Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
People in stress test weekend, what do you think?
JEMcLeod
Member Posts: 35
So right now stress test is in progress and is almost over. So instead of just the normal beta testers we can get a review from more of the public. I have been playing majority of the weekend and I have to say I quite enjoy it. I chose elf lore-master and I just think this game is pure fun and enjoyable and plan on buying it when it releases. Cancelled Vanguard and am going to use the money per month towards LOTRO.
So I was just wondering what everyone else who has been playing this weekend are planning on doing and how they think the game is and plays.
Comments
- It ran smooth. After crashing, laggy, staggering performance in Vanguard, it was nice to just run around without lag or program bugs.
- world looked nice. It was big too. Kind of catches you off guard, but you run for 10-15 minutes, then look at the map, and are like... hmm... this place really is pretty big. Just guessing, I would say 60% of what original WoW was.... just guessing. But big enough to play in for sure. Lots of big grand areas, inside dungeons with hunred foot rooftops, nice drawf city that looks better than ironforge imo.
- lore... love it of course. Saw the party tree in bag end, strider in the prancing poney, farmer maggot, tom bombadil, weathertop.... all neat. Read the books as a kid and still remember it all for some reason.
- startup. played a hobbit-burglar, human-hunter, and elf-champion. Two major start up areas get you going easily, like wow did. Fast intro to the game.
- auction-house. straight out of wow. The good ideas have little room for more improvement actually.
What I didn't like:
- pvp. Sorry, but I like the tension, fear, suspense that comes from not knowing what's going to happen when I go over the next hill. Only humans can bring that kind of unknown right now, since AI is so pitiful in most of these games. I played wow the first 5 months because of the world-pvp. Then blizz created BGs and honor-points, and ruined their game imo... that's when I quit. Little mobs or NPCs can only go so far... keep me interested maybe twice doing the same thing... then it's time to move on. The monster play was ok... it's essentially a pvp battleground where the "bad side" doesn't have to level, just port in and have a lvl 50 monster. It might be fun for a few weeks at max level.... like a little mini-game or something.
- animations. I've seen better i think. It's playable... not that big of a deal I guess.... but I've seen better (wow for example).
What I don't know about after just a weekend stress test:
- crafting. couldn't tell, but seemed ok. The real question with crafting is this... will the items made be better or worse than items obtained from drops and quests? If drops and quests are better, then crafting will eventually be a dead end. If crafting stuff is better, and crafters maybe replace items that decay, then they always have demand, and it will be nice. The details of how you make stuff is kind of irrelevant compared to that question. So I still don't know the answer to this question.
- class customization. I saw virtues and traits, but I don't know what will be available to fill in those slots and customize the character. Will there enough traits to actually have some choices or not? If not, then it's pretty blah .... every 'hunter' will be very close to identical, and that's boring.
CONCLUSION:
It's a winner imo. It's the kind of game to buy, pre-order so you can get it for 10/mo, play 3-5 months, over the summer, level a main, do a few high-end raids, a little battleground pvp, maybe even an alt or two. Then cancel, and play the next game. Maybe come back the next summer when they've doubled the world size or something. I dont' think there is enough there though to keep someone playing solid for years. But what is there is very nice. definately worth playing imo.
Just wait till you enter the valley of Rivendale. Wow.
I'm sorry stress test is ending, I'll hate to leave till open beta.
Ran better than most released MMOs in its *stress test*. The world looked better than any MMO I have played, the attention to detail was fantastic, and the game play was a lot of fun.
I really don’t have enough good things to say about this game.
The stress test this weekend was my first go around with LOTRO, and here are my general impressions after playing a Captain to level 10 and travelling as far as the Chetwood and the Midgewater Marshes. Note: I am not a die-hard fan of LOTR, not that there's anything wrong with that. I loved the movies, enjoyed the books, and have enjoyed reading literary criticism about the world-building behind Middle-Earth with great interest, but I am far from being anywhere near a Tolkien devotee. I approached LOTRO less as the culmination of a life-long dream and more as yet another MMORPG.
What I Liked:
1) I could run it smoothly, albeit at Low setting but at 1280x1024. At that graphical setting and that resolution, I had no performance issues at all (my primary concern) and the graphics remained acceptable to me.
2) As an MMORPG vet, the game mechanics, at least from levels 1-10 were very simple to pick up and play, although the Trait and Achievement systems hinted at more complex player decisions as the game progressed.
3) Some of the atmosphere was very evocative of Lord of the Rings and Middle-Earth. The prologue was great fun, and the ruins scattered all about the landscape are nice touches.
4) It was very stable for a beta build. No glaring bugs, no major lag issues even for a stress test, the servers were available whenever I wanted to play, and everything just seemed to work as advertised.
What I Didn't Like:
1) The early quests seemed very by-the-numbers to me. I made the effort to read every line of text associated with each quest in order to better immerse myself in the atmosphere, but even that couldn't overcome my lack of interest in killing this or delivering that or collecting you-know-what for the umpteenth time in an MMORPG. The fact that some of the quests involved killing creatures that apparently were in short supply made them even more frustrating, although I blame that more on the overwhelming numbers of low level players in one area due to the stress test. I shouldn't be too hard on LOTRO when it comes to quest crafting as every single MMORPG on the market these days follows the same uninspired quest design, but still...
2) Speaking about the text - I dunno, for some reason, I'd say a great amout of the NPC dialogue just didn't sound like LOTR to me. Sounded more like bad renaissance faire, but that's just my opinion. I guess one can't expect farmers and everyday folk to be as eloquent as Gandalf and Elrond, and spouting off high-winded monologues on destiny and fate and such stuff.
3) At least when it came to the Captain class, I felt it was a bit bland. Before level 10, all I had were 3 melee attacks with very similar animations and hard to discern differences (yes, I know one was a bleed, one gave me a defensive bonus and one did more damage, but I just couldn't get very excited about that), a toggle that increased my critical percent by a barely noticeable amount, and a direct DD shout (not including the two fellowship skills I had). I just didn't get the impression that my character was CHANGING all that much as I leveled. I know it's only 10 levels, and that's fine. The introduction of my Herald of War at level 10 was very cool actually, but aside from that, the Captain class was a bit uninspiring to me.
4) The quest rewards and the mob dropped items were very bland. Now, I know this is LOTR so one can't have a Monty Haul type loot system with Vorpal Blades and Helmets of Uberosity dropping off of every mangy rat and cowardly brigand, but receiving a non-descript Two-Handed Sword and some shoulder pads as quest rewards does not make a player whoop for joy. About the only item I got excited about was when I received a Cloak as a reward. Again, this is LOTR so the loot system probably makes sense under these very specific circumstances, but still...
5) I absolutely hated having to wait in line to kill something in order to finish a quest. I understand that the reason for this is to encourage people to socialize more and start familiaring themselves with the Fellowship system at an early level, but the situation was all wrong. I mean, at the lower levels, you're asking players to group together in order to kill a mob that they can easily solo by themselves. I'm not adverse to grouping to finish quests, but all that effort to form a group in order to kill a mob in 2 seconds without any strategy at all? More annoying than anything.
6) I was expecting more symphonic and cinematic music...where did it go? Maybe at the higher levels?
All in all, a decent experience. The fact that I could even run it on my admittedly out-dated system is a big plus, but the fact that I found much of the game play kind of bland is a big minus. At this point, I'd probably pass on LOTRO if it was released today, not because it's a mess of a game, but just because it didn't really catch my attention. Of course, I only made it to level 10, so these impressions are just about the very early levels. Unfortunately, for someone like myself who has limited time to play anything these days, if the early levels fail to grab me, then I become wary about how interesting the later levels will be. With such limited time available to me, I can't justify potentially wasting them on the ephemeral promise that levels 30+ will be great.
Things that are good :
It runs on HIGHEST setting even on my crappy PC
They really make you feel part of the Tolkien books
Graphic is great
Things that i didnt like:
So all in all.
Did I like it , yes... Was i impressed and yelling "this is best MMO evar!" , no ...
Will I buy it
Sure thing.
"Before this battle is over all the world will know that few...stood against many." - King Leonidas
Not my cup of tea:
-Only 7 classes
-Small world size, 15 land zones(not including dungeons)
-Poor character customization. Few different faces, hair styles, eyebrows, and lips
-Could not enter 90% of houses, doors were just for cosmetic looks
-Very casual oriented
-Most of the content can be done solo
The things that I did like, was the graphics and the polish.
Edit: There are a total of 7 classes and not 5 like I posted earlier. Certain races are limited to specific classes, so I made a mistake of thinking there were fewer classes.
The game is smooth and looks great on my computer running it on max settings at 1680x1050 wide screen (8800GTX)
The game even performs well when there are 50+ other characters or so on screen. This is probably due to the fact that most buildings and characters use a lower poly count, but pretty good texture work.
The music was good, the sound has some issue though. I would hear random bear screams in my headphones when there were no bears around. I swear I'm not making this up
The game crashes under Vista when you zone in/out of instances sometimes. I was kind of expecting that though given the poor support for my graphics card and the newness of the operating system, and the betaness of the game.
The character running animation need a LOT of work, it is not fluid/smooth and is painful to look at most of the time.
The level of detail in character creation is low but I don't really care to much, I spend most of the time looking at people from a distance and so all that detail is lost anyway.
I played a champion 12, minstrel 8, captain 8.
I wouldn't say there is anything I came across that is ground breaking here. Almost all the classes use similar mechanisms to other games. For instance the captain has a system of Marks( WoW Paladin Judgements), and Commands (Wow Paladin Blessings), gets heavey armor, can rez, but isn't a healer. The champion has a combo point system like the WoW rogue, and the Minstel has a system which is just tier based, perform T1 skill and then you can perform a T2 skill, and so on. Reminds me of weapon chains in DAoC kinda, but none were reactive based.
I tried the guardian(tank) class and found the most effective way to play was to just press all my skills at the same time.
You spend a lot of time waiting for cool downs in the combat system. It gets annoying because when you press a skill it doesn't just go off instantly, it often takes a round of combat or something, there is a delay. So you spend even more time wait to make sure the game is doing what you think you're telling it to do.
I would say they need to make the combat system more responsive to player input. Overall it's simple and easy to learn, nothing new.
The questing system is a copy/paste from WoW same as Vanguard and DAoC(latest stuff at least). Seems WoW is the standard now and I guess it is a good system. The quality of quests was good, the rewards were bland... In all my time playing I don't think I encountered a single magical item. Which seems kind of odd. Even if this is world/lore related I thing it's a poor choice, but who knows it probably is just a slow start in this game.
The world is very detailed and looks great, and there is a lot of room for expansion. I think this is perhaps the best part of the game, the quests and the continued major storyline, It reminds me of the vaults in AC2. I think this is something most MMOs have been missing, a reason for the player to exist in the game world, here we get to play out parts of the story which is much more interesting than being dumped in a huge game world with no real reason for being there.
There is no XP grind and the content seems to be solo/casual friendly, which is a plus for me. You can play in a group if you want to, which is true in any mmo, but the inverse isn't always true so it's nice to have the option.
I wanted to try crafting but it was such a pain to collect all the materials during a stress test, and the prices on the AH were nuts. From what I can tell they have a WoW/Vanguard style gathering system, which then in turn supports the crafts.
The crafting is simple like WoW with some sub-combines, like for a sword you make a hilt, blade and combine them. This is fine for me, I hate Vanguard's system, it's the most boring sub-game I've ever played. EQ2 was annoying with the billions of sub-makes, until they changed it, but the game in EQ2 was at least kind of fun. Vanguard just makes you click 60 times over the course of 1 minute for no good reason.
Actually now that I think about it the EQ2 system would let you make a crap item fast if you wanted to, or put a lot of effort in and make a good item slowly. Vanguard crap items yield no XP from my understanding so you are forced to make at least a D quality item which eats time.
Anyway. I'm not sure how much player made gear matters at all. I'll probably try it out in open beta when i can harvest some mats without a zerg of other players swarming around every resource node.
I wanted to try out monster play but didn't get to. I understand you control level 50 monsters at end game locations. I'm not sure there were any lvl 50 players even on the server though.
If I had to choose between this and Vanguard, actually I do
Once you have finished your first MMO the novelty of the entire thing is gone and you start to look for something better. All the new MMOs are just clones of work already done with some changes here and there.
MMOS consist of:
Classes, Races, Combat, Magic, Items, Mail, Mounts, Houses, Boats, Maps, Quests, Guilds, Groups, Raids, Crafting, Gathering, PVP
I think that's basically it. Companies keep refining these areas but ultimately it doesn't matter. Once you are a 2nd gen MMO player none of these systems are going to hold your attention for very long. Personally I think the only area where you are going to hold onto players who have played "Every modern MMO" is with the story. I personally would like to see more interactive movie type quests inside of MMOs which are tied directly to player advancement. I'm very curious to see how AoC does there single player game for levels 1-20 and how that works out. I'm assuming it's going to allow for much greater immersion in the game world and a far better experience for 2nd+ gen players.
anyway that's my 2c, cya in LOTR... at least until AoC comes out.
World size was decent, IMO. And I think it is going to be MASSIVE soon.
Char customization actually depends on what Land you choose at your Char creation. Diffrent lands give diffrent options.
I really liked the Graphics. They looked great and it seemed low-end PCs can run them on highest.
Also, for being a stress test in Closed Beta, the crashes were infrequent and the game had very few bugs. I was incredably impressed by it. As the stress test went on through the weekend, the crashes were almost gotten rid of, and the occasional "Crash" were you would still be able to talk, but not move or do anything because shorter and shorter.
Story was pretty darn awesome.
Some of the quests were very well crafted. Some of the best quests I have ever seen in any MMO. Of course, there were still the crappy quests were you kill X mobs, but it would be real hard to get rid of all those and have enough content. The Epic quests were awesome, and I don't want to ruin it for anyone, so thats all i'll say :P
Great game over-all. It put me over the edge and I'm going to pre-order it
Innovative? Really not, they combined ideas from DAoC, EQ (1 and 2), Lineage 2 and other games.
Immersive? Rather enough, lotta quests and a magnificent word
Fun? Yes. Not like the reat masterpieces of the genre (EQ I and II, FFXI) but a very good game, better than a lot of other MMORPGs.
I never liked other Turbine games (the two AC and the really crap D&DO), but LOTRO is a damned well done game.
Chapeau, Turbine, LOTRO is your first MMORPG that I like.
Should be my game when i'm waiting for WAR: nice, lotta quests and so on. If they will do a very good Role Play System can be one of the best games of the year (the winner is WAR, of course
My blog about (no more)MMORPG Addicted - a bog about videogames, cinema, politics and other things (in Italian)
After Level 20 I finding alot of the areas are simply to hard to solo, Can't base the entire game on Bree Lands.
who me ?
As a WoW player this was easy to get into and was very familiar, its similarity to WoW is what will make this a huge hit, with 3.5 million WoW players in the west Turbin have a good potential player base to tap into as well as the millions on LOTRO fans.
But I am torn, LOTRO = PvE & WAR is PvP If they are released closed to each other it wont be easy to choose.
I can see LOTRO being the #2 subscription based MMO in the west (#1 being WoW ofc).
LOTRO is the best PVE game on the horizon its also the best RP game to imo and it has alot of great features.
Im actually in closed beta so ill probably have a few more points due to testing the game more extensively.
Pros:
Challenging - The game seems pretty straight forward to begin with but later on its gets alot more challenging, some of the Boss instances are excellent and you really feel like you are needed in your group to complete them.
Monster play - This is somthing new, its the first time its been done and its quite good fun, i must admit you couldnt play it forever but get a nice group together and you can kick some hobbit ass for hours on end.
Graphics - No doubt about it LOTRO is beautiful and whats even better is the fact that even older PCs can run it on higher settings and that is indeed great.
Easy to get into - Anyone can get into it, its so smooth and runs so well that it can easily be played without the worry of lagging and what not.
World - The world is very detailed and i belive that is why the zones are smaller, also because it saves on boring long distant runs just to do a delivery quest.
Quests - Im not a quester, im usually a grinder, but LOTROs quests are just damn awesome. If you read them you really get into them and it feels alot like Tolekeins world.
New features - I love some of the features such as being able to play music using your regular PC keyboard, fair enough the notes are very basic in sound but you can do quite alot with it. I actually went and listend to a group of hobbits playing some of the Lord of the rings movie soundtracks and they where very accuracte, i found that rather entertaining.
Sound - The music is great, it sounds alot like that of the movies which is great, it helps alot with the immersion.
Cons:
Animations - The animations still need abit of work some of them seem abit stiff and just wrong. They arent that bad though i have seen alot worse.
Customisation - There is quite alot of customisation even at this point, but really it could still do with some more to make the player feel even more unique.
Thats pretty much it, there are a few other smaller things but they dont really matter to much. Overall i think the game is great, its well worth pre-ordering and it will no doubt be a big hit for Turbine.
Thanks alot
Garrik
________________________________
"once upon a midnight dreary, while i porn surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of 'hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, "give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404."
Performance
Excellent performance, despite occassional lag storms which of course I "blame" on the mobs of people. Performed WAY better than Vanguard which is in release. In towns I would get the occassional 10-30 second lag freeze, then it would clear up and everything would be fine. Oddly, I saw little difference in lag whether I was at the highest or lowest graphics settings, so I would be tempted to attribute the worst of the lag to server lag.
Graphics
Very good if not spectacular. Quite immersive, more so than WoW and about the same as VG. Character animations were good; better than VG (way better), almost but not quite as good as WoW. Immersion factor a tad higher than WoW, a little higher than VG but VG was very good also.
Quests
The usual garden variety quests, yet in LOTRO they seemed more meaningful somehow. Purely subjective, I know, but I didn't mind the usual Kill X of Y quests in LOTRO nearly as much as I do in WoW and VG.
Combat
More or less typical; start auto-attack, click skills when appropriate. I liked that some skills only become active under other conditions which makes combat a little more interesting. The Minstrel in particular had quite a few skills like that. The only other comment I would have for combat is that, at least to level 9 or so, I had a hard time dying. Not sure if the game gets harder later on, but it was basically a cakewalk. WoW is pretty easy too in the early levels, so I would say it's pretty much a draw. As for VG, I can't judge because I was having such serious performance issues, but during the times I could do anything, VG wasn't difficult either in the early levels.
Interface
About on par with other MMO's. I liked the comparison window that popped up when you mouse-over'd an equippable item. WoW doesn't do that (un-modded), and I don't recall if VG did it. Sounds like a little thing, but to me it was a very nice thing to have. One thing that bugged me is that the item icons in your inventory looked very bland and 2d-ish. Maybe they're just placeholders, but the lack of quality in the item icons was jarring.
Mod Intelligence
Dumber than a bag of hammers, like every other MMO out there.
Overall
A nice game. Not groundbreaking, but very polished and satisfying. I'm not sure if it'll be a WoW-killed like LOTR fans would like it to be, but I predict it'll do quite well.
Fans of the Ring novels might find it all kind of silly, but I for one was impressed with how the lore was intermixed in the quests and dialogue.
Will LOTRO perservere over a long period of tme? Hard to tell. It depends a LOT on what sort of content additions they make over time. The world is kind of small (though I hardly noticed over the weekend), but that won't be an issue if they release additional zones in the 6 months or so following release.
And for those who like numbers, here they are, for the games I've played to any real extent. Scale of 1-10, 10 being superb. Take these numbers with a pound of salt ...
LOTRO: 8.5
WoW : 8.0
Guild Wars: 7.6
DDO: 6.5
Vanguard: 5.0
Mobs, beasts, trees, and lots of other content would only appear at significantly short distances.
this really gave the game an unpleasant, laggy feel.
I still like LotRO. It is beautiful...however i've got to say...it REALLY feels a lot like WoW. Gameplay, interface, quests, lots of it is just like Wow.
This doesn;t make it bad. But if you are a MMORPG fan looking for a total WoW difference, LotRO might not be for you.
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Friday night, I played a dwarf guardian to 8.
Saturday night, I played a Hobbit Hunter to 8.
1) The game installed easily, but .NET framework 1.1 broke functionality for another app I have that uses 2.0. Not good...
2) Game looked beautiful and ran very smoothly. Over the course of about 8 hours, the game crashed once with a generic error. I was able to get back in immediately.
3) For a stress test, it didn't seem particularly stressful. I played in Windfola exclusively, btw. Windfola never seemed to have more than a handful of characters in any zone I was in.
4) The introductory quests were simple and designed to introduce you to combat, questing, etc... In this, they succeeded.
5) I dislike spawn camping in order to complete a quest. When I and others have mentioned this, we've been attacked and told that we should group with those others waiting for the spawn. I disagree. I shouldn't be forced to group just for a chance to complete a relatively simple quest. What is this, EQ1 2007?
6) After exiting the Intro, the quality of the quests didn't seem to change. They were still straightforward 'kill x number of mobs' or 'run from x to y' quests. Nothing innovative or particularly interesting. I wouldn't call the quests I saw a low level fun. Rather, I felt compelled to complete them for experience.
7) I did run one fellowship quest (A Gift from the North), but didn't complete it. I had a few issues with that quest. 8) I never tried crafting, so I can't comment upon it.
9) I didn't know about horses until a team mate told me about them right before I logged...
All-in-all, the game was fine. It looked nice and ran well. The game seemed pretty polished for a beata. I enjoyed playing it, but wasn't overly impressed with the gameplay or quests. Nothing really 'wowed' me. I've been told by others, especially on these boards, that I should play until at least 10 or 15 before I can really get a feel for the game. Personally, I feel like I should be 'wowed' from the minute I login. I wasn't.
~Ripper
I just have to say that when you're running in town and hear someone playing "Ironman" on the flute it means you've found something that will probably be able to draw in pretty good numbers.
The Stress test was nowhere near as stressfull as the VG open beta or stress test. I found the quests to be the standard fare but they were in many cases more engaging and were able to draw you in to the story unlike a lot of the quests in VG,EvE,RFo, CoX or GW. They had a "soul" that made you want to helpout ,much like some WoW and DaoC quests.
The fellowship quests in particular...
Unfortunately i didn't get to check out monster play, just ran out of time.
Crafting, pretty good job on that, It would have been better if you were able to, select 3 jobs for yourself rather than going with the ones selected, however i can understand since they want a dynamic crafting/trading system. From what i could see crafted Items were better than items you could purchase, but weaker than quest rewards, except the "heavy" items which gave a bonus such as +2agil etc.
storebought dagger>crafted dagger>quest dagger>crafted heavy dagger
So, at the lower lvls crafting does have it pretty good, will have to lvln higher to see if the trend continues.
All in all ....Way back in the day I was an AC1 junkie(EQ1 just didn't do it for me), I'm so glad i'll be able to go back to Turbine.
Most people have covered the game pretty well. I found the game "okay," nothing really sparked my interest any more than other games that are currently available. I could play it, but in reality, I could just go play EQ2, GW, or WoW and get a similar experience from a gameplay perspective. That said, LotRO has the best lore available. It is pretty cool to do the quests for Stryker, see the Nazgul and such.
A few added comments to what was said elsewhere:
Difficulty. Things do begin to get more difficult as you progress. Levels 1-12 or so are super easy though, but I guess that is standard fare now days. Retreat (death) is only slightly more than an inconvenience. Item decay and the ten minute timer on the debuff you get is enough to keep you from wanting to die. Add to that, that if you stay undefeated long enough, the titles are pretty cool. But once you die one time, there really isn't any incentive to run from a fight that is getting close.
Class Diversity. There just isn't any class diversity at this point in the game and I really think before release, they need it. In fact, all the classes are extremely similar from a gameplay perspective.
Monster Play. I found monster play very uninspiring as a means of pvp. Someone else has a post here about it, but there is absolutely no incentive to play a monster other than for a change from grinding quests on your main. I really don't see monster play as a means to maintain the pvp playerbase. Don't get me wrong, it was fun, but overall uninspiring.
Overall. The game is well done and fun to play. I would play this game for sure if I 1) Loved LotR or 2) Didn't already have another mmorpg I found enjoyable. I would not play if I had an mmorpg that I was currently enjoying, it just isn't <insert adjective: unique, inspiring, exciting> enough to take me away from another game.
Well, this thread has me leaning towards giving it a try..... needs something to tide me over until later this year when some other games are released....
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
It puzzles me when people complain about grouping in an MMO. Isn't that the reason you play an MMO to group with others? If you are so into solo play, go play an FPS, there are tons of them.
I was very impressed with the graphics, very well done, the elf areas were very elegant, the dwarf areas very functional, etc.
I was very impressed with the lagless game, while I did experience some stoppage once in a while, for the most part it was unnoticable. I ran the game on a fairly low end system and had no problems or lag except some in the large cities.
I was not concerned about the lack of pvp, personally if I am going to pvp, I want the old UO like conditions, which none of these games have, nor any of the upcoming ones either. If you can't risk losing something what is the sense or even the thrill of pvp? So far, I only know of two games, UO and AC1 where you can actually loot the corpse of your foe.
While the animations weren't perfect, I can hardly see why so many stressed that problem. Seems very inconsequential to me.
I tried most of the classes and enjoyed them all. The game seemed very tolkienesk to me.
I did notice sound glitches on the major quest interludes, the voice kept fading in and out, probably due to my less than high end system.
I was surprised at the number of quests available, certainly many more than I had time to do.
I was thinking of giving the Burning Crusade a shot in Wow, but this definitely made me change my mind and I will wait and purchase this game instead. I think some of you Warhammer affictionados will be disappointed when that game comes out, Mythic has yet to impress me with anything they have done and they have a horrible track record when it comes to balancing pvp classes. Age of Conan has a chance, but again, what has Funcom ever done that was impressive? We will just have to wait and see on those games, but as they say a game in hand is worth two still in development.
Just a quick one, do you think out of your experience playing LOTRO, that my laptop will run LOTRO. Maybe not maximum settings but low/medium or something.
Laptop specs:
- AMD Sempron 3400+, 1.8 GHz
- ATI Radeon Xpress 1100 128mb
- 1 GB DDR2 RAM
Appreciate answer as soon as possible,Gralj
Best regards,
Gralj
Best regards,
Gralj