Lord of the Rings Online

what i am noticing about lotro is that they based themselves with the books AND the movies

for the books/art they took characters and creatures. they where not that well done, maybe because it is hard to reproduce a living being exaclty  how Tolkien wanted it to look like. so they are more basic models.

on the other hand the scenery is incredible. it is vast and acurate when it comes to details. Of course it does not compare to the new Conan game... but hey to play that game to its fullest potential you need a computer that will come out in about a year.  LOTRO lets us use the computers we have today and alow us to boost its graphics and enjoy some nice scenery.

to add a note. i do not agree with those that judge a game by the look of it (litterally) good graphics does not mean good game.  as of now i have not had as much fun playing ANY mmo out there than i had playing Ultima online. so go ahead, compare Ultima online and AoC with graphics... gameplay and fun wise. UO wins regardles of its Ancient graphics. (hell the 2D version was better than the 3D version of UO)

so LOTRO has plenty of content to counter balance its "soulless" character models.

lets just say that i have found a feeling close to what i had when i played SWG-pre-cu.

close... but no cookie yet.

EDIT: oh and OP, you can remove SWG from games to try. dont waste your time there, if you played WoW youve played SWG...

I think the landscapes are pretty epic when they need to be and fairly pastoral and quiet when they need to be (The Shire). The newer areas (Evendim) are much more well thought out and quite breathtaking in places. Some areas (The Mosty Mountains are unbelievably dull, just a giant snowy field. On the whole though i like the way it looks.

The worst thing is the avatars, they are so gray and armour looks like it's painted on. If you drag the camera away even a little way all detail disappears. Not good.

You are perhaps forgetting an important part, MMO graphics aren't sub-prime because that's the best they could do, they are sub-prime because of the market they are aimed at and the wide range of technical specifications they must cater to.

AoC is a perfect example of a company aiming too high and disappointing vast swathes of customers, when they have to turn the settings down to WoW levels of details just to help eliminate lag.

If you want the best gaming graphics dont buy an MMORPG buy a single player/small zone FPS game.

Very few MMOs have better graphics than LOTR, in fact the only one that comes close is AoC which is null and void for the above reasons.

If you think Lotro's graphics are souless then don't even bother trying vanguards. To me vanguards graphic were horrible..just horrible. the character models to go with the envirements and..bah I just can't get over my huge dissapointment with the graphics : /

I loved the game..but the graphics were such a let down.

I personally Love LOtrOs graphics and think they are spot on. But..thats just my opinion :D

I've been playing Lord of the Rings for a few days now with the 14 day trial.  I thought not only were the graphics bland the entire game is bland.  Graphically it reminded me a lot of Guild Wars.  Not because they have a similar appearance but because while they both had high technical merits they had no artistic appeal.  Just because you use high resolution textures and high polygon count images doesn't mean the graphics are good.  Can't really explain what makes something look good, but whatever it is Lord Of the RIngs Online doesn't have it.

I'm sorry but it has great artistic appeal. Have you seen Thorin's Hall? Have you seen Rivendell? Did you see the landscape? Its not all about resolution or high polys (which this game doesn't have) but I believe it is very well done artistically. Its not over the top like other games...this isn't high fantasy it's low fantasy. It's meant to look realistic.

Originally posted by Shastra

 

---

Originally posted by Nihilx
Technically, the graphics are very good. Artistically, I think they are bland. But then again, I think the whole game is as "vanilla" as can be.

---

 

Have you even played it or just judging by screenshots?

Of course I've played it. Judging graphics by screenshots is like judging the flavour of a dish by listening at the kitchen door.

Originally posted by Gloomie

 I thought not only were the graphics bland the entire game is bland. 

Agreed. I felt the game was geared towards a very young demographic.

And indeed, the character models are really sub-par.

Originally posted by Nihilx

Originally posted by Gloomie

 I thought not only were the graphics bland the entire game is bland. 

 

Agreed. I felt the game was geared towards a very young demographic.

And indeed, the character models are really sub-par.

I think you're not getting it... if you really mean that. LOTRO's population is actually quite mature, most people I know (in my kin, for instance) are 25+ or even 30+. Lotro is perfect for those who have only a couple hours per week (!) to play, and might not satisfy kids or HC gamers with 6 hours a day.

Art style in MMO's is not "geared" towards any demographic. If it would be, noone above 12 would play WOW....

BTW the OP has already realized that he was using the low-res textures, and modified his initial point. Liking or disliking a game's visuals is a matter of total subjectivity, thus, nobody will "win" here. However, saying that "the entire game is bland" is rather much like simple trolling, especially w/o giving reasons.

There is nothing wrong with not liking a game at all: hijacking threads with 1 line flamebaits, on the other hand, can be a problem.

DB

Originally posted by Nihilx

Technically, the graphics are very good. Artistically, I think they are bland. But then again, I think the whole game is as "vanilla" as can be.

That's exactly how I feel. I have no problem with the graphics engine or technical quality of textures, etc... The Art Direction though, for me, is about as bland a version of the LotR universe as one could possibly imagine.

I know they licensed the books, not the movie, but most of the artistic st