Originally posted by Trollo

I always thought LOTRO would be a rough harsh place to be in. But when i played it it was....not so harsh. I mean yes it has its challenges but I was never scared of much. I wish it was more pvp oriented. Needless to say the game has survived and become a succesfull mmo.

I always saw Bree, the Shire, Rivendell, as being the epitome of comfort and safety. Unfortunately, the safe zones are where you have to start, so you don't much get to see the creepy bits of the world.

Doesn't sound like you made it to Angmar.  Or even the Old Forest, and Great Barrows.  This game is terrific at swinging the mood around quickly.  You should do a trial and try to check out those places.  The latter two, I mean... you won't make it to Angmar by trial...

Originally posted by Robsolf

Originally posted by pencilrick

Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

Originally posted by pencilrick

 

  In WOW, you can make your way into almost any zone, even ones too high in level for you.  By contrast, in LOTRO, the zones are laid out almost a line, and you have to complete quests before they open up to you.

 

 

This is incorrect. There is only two zones that requires a quest to get into, east angumar, and Moria itself.

You are quite free to go anywhere you can get to. FFS level 1 chickens can get to lothlorien.

I recall beginning LOTRO in a tutorial instance, having to complete quests to leave the instance before I could even get to a starting area, then having to complete quests to get out of the starting area to go to another zone with only one or two ways out of it.

I did not play LOTRO much, but to me the actual books felt more free and less on rails than the game.

Well... had you played past 8th level, you would have found that once out of tutorial, you could quest(ie, found quests in your level range) anywhere from Comb and Bree to to the Shire to Ered Luin to Thorins' Hall.  All of that area about the easily equivilent of all the starting zones in WoW, with the advantage of them being close together.  You a Dwarf but want to start in Hobbiton?  Take a pony and travel there.  Or just walk, with about 80% of each zone traversable.

 

You two arent seeing what hes talking about. This poster is talking about the main story quests.The "Books", in which you are simply put in instances and put on a straight line. Please try reading his posts, and you will see what hes talking about. I have played lotro into the 30's. Again im not saying its a bad game, but I too was put off by instancing into every individual room to speak with a main quest holder.

Also to Mr.Bloodworth, no not everything we are talking about was only in writing. Again There was clearly a video with Evil and Good armor and characters in it, there was dungeons with destructible objects like Walls and doors, and there was emphasis on quests and travel with freinds like using a different race to read certain "Lore" from another race.

To Toquio3: Read above, there was much more in that article that what you claim to have read. Or maybe you might have missed something, but please re-read it, because you left out alot that was different.

Originally posted by pencilrick

Sorry, but I'm not buying the arguments that there is freedom in LOTRO, at least not the perception of freedom.  That game felt very limited and boxed in to me.

While WOW tried to lead me on a path of breadcrumb quests, I always felt I could step off that path.  But LOTRO felt very much on rails, too many invisible walls.

But if you guys enjoyed that game, then Bon Appetit!  Have at it.

You can do the same in LOTRO. After the tutorial, you can go anywhere you want.  If you choose to continue the quests laid before you and you find that confining, that's not the fault of the game -- that's you.

Originally posted by pencilrick

Sorry, but I'm not buying the arguments that there is freedom in LOTRO, at least not the perception of freedom.  That game felt very limited and boxed in to me.

While WOW tried to lead me on a path of breadcrumb quests, I always felt I could step off that path.  But LOTRO felt very much on rails, too many invisible walls.

But if you guys enjoyed that game, then Bon Appetit!  Have at it.

Well, it indeed is. Each zone is basically made of a couple of walkways and narrow paths surrounded by cliffs (Misty, Trollshaws, Angmar, North Downs, Lone Lands, Ered-Luin), while there are a few open-zones (Forochel, Evendim, Eregion, Shire, Bree) they are all still connected with a narrow path with each other. If you find a house somewhere in wilderness, most of the time you can't enter it. And even if you can, there's a loading screen -> and you are basically teleported into an indoor instance which is always ridiculously much bigger than as the house looked like from the outside.

Each zone has clear linear quest and level progression. Level 60 common stag around Lorien is stronger than most of the Orcs in Angmar just because Moria and Lorien were part of the expansion that came after Angmar and increased level cap.

So yeh, it is linear, it has ridiculous scale (5 minutes walk from shire to bree which should take weeks), and for a world such a strong IP Middle Earth (probably the most popular IP out there based on books/dvds sales), it's hardly acceptable that Turbine couldn't achieve bigger success. That also explains recent no-free content updates, and the fact that the game vision turned into pay to play+regular paid expansions+no free content updates model.

Originally posted by jiveturkey12

Originally posted by Robsolf

Originally posted by pencilrick

Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

Originally posted by pencilrick

 

  In WOW, you can make your way into almost any zone, even ones too high in level for you.  By contrast, in LOTRO, the zones are laid out almost a line, and you have to complete quests before they open up to you.

 

 

This is incorrect. There is only two zones that requires a quest to get into, east angumar, and Moria itself.

You are quite free to go anywhere you can get to. FFS level 1 chickens can get to lothlorien.

I recall beginning LOTRO in a tutorial instance, having to complete quests to leave the instance before I could even get to a starting area, then having to complete quests to get out of the starting area to go to another zone with only one or two ways out of it.

I did not play LOTRO much, but to me the actual books felt more free and less on rails than the game.

Well... had you played past 8th level, you would have found that once out of tutorial, you could quest(ie, found quests in your level range) anywhere from Comb and Bree to to the Shire to Ered Luin to Thorins' Hall.  All of that area about the easily equivilent of all the starting zones in WoW, with the advantage of them being close together.  You a Dwarf but want to start in Hobbiton?  Take a pony and travel there.  Or just walk, with about 80% of each zone traversable.

 

You two arent seeing what hes talking about. This poster is talking about the main story quests.The "Books", in which you are simply put in instances and put on a straight line. Please try reading his posts, and you will see what hes talking about. I have played lotro into the 30's. Again im not saying its a bad game, but I too was put off by instancing into every individual room to speak with a main quest holder.

 

Also to Mr.Bloodworth, no not everything we are talking about was only in writing. Again There was clearly a video with Evil and Good armor and characters in it, there was dungeons with destructible objects like Walls and doors, and there was emphasis on quests and travel with freinds like using a different race to read certain "Lore" from another race.

To Toquio3: Read above, there was much more in that article that what you claim to have read. Or maybe you might have missed something, but please re-read it, because you left out alot that was different.

 

 

so there were different language texts on ruins across the world, and destructable objects? ok. My point, however, was how would those features (along with the ones mentioned earlier, they werent THAT many) have turned this game into the promised land?

 The original project that started in 1998 was set in a Fourth Age.  So it surely could happen down the road as a sequel to LotrO.  As Lotr era ends at the end of the third age.  

I personally believe this to never happen though.  Turbine is going to milk this license for another 10 good years.  They are going to release expansion after expansion, upgrading there system and adding Rohan, Gondor, Mordor, Isengaurd and everything.

This is my opinion is a very good thing.  The world in LotrO is massive and with future expansions comes updated combat systems,  They already said they are adding mounted combat with the Rohan expansion. 

Originally posted by Toquio3

Originally posted by jiveturkey12

Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

Originally posted by jiveturkey12

While I completely agree that development on the game was horrible, that doesnt mean it wasnt going to be a good game. And what do you mean "never had any In game Graphics", there was a whole gameplay video on gamespot that featured a UI, quests, and combat.

Made by turbine.

Yes that is true, but your forgetting that the game still when created by Turbine under the title "Middle Earth ONline", started out very similar to what Sierra wanted to do. As I said before over time, MEO degenerated into LOTRO like when they announced the switch from seamless houses, to instanced ones.

Just like the article posted by Signus, the MEO Turbine was making still had the "Villians and Heroes" or dark and light scenario for character development. And many other features exactly like the Middle Earth Game Sierra wanted.

 

Actually, I liked the instanced housing, where they divided the players into neighbourhoods. It sure beats an endless expanse of land littered with slums. Now, keep in mind I never experienced non instanced housing, so that may be wrong, but thats how I envision it to be. Neighbourhoods are more private and if the circumstances are right, you can mail your neighbours and gather at the town center and have parties. good stuff.

I have, in SWG. Horrible, -horrible- stuff.

 Open seamless housing in Darkfall Online.  

Try it, Live it, LOVE IT.

It is the best housing system to date and it is not even developed completely yet.

From the Middle Earth Online interview:

http://rpgvault.ign.com/articles/795/795002p2.html

"I stayed with the project until the bittersweet end. The "Axe of Dev Team Decapitation" was first spotted in 1999, when the boneheaded overlords decided to try and force us to make MEO into an EverQuest clone. Over my dead body... or at least fired body. :)

Can you believe the nerve? The overlords wanted to take this wonderful work of art by J.R.R. Tolkien and package it as a hack and slash game?! I was horrified by this turn of events. Many of us on the team were. That's not what we signed up for! How could I live with myself after promising that I'd keep true to Tolkien's works? In short, I couldn't. I resisted every attempt to change the game's vision into a world where Gandalf is a dime a dozen and hobbits are hurling fireballs. Oh, the overlords didn't take kindly to that, and started to shop the game to external developers. Damn them... "
 

Kinda funny, because that's exactly what happened. Lotro is everquest clone, there are dwarves hurling fireballs, and people raiding on goats in Middle Earth.

Originally posted by Thillian

 

From the Middle Earth Online interview:

http://rpgvault.ign.com/articles/795/795002p2.html

"I stayed with the project until the bittersweet end. The "Axe of Dev Team Decapitation" was first spotted in 1999, when the boneheaded overlords decided to try and force us to make MEO into an EverQuest clone. Over my dead body... or at least fired body. :)

Can you believe the nerve? The overlords wanted to take this wonderful work of art by J.R.R. Tolkien and package it as a hack and slash game?! I was horrified by this turn of events. Many of us on the team were. That's not what we signed up for! How could I live with myself after promising that I'd keep true to Tolkien's works? In short, I couldn't. I resisted every attempt to change the game's vision into a world where Gandalf is a dime a dozen and hobbits are hurling fireballs. Oh, the overlords didn't take kindly to that, and started to shop the game to external developers. Damn them... "
 

Kinda funny, because that's exactly what happened. Lotro is everquest clone, there are dwarves hurling fireballs, and people raiding on goats in Middle Earth.

He said hobbits, not dwarves, and hobbits are not hurling fireballs. stop bending the statement to suit you. And if the game was such a magnificent work of art, you would think at least 1 person at turbine would've seen it? and no gandalf is not a dime a dozen. you're following the epic story of the fellowship, guess whos in it?

also, what nerve do you have to say MEO would be any better then lotro? did you plauy the finished game? with thousands of other people? no, so stop assuming the game would carry you to the promised land on clouds made of cake.

Originally posted by Dameonk

Truth is, Turbine did as good as they can do.  They are just not a great development company.  I don't know anyone that isn't a die hard fan that can say AC, AC2, DDO, and LOTRO are anything but "ok" games.

One big clue is the fact that they could NOT figure out a way to make the combat "fun" and the classes unique (in Turbine's own opinion) without having big flashy particle effects, even though they have absolutