don't have a vendetta against any game. I simply wanted to correct the record that was misleading in the OP.
Mounts: Of course LOTRO can't have griffons, dinasaurs, dragons as mounts if they want to have the game resemble Middle Earth. Vanguard can have these things, but then again so does other fantasy MMOs. Nothing new there.
Thing is, Turbine wouldn't have flying mounts at launch even if they were in Middle Earth and part of the lore. How can I say that you might wonder? Because they don't even have normal horse mounts at launch!!! And that was part of the Middle Earth lore! People are going to have to wait another year to ride a horse in LOTRO! Also, Vanguard is the first game to have flying mounts without rails.
Uh, I don't believe I was correcting which game would have mounts or not. I was correcting the second iteration of that claim which compared no mounts to flying mounts. Again, I am only setting the record straight.
Gameplay: Again, you have no real idea how easy either would be.
Actually I do, I have firsthand intricate knowledge of LOTRO. While I can't say the same for Vanguard, the developers have clearly stated over and over that it will be harder than your standard MMORPG. Vanguard will not be like WoW where you have a bunch of sucky awful video game players that can achieve lvl 60 with no skill at all. Personally, it makes me puke to see no skilled hacks with high level characters cause people can level up with no talent and still suck and not be able to play their class. In Vanguard, it will take skill. You will have to choose how to react to the NPC's in a fight, and you will have different options to choose from at the same time. It will be more than button mashing every mob the same way, (WoW was and now LOTRO). The devs at Vanguard have said this over and over again.
So yet another person 'in beta' with first hand knowledge. Tell me this. If you can't be trusted to keep the NDA, why should I trust anything you say. Your word obviously means nothing, and in my view that speaks more than any words you have to say.
_____________________________ Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
The reason Vanguard looks like EQ is because the vast majority of Sigil's artists, like a lot of the people at Sigil, came from EQ. I'm not at all impressed with what I read and see about Vanguard -- it's a pie with a pretty crust but little filling. Lots of hype. Then, major decisions made by Sigil over the last year have really turned me off completely. I mean OMG, leave MicroSoft which supported your sorry asses for 3+ years and "sell out" to SOE? Okay, I know, SOE will only produce and distribute the game but come on, merely logging in to SOE's Station would make me puke.
LoTR looks promising. I predict LoTR will have a modest amount of players when released but if Turbine holds true to its plans for game development and their incremental approach to realsing major updates in manageable, bug-free "bites," it won't be long before you will see a lot of MMORPG gamers playing this game.
No, actually you don't know what you're talking about. Turbine has licensed LOTR from Tolkein Enterprises and is under contract to keep the game true to Tolkein's books. Turbine can't just decide to have evil races in regular gameplay, the whole crux of the story is about a specific 4 races saving the world of Middle-earth. This is why Turbine developed PvMP, Player vs Monster Play, so that players can experience playing bad guys without upsetting the lore. And Turbine can't just decide to have wizard player characters, because according to Tolkein, wizards were demi-gods. No players will get to play demi-gods. No player will play Gandalf or Elrond or Galadriel or Aragorn or Arwen, or Frodo or Samwise for that matter. Players will be working toward the same goals as the book characters, aiding the cause in whatever ways Turbine designs for them to aid that cause. Turbine has experts in the lore to help them keep things true to the written works, and the game undergos reviews by Tolkein Enterprises to be sure that they are.
One thing is certain, and I can say this without having played either game: some players will love LOTRO and hate Vanguard. Some players will love Vanguard and hate LOTRO. Some players will love both. Some players will hate both. Just how many land in which camp is what everyone wants to know, and no one will know until the games ship. All the rest of it is speculation and prediction. But you knew that already, didn't you?
Wow-what a great post arguing against a point that I never made.
You must feel either 1) very smart because you received your GED or 2) very dumb for wasting your time.
Though not biased, this post is a bit misleading (whether intentional or not does not matter).
Races: For the most part, Tolkien only gives us 4 races, so that comparison is rather disingenuine.
I disagree. Turbine could have made a game with evil races, but elected not to. Also, they could have had a wizard class, though i understand that they dont want everyone to be a jedi...
Evil races would not fit in with lore. Despite the current fade that evil is cool, Tolkien says different. Sticking with the side of Good allows Turbine to have thematic content that jibes with Tolkien. You mention all these things they 'could have had.' Well they could have had playable Dragons, but like your suggestions, they chose not too. So? Proves nothing except the devs have restraint.
Continents: Middle Earth in the lore is huge. The number of continents is irrelevant.
The number of continents IS relevant. Middle Earth may be huge in the lore, but LOTRO is launching with only a sliver of Middle Earth-the NW portion of Eriador. We are not talking about small continents in Vanguard, but huge continents. Furthermore, they are seperated by vast oceans that one can explore on their own ships. Content is out there to be discovered. Each continent is home to its own set of races and has a different theme. Any way you look at it, there is more content in Vanguard
Look, there's no way Turbine could implement continents for LOTRO. The number of continents a ridiculous comparison drummed up simply to add an additional 'feature' to the OP list. I'm sure Eriador has 'content to be discovered' and different areas with a different theme. Angmar comes to mind which I imagine is thematically different than the Shire which will likely be thematically different than the Dwarven area.
Instanced: LOTRO devs have said only about 10 to 20 percent of the world is instanced. A blanket statement of 'instanced' vs Vanguards non-instanced is false.
K, if you are going to nitpick on that comment, perhaps I should have said LOTRO will have instancing instead of being "instanced", and Vanguard will not have instancing at all
Well, it isn't a nit-pick, it's an egregious mis-characterisation.
Game life span: You really can't tell from a pre-launch perspective what sort of lifespan these games will have.
OMG, it might be speculative at this point but I absolutely guarantee 100% that Vanguard will have a bigger following than LOTRO and outlast it. Turbine has failed at everything they've touched since AC 1, while the guys who designed the mother of all MMORPG's in Everquest are making this game...do you really think LOTRO will outlast Vanguard? Wishful thinking. For goodness sake, people are STILL playing EQ 1 today!
Each game will have its following. Unlike you, I'm not here to measure epeens, and trash one game over the other. I don't have a vendetta against any game. I simply wanted to correct the record that was misleading in the OP.
Mounts: Of course LOTRO can't have griffons, dinasaurs, dragons as mounts if they want to have the game resemble Middle Earth. Vanguard can have these things, but then again so does other fantasy MMOs. Nothing new there.
Thing is, Turbine wouldn't have flying mounts at launch even if they were in Middle Earth and part of the lore. How can I say that you might wonder? Because they don't even have normal horse mounts at launch!!! And that was part of the Middle Earth lore! People are going to have to wait another year to ride a horse in LOTRO! Also, Vanguard is the first game to have flying mounts without rails.
Uh, I don't believe I was correcting which game would have mounts or not. I was correcting the second iteration of that claim which compared no mounts to flying mounts. Again, I am only setting the record straight.
Gameplay: Again, you have no real idea how easy either would be.
Actually I do, I have firsthand intricate knowledge of LOTRO. While I can't say the same for Vanguard, the developers have clearly stated over and over that it will be harder than your standard MMORPG. Vanguard will not be like WoW where you have a bunch of sucky awful video game players that can achieve lvl 60 with no skill at all. Personally, it makes me puke to see no skilled hacks with high level characters cause people can level up with no talent and still suck and not be able to play their class. In Vanguard, it will take skill. You will have to choose how to react to the NPC's in a fight, and you will have different options to choose from at the same time. It will be more than button mashing every mob the same way, (WoW was and now LOTRO). The devs at Vanguard have said this over and over again.
So yet another person 'in beta' with first hand knowledge. Tell me this. If you can't be trusted to keep the NDA, why should I trust anything you say. Your word obviously means nothing, and in my view that speaks more than any words you have to say.
Your spelling is flawed. Your points are flawed. Your logic is flawed.
Don't give up though! Keep trying! One day you will succeed!
I must say, some of you guys are very miss informed, and should just not post, if you got no clue about the games. Me personally, I am looking foward to both games(and Warhammer Online), and while most of the best LOTR stuff has been covered in this post, there has been alot of lies about Vanguard.
First off, SOE hosts the servers, but has absolutely nothing to do with Vanguard it self, the way it is made, nor do they have any influence on the gameplay, whatsoever. Secondly, ppl saying stuff like "have fun playing EQ3" etc, are just plain retards. This game while made by the same ppl, and focused towards the same gaming crowd, is ALOT different. EQ was a zone based game, with little crafting, no diplomacy,player houses/cities, very few quests, and generally envolved around mob grinding, which was okay since it was group based.
Vanguard offers Player houses, seamless world, lots of quests, alot more focus on crafting and diplomacy. Player build boats, mounts, flying mounts. When you look deeper in to the gameplay it does envolve around that same groupbased gameplay, although there will both be raiding and soloing.
People who says it is similair to EQ and that LOTR is all new and got super quests etc are wrong. If you read the previews of LOTR, you'd know they also have kill x amount of wolfs etc, like someone said they didn't. Although the game also has good lore, and also some advanced quests I find interesting.(Not bashing LOTR at all, it does look good)
Also saying that cause Vanguard has more classes they must be rushed is just idiotic????!
Generally alot of false statements from players who seem very biased, and from people who have made up their mind already and don't feel like looking at the facts, but would rather trashtalk.
Originally posted by mfj85 I must say, some of you guys are very miss informed, and should just not post, if you got no clue about the games. Me personally, I am looking foward to both games(and Warhammer Online), and while most of the best LOTR stuff has been covered in this post, there has been alot of lies about Vanguard. First off, SOE hosts the servers, but has absolutely nothing to do with Vanguard it self, the way it is made, nor do they have any influence on the gameplay, whatsoever. Secondly, ppl saying stuff like "have fun playing EQ3" etc, are just plain retards. This game while made by the same ppl, and focused towards the same gaming crowd, is ALOT different. EQ was a zone based game, with little crafting, no diplomacy,player houses/cities, very few quests, and generally envolved around mob grinding, which was okay since it was group based. Vanguard offers Player houses, seamless world, lots of quests, alot more focus on crafting and diplomacy. Player build boats, mounts, flying mounts. When you look deeper in to the gameplay it does envolve around that same groupbased gameplay, although there will both be raiding and soloing.
People who says it is similair to EQ and that LOTR is all new and got super quests etc are wrong. If you read the previews of LOTR, you'd know they also have kill x amount of wolfs etc, like someone said they didn't. Although the game also has good lore, and also some advanced quests I find interesting.(Not bashing LOTR at all, it does look good) Also saying that cause Vanguard has more classes they must be rushed is just idiotic????! Generally alot of false statements from players who seem very biased, and from people who have made up their mind already and don't feel like looking at the facts, but would rather trashtalk.
so you aren't for or against either??? I mean all you just said that everyone who just posted were retards and that this post you just put in is exactly what it is going to be like. I want more info.
Originally posted by Dark_Morbius I wish I could say more but I am testing both and I will defintley not be purchasing vanguard. As another poster said it is eq.
I've been waiting A LOT for Vanguard. I even purchased the stupid beta-keys from a magazine to get the Vanguard Beta Invite. So after a couple months, I finally got the Beta Invite, downloaded the HUGE client. Was around 25gb total. And you know what, I didnt even make it to level 10... the game was so boring and slow in a bad way, in a very bad way. I still remember I had to find a group to finish a level 3 quest!! Just because the monster camp was so crowded, multiple pulls, and fast spawn. At level 3!??
And yesterday I was lucky enough to get Lord of the Rings Online beta invite ( I applied to the beta after got so dissapointed by Vanguard), I downloaded the client, its around 6gb total after extracted. I didn't expect a lot from this game, but surprisingly it got me hooked!! Real hooked, the first 6 levels were the most fun MMORPG I ever experienced. Even further now I'm still having fun with the game, the quest storylines are fun and have good backgrounds. Not just suddenly some NPC ask us to kill X mobs because they feel like it. Oh, and I'm not a really big fan of Tolkien, I watched and liked the movies but I think I have to watch them now again to get to know the lore haha.
So right now, between Vanguard and LotRO, my money is on LotRO. Not because what people said or what I read, but because I already experienced both.
Vanguard offers a huge gaming sphere with very different continents, and very different atmospheres. The hugeness makes it alittle bland though. On low settings, the game looks like Wish online just before they cancelled. At high settings it looks like EQ 2, actually not as good as eq2 at high settings, but very decent, unplayable though, at those settings. My machine is average.
It has alot more to offer than LOTRO, however, it is very rough at this stage. They could release LOTRO right now, and it would be well recieved. Havent seen a beta that polished before. Only WoW open beta was as good.
LOTRO, is a smaller world, with alittle more forced gameplay, with more instances, and not as much raiding, if anything? Already the lore in the game is tremendous, I feel that this game will give me a great experience exploring the depth of Tolkiens lore..
Vanguard shows the most promise on the board, but gameplay is bland and boring. I love the hardcoreness of the game, very steep learning curve, exp is harsh to get after lvl 10, and raids will wipe if one member fails. But something is missing, maybe they will manage to make it, though.. The only third gen thing i see in vanguard is their Diplomacy system, which is kinda nice, a good way to get to know the lore.
LOTRO will do what WoW did, do what already works, with nice graphics, and with an unbeatable background story..
Lotro has a great feel. but will it last? Vanguard feels like a huge 3d room, gameplay is too bland right now. Skills are linear and boring.
Vanguards classes is a huge plus though, they feel very different at this stage, and there is a place for most classes. Races, has the fault of eq2, looks alittle too similar. CC are overpowered at this stage. Many new features in the mmo genre concerning classes.. SWG was as good or better.. so I wont call it 3rd gen.
Vanguard has a "wow" effect, but so does LOTRO.
LOTRO feels like a game, Vanguard feels like a new world. Which will prove good or bad..
Originally posted by -Jaguar- LotRO has better graphics.Vanguard is seamless (no zones), which is the major reason I like it.
You need to do some research. Vanguard SoH has graphics nailed down! LOTR has nice graphics, but their almost too colorful, whereas VG has more of a realistic feel. I guess it all depends what you prefer.
/played-mmorpgs
Total time played:9125 Days, 21 Hours, 29 Minutes, 27 Seconds Time played this level: 39 Days, 1 Hour, 24 Minutes, 5 Seconds
Originally posted by matraque Those thinking VG = EQ are totally wrong. Trust me.
Well, to be honest about it. VG = EQ mixed with SoR; it is kinda a son of these two games, design-wise. For the better...and for the worst. If you dislike either, it is going to be unlikely you like the mixing; if you like 1 or two, maybe.
SoR is more hardcore than Vanguard and EQ. Vanguard aim to be more casual-friendly than EQ and SoR, however it will end-up more hardcore than EQ, yet in a different way. Prolly not at release however, I tend to believe that at release, VG will be less hardcore than EQ. But as expansions kick in, the game will get a LOT more hardcore than EQ, especially when they listen to the online community and what they ask...we all know what FoH will ask for.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
have any of you actually played LOTR to comment on it ? I did, I got to play it at E3 and let me comment...
There is a reason for no mounts in LOTR, the world is too small and would make it even smaller with mounts. Those who say one giant continent make me laugh. The world is like half of one continent in WoW.
For those that say the quests in LOTR are complex and innovative...WRONG. The ones I saw were patheticly boring. Go kill 5 wolves, go collect 6 piles of wood, wash rinse an repeat. No thought whatsoever was put into them. The very first quest is decent and makes you feel like your playing in Middle Earth but the rest are very boring. No clever storyline, just mayor so and so needs you to thin the woods out of wolves..councilman so and so needs you to remove some of the robbers from the woods, bleh. None of the quests made me think hey Im playing in Middle Earth after the initial one.
Someone mentioned character creation for LOTR being good, sorry but wrong again. I'd say it was one of the worst Ive ever seen for an MMO. It had basically zero new things to it an you end up looking exactly like everyone else. It was basic, choose from 7 noses, choose from 7 mouths, choose from 7 different scars, choose 7 different hair styles, and be muscular or thin or fat. No choices in clothing or clothing colors. No choices really that made you unique looking whatsoever. For a new MMO, I expect a lot more than this.
Combat in LOTR is boring. There are specials but I didnt need to use any. The mobs arent very difficult and did fine just as easily with auto-attack as using specials. And specials werent very well thought out. There wasnt any fears, stuns, lockdown moves, etc moves that might actually create strategy. The specials were simplistic varieties of basic attacks. And worst of all, the combat animations are just awful. I quickly got tired of seeing the same 2 basic moves my toon made when he attacked something. Lets face it, most of your game time will be spent in combat so why not make it pleasing to watch. Overall, combat is definitely the weakness of this game and thats very very bad when the combat has little else.
Crafting is pointless is LOTR. It was obviously added at the last stages of alpha and isnt very good. Its also not needed as one can just buy anything from npc's or get stuff as rewards for killing 10 bears.
Social aspects - this game desperately craves a place to hang out with hobbits and share a pint of ale with. Unfortunately, most of the buildings are closed off. The only buildings you can enter are for quests or to get quests and even then its zoned so you have to wait for loading screen everytime you walk in or out. Most towns have the same look to them...closed buildings just there for decoration...npc trainers for classes, npc vendors selling armor or weapons...and some quest givers. Players run in and out of town turning in boring quest after boring quest and move on.
What I saw was just plain sad. LOTR is a flop waiting to happen. It made me want to play DDO, it was that bad. There arent any hobbits singing toons in a tavern. There wasnt any farming like I had read about. There wasnt any reason to group that I saw. The world is very small and you'll run out of places to go quite fast. This is a pathetic use of great license.
Comments
But even I know better than to rely on the extremely limited amount of information released about any of those games.
Wait until the NDA is lifted. Then decide based on other peoples personal experience. Right now, what you have is the equivelent to rumors.
rofl. Nice try twisting what I said. I just said the exact same thing I've been saying all along. That all you have is rumor and you should wait to judge whether you think it will be a good game.
Have you been smoking something? Or are you just trying to bait and troll?
rofl. Nice try twisting what I said. I just said the exact same thing I've been saying all along. That all you have is rumor and you should wait to judge whether you think it will be a good game.
Have you been smoking something? Or are you just trying to bait and troll?
I would go mostly trolling but i didnt twist any words of yours you said what you said.your statement happen to be directed at me and thats the reason i brought it to your attention. I didnt twist any of your words just quoted you thats all so wiggle your way out of your own words. but hey good luck in any game you choose..
i dont know if this helps and it depends on others opinions. i have two people i have been guildmates with since the old days. one got into lord of the rings and the other got into vanguard. the guildmate in the rings beta says that the game is dry, drab and boring and was sad he didnt get into vanguard so went back to a game called rappelz which imo is not the best. the other friend in vanguard syas the content is promising and looks fun but h feels that the game needs much more work even for a beta and wished he had got into lord of the rings so went back to eve.
my whole point of this response is even with my trust in these peoples judments i will try both for myself because everyone has different tastes and any review will be colored by those tastes. i think at this point it is best for you to look at the features of both games and make the best choice you can and then cross your fingers and never look back. i am not saying either is best but i am sure you will find the one you like.
heck i even know a guy who still says dark and light will be one of the best games ever when the bugs are worked out.
No, actually you don't know what you're talking about. Turbine has licensed LOTR from Tolkein Enterprises and is under contract to keep the game true to Tolkein's books. Turbine can't just decide to have evil races in regular gameplay, the whole crux of the story is about a specific 4 races saving the world of Middle-earth. This is why Turbine developed PvMP, Player vs Monster Play, so that players can experience playing bad guys without upsetting the lore. And Turbine can't just decide to have wizard player characters, because according to Tolkein, wizards were demi-gods. No players will get to play demi-gods. No player will play Gandalf or Elrond or Galadriel or Aragorn or Arwen, or Frodo or Samwise for that matter. Players will be working toward the same goals as the book characters, aiding the cause in whatever ways Turbine designs for them to aid that cause. Turbine has experts in the lore to help them keep things true to the written works, and the game undergos reviews by Tolkein Enterprises to be sure that they are.
One thing is certain, and I can say this without having played either game: some players will love LOTRO and hate Vanguard. Some players will love Vanguard and hate LOTRO. Some players will love both. Some players will hate both. Just how many land in which camp is what everyone wants to know, and no one will know until the games ship. All the rest of it is speculation and prediction. But you knew that already, didn't you?
Edit for typo.
Though not biased, this post is a bit misleading (whether intentional or not does not matter).
Races: For the most part, Tolkien only gives us 4 races, so that comparison is rather disingenuine.
I disagree. Turbine could have made a game with evil races, but elected not to. Also, they could have had a wizard class, though i understand that they dont want everyone to be a jedi...Evil races would not fit in with lore. Despite the current fade that evil is cool, Tolkien says different. Sticking with the side of Good allows Turbine to have thematic content that jibes with Tolkien. You mention all these things they 'could have had.' Well they could have had playable Dragons, but like your suggestions, they chose not too. So? Proves nothing except the devs have restraint.
Continents: Middle Earth in the lore is huge. The number of continents is irrelevant.
The number of continents IS relevant. Middle Earth may be huge in the lore, but LOTRO is launching with only a sliver of Middle Earth-the NW portion of Eriador. We are not talking about small continents in Vanguard, but huge continents. Furthermore, they are seperated by vast oceans that one can explore on their own ships. Content is out there to be discovered. Each continent is home to its own set of races and has a different theme. Any way you look at it, there is more content in VanguardLook, there's no way Turbine could implement continents for LOTRO. The number of continents a ridiculous comparison drummed up simply to add an additional 'feature' to the OP list. I'm sure Eriador has 'content to be discovered' and different areas with a different theme. Angmar comes to mind which I imagine is thematically different than the Shire which will likely be thematically different than the Dwarven area.
Instanced: LOTRO devs have said only about 10 to 20 percent of the world is instanced. A blanket statement of 'instanced' vs Vanguards non-instanced is false.
K, if you are going to nitpick on that comment, perhaps I should have said LOTRO will have instancing instead of being "instanced", and Vanguard will not have instancing at all
Well, it isn't a nit-pick, it's an egregious mis-characterisation.
Game life span: You really can't tell from a pre-launch perspective what sort of lifespan these games will have.
OMG, it might be speculative at this point but I absolutely guarantee 100% that Vanguard will have a bigger following than LOTRO and outlast it. Turbine has failed at everything they've touched since AC 1, while the guys who designed the mother of all MMORPG's in Everquest are making this game...do you really think LOTRO will outlast Vanguard? Wishful thinking. For goodness sake, people are STILL playing EQ 1 today!
Each game will have its following. Unlike you, I'm not here to measure epeens, and trash one game over the other. I don't have a vendetta against any game. I simply wanted to correct the record that was misleading in the OP.
Mounts: Of course LOTRO can't have griffons, dinasaurs, dragons as mounts if they want to have the game resemble Middle Earth. Vanguard can have these things, but then again so does other fantasy MMOs. Nothing new there.
Thing is, Turbine wouldn't have flying mounts at launch even if they were in Middle Earth and part of the lore. How can I say that you might wonder? Because they don't even have normal horse mounts at launch!!! And that was part of the Middle Earth lore! People are going to have to wait another year to ride a horse in LOTRO! Also, Vanguard is the first game to have flying mounts without rails.
Uh, I don't believe I was correcting which game would have mounts or not. I was correcting the second iteration of that claim which compared no mounts to flying mounts. Again, I am only setting the record straight.
Gameplay: Again, you have no real idea how easy either would be.
Actually I do, I have firsthand intricate knowledge of LOTRO. While I can't say the same for Vanguard, the developers have clearly stated over and over that it will be harder than your standard MMORPG. Vanguard will not be like WoW where you have a bunch of sucky awful video game players that can achieve lvl 60 with no skill at all. Personally, it makes me puke to see no skilled hacks with high level characters cause people can level up with no talent and still suck and not be able to play their class. In Vanguard, it will take skill. You will have to choose how to react to the NPC's in a fight, and you will have different options to choose from at the same time. It will be more than button mashing every mob the same way, (WoW was and now LOTRO). The devs at Vanguard have said this over and over again.
So yet another person 'in beta' with first hand knowledge. Tell me this. If you can't be trusted to keep the NDA, why should I trust anything you say. Your word obviously means nothing, and in my view that speaks more than any words you have to say.
_____________________________
Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO
Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
Find the Truth: http://www.factcheck.org/
The reason Vanguard looks like EQ is because the vast majority of Sigil's artists, like a lot of the people at Sigil, came from EQ. I'm not at all impressed with what I read and see about Vanguard -- it's a pie with a pretty crust but little filling. Lots of hype. Then, major decisions made by Sigil over the last year have really turned me off completely. I mean OMG, leave MicroSoft which supported your sorry asses for 3+ years and "sell out" to SOE? Okay, I know, SOE will only produce and distribute the game but come on, merely logging in to SOE's Station would make me puke.
LoTR looks promising. I predict LoTR will have a modest amount of players when released but if Turbine holds true to its plans for game development and their incremental approach to realsing major updates in manageable, bug-free "bites," it won't be long before you will see a lot of MMORPG gamers playing this game.
Originally posted by Jetora...
No, actually you don't know what you're talking about. Turbine has licensed LOTR from Tolkein Enterprises and is under contract to keep the game true to Tolkein's books. Turbine can't just decide to have evil races in regular gameplay, the whole crux of the story is about a specific 4 races saving the world of Middle-earth. This is why Turbine developed PvMP, Player vs Monster Play, so that players can experience playing bad guys without upsetting the lore. And Turbine can't just decide to have wizard player characters, because according to Tolkein, wizards were demi-gods. No players will get to play demi-gods. No player will play Gandalf or Elrond or Galadriel or Aragorn or Arwen, or Frodo or Samwise for that matter. Players will be working toward the same goals as the book characters, aiding the cause in whatever ways Turbine designs for them to aid that cause. Turbine has experts in the lore to help them keep things true to the written works, and the game undergos reviews by Tolkein Enterprises to be sure that they are.
One thing is certain, and I can say this without having played either game: some players will love LOTRO and hate Vanguard. Some players will love Vanguard and hate LOTRO. Some players will love both. Some players will hate both. Just how many land in which camp is what everyone wants to know, and no one will know until the games ship. All the rest of it is speculation and prediction. But you knew that already, didn't you?
Wow-what a great post arguing against a point that I never made.
You must feel either 1) very smart because you received your GED or 2) very dumb for wasting your time.
Though not biased, this post is a bit misleading (whether intentional or not does not matter).
Races: For the most part, Tolkien only gives us 4 races, so that comparison is rather disingenuine.
I disagree. Turbine could have made a game with evil races, but elected not to. Also, they could have had a wizard class, though i understand that they dont want everyone to be a jedi...Evil races would not fit in with lore. Despite the current fade that evil is cool, Tolkien says different. Sticking with the side of Good allows Turbine to have thematic content that jibes with Tolkien. You mention all these things they 'could have had.' Well they could have had playable Dragons, but like your suggestions, they chose not too. So? Proves nothing except the devs have restraint.
Continents: Middle Earth in the lore is huge. The number of continents is irrelevant.
The number of continents IS relevant. Middle Earth may be huge in the lore, but LOTRO is launching with only a sliver of Middle Earth-the NW portion of Eriador. We are not talking about small continents in Vanguard, but huge continents. Furthermore, they are seperated by vast oceans that one can explore on their own ships. Content is out there to be discovered. Each continent is home to its own set of races and has a different theme. Any way you look at it, there is more content in VanguardLook, there's no way Turbine could implement continents for LOTRO. The number of continents a ridiculous comparison drummed up simply to add an additional 'feature' to the OP list. I'm sure Eriador has 'content to be discovered' and different areas with a different theme. Angmar comes to mind which I imagine is thematically different than the Shire which will likely be thematically different than the Dwarven area.
Instanced: LOTRO devs have said only about 10 to 20 percent of the world is instanced. A blanket statement of 'instanced' vs Vanguards non-instanced is false.
K, if you are going to nitpick on that comment, perhaps I should have said LOTRO will have instancing instead of being "instanced", and Vanguard will not have instancing at all
Well, it isn't a nit-pick, it's an egregious mis-characterisation.
Game life span: You really can't tell from a pre-launch perspective what sort of lifespan these games will have.
OMG, it might be speculative at this point but I absolutely guarantee 100% that Vanguard will have a bigger following than LOTRO and outlast it. Turbine has failed at everything they've touched since AC 1, while the guys who designed the mother of all MMORPG's in Everquest are making this game...do you really think LOTRO will outlast Vanguard? Wishful thinking. For goodness sake, people are STILL playing EQ 1 today!
Each game will have its following. Unlike you, I'm not here to measure epeens, and trash one game over the other. I don't have a vendetta against any game. I simply wanted to correct the record that was misleading in the OP.
Mounts: Of course LOTRO can't have griffons, dinasaurs, dragons as mounts if they want to have the game resemble Middle Earth. Vanguard can have these things, but then again so does other fantasy MMOs. Nothing new there.
Thing is, Turbine wouldn't have flying mounts at launch even if they were in Middle Earth and part of the lore. How can I say that you might wonder? Because they don't even have normal horse mounts at launch!!! And that was part of the Middle Earth lore! People are going to have to wait another year to ride a horse in LOTRO! Also, Vanguard is the first game to have flying mounts without rails.
Uh, I don't believe I was correcting which game would have mounts or not. I was correcting the second iteration of that claim which compared no mounts to flying mounts. Again, I am only setting the record straight.
Gameplay: Again, you have no real idea how easy either would be.
Actually I do, I have firsthand intricate knowledge of LOTRO. While I can't say the same for Vanguard, the developers have clearly stated over and over that it will be harder than your standard MMORPG. Vanguard will not be like WoW where you have a bunch of sucky awful video game players that can achieve lvl 60 with no skill at all. Personally, it makes me puke to see no skilled hacks with high level characters cause people can level up with no talent and still suck and not be able to play their class. In Vanguard, it will take skill. You will have to choose how to react to the NPC's in a fight, and you will have different options to choose from at the same time. It will be more than button mashing every mob the same way, (WoW was and now LOTRO). The devs at Vanguard have said this over and over again.
So yet another person 'in beta' with first hand knowledge. Tell me this. If you can't be trusted to keep the NDA, why should I trust anything you say. Your word obviously means nothing, and in my view that speaks more than any words you have to say.
Your spelling is flawed. Your points are flawed. Your logic is flawed.
Don't give up though! Keep trying! One day you will succeed!
______________________________
WAR looks AWESOME!
Give Blood....Play Rugby!
I miss DAoC
I must say, some of you guys are very miss informed, and should just not post, if you got no clue about the games. Me personally, I am looking foward to both games(and Warhammer Online), and while most of the best LOTR stuff has been covered in this post, there has been alot of lies about Vanguard.
First off, SOE hosts the servers, but has absolutely nothing to do with Vanguard it self, the way it is made, nor do they have any influence on the gameplay, whatsoever. Secondly, ppl saying stuff like "have fun playing EQ3" etc, are just plain retards. This game while made by the same ppl, and focused towards the same gaming crowd, is ALOT different. EQ was a zone based game, with little crafting, no diplomacy,player houses/cities, very few quests, and generally envolved around mob grinding, which was okay since it was group based.
Vanguard offers Player houses, seamless world, lots of quests, alot more focus on crafting and diplomacy. Player build boats, mounts, flying mounts. When you look deeper in to the gameplay it does envolve around that same groupbased gameplay, although there will both be raiding and soloing.
People who says it is similair to EQ and that LOTR is all new and got super quests etc are wrong. If you read the previews of LOTR, you'd know they also have kill x amount of wolfs etc, like someone said they didn't. Although the game also has good lore, and also some advanced quests I find interesting.(Not bashing LOTR at all, it does look good)
Also saying that cause Vanguard has more classes they must be rushed is just idiotic????!
Generally alot of false statements from players who seem very biased, and from people who have made up their mind already and don't feel like looking at the facts, but would rather trashtalk.
LOTRO will have more subs probably yeah, its more like wow than vanguard.
And yesterday I was lucky enough to get Lord of the Rings Online beta invite ( I applied to the beta after got so dissapointed by Vanguard), I downloaded the client, its around 6gb total after extracted. I didn't expect a lot from this game, but surprisingly it got me hooked!! Real hooked, the first 6 levels were the most fun MMORPG I ever experienced. Even further now I'm still having fun with the game, the quest storylines are fun and have good backgrounds. Not just suddenly some NPC ask us to kill X mobs because they feel like it. Oh, and I'm not a really big fan of Tolkien, I watched and liked the movies but I think I have to watch them now again to get to know the lore haha.
So right now, between Vanguard and LotRO, my money is on LotRO. Not because what people said or what I read, but because I already experienced both.
Vanguard offers a huge gaming sphere with very different continents, and very different atmospheres. The hugeness makes it alittle bland though. On low settings, the game looks like Wish online just before they cancelled. At high settings it looks like EQ 2, actually not as good as eq2 at high settings, but very decent, unplayable though, at those settings. My machine is average.
It has alot more to offer than LOTRO, however, it is very rough at this stage. They could release LOTRO right now, and it would be well recieved. Havent seen a beta that polished before. Only WoW open beta was as good.
LOTRO, is a smaller world, with alittle more forced gameplay, with more instances, and not as much raiding, if anything? Already the lore in the game is tremendous, I feel that this game will give me a great experience exploring the depth of Tolkiens lore..
Vanguard shows the most promise on the board, but gameplay is bland and boring. I love the hardcoreness of the game, very steep learning curve, exp is harsh to get after lvl 10, and raids will wipe if one member fails. But something is missing, maybe they will manage to make it, though.. The only third gen thing i see in vanguard is their Diplomacy system, which is kinda nice, a good way to get to know the lore.
LOTRO will do what WoW did, do what already works, with nice graphics, and with an unbeatable background story..
Lotro has a great feel. but will it last? Vanguard feels like a huge 3d room, gameplay is too bland right now. Skills are linear and boring.
Vanguards classes is a huge plus though, they feel very different at this stage, and there is a place for most classes. Races, has the fault of eq2, looks alittle too similar. CC are overpowered at this stage. Many new features in the mmo genre concerning classes.. SWG was as good or better.. so I wont call it 3rd gen.
Vanguard has a "wow" effect, but so does LOTRO.
LOTRO feels like a game, Vanguard feels like a new world. Which will prove good or bad..
They are very different.
Cheers
Total time played: 9125 Days, 21 Hours, 29 Minutes, 27 Seconds
Time played this level: 39 Days, 1 Hour, 24 Minutes, 5 Seconds
eqnext.wikia.com
Well, to be honest about it. VG = EQ mixed with SoR; it is kinda a son of these two games, design-wise. For the better...and for the worst. If you dislike either, it is going to be unlikely you like the mixing; if you like 1 or two, maybe.
SoR is more hardcore than Vanguard and EQ. Vanguard aim to be more casual-friendly than EQ and SoR, however it will end-up more hardcore than EQ, yet in a different way. Prolly not at release however, I tend to believe that at release, VG will be less hardcore than EQ. But as expansions kick in, the game will get a LOT more hardcore than EQ, especially when they listen to the online community and what they ask...we all know what FoH will ask for.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
have any of you actually played LOTR to comment on it ? I did, I got to play it at E3 and let me comment...
There is a reason for no mounts in LOTR, the world is too small and would make it even smaller with mounts. Those who say one giant continent make me laugh. The world is like half of one continent in WoW.
For those that say the quests in LOTR are complex and innovative...WRONG. The ones I saw were patheticly boring. Go kill 5 wolves, go collect 6 piles of wood, wash rinse an repeat. No thought whatsoever was put into them. The very first quest is decent and makes you feel like your playing in Middle Earth but the rest are very boring. No clever storyline, just mayor so and so needs you to thin the woods out of wolves..councilman so and so needs you to remove some of the robbers from the woods, bleh. None of the quests made me think hey Im playing in Middle Earth after the initial one.
Someone mentioned character creation for LOTR being good, sorry but wrong again. I'd say it was one of the worst Ive ever seen for an MMO. It had basically zero new things to it an you end up looking exactly like everyone else. It was basic, choose from 7 noses, choose from 7 mouths, choose from 7 different scars, choose 7 different hair styles, and be muscular or thin or fat. No choices in clothing or clothing colors. No choices really that made you unique looking whatsoever. For a new MMO, I expect a lot more than this.
Combat in LOTR is boring. There are specials but I didnt need to use any. The mobs arent very difficult and did fine just as easily with auto-attack as using specials. And specials werent very well thought out. There wasnt any fears, stuns, lockdown moves, etc moves that might actually create strategy. The specials were simplistic varieties of basic attacks. And worst of all, the combat animations are just awful. I quickly got tired of seeing the same 2 basic moves my toon made when he attacked something. Lets face it, most of your game time will be spent in combat so why not make it pleasing to watch. Overall, combat is definitely the weakness of this game and thats very very bad when the combat has little else.
Crafting is pointless is LOTR. It was obviously added at the last stages of alpha and isnt very good. Its also not needed as one can just buy anything from npc's or get stuff as rewards for killing 10 bears.
Social aspects - this game desperately craves a place to hang out with hobbits and share a pint of ale with. Unfortunately, most of the buildings are closed off. The only buildings you can enter are for quests or to get quests and even then its zoned so you have to wait for loading screen everytime you walk in or out. Most towns have the same look to them...closed buildings just there for decoration...npc trainers for classes, npc vendors selling armor or weapons...and some quest givers. Players run in and out of town turning in boring quest after boring quest and move on.
What I saw was just plain sad. LOTR is a flop waiting to happen. It made me want to play DDO, it was that bad. There arent any hobbits singing toons in a tavern. There wasnt any farming like I had read about. There wasnt any reason to group that I saw. The world is very small and you'll run out of places to go quite fast. This is a pathetic use of great license.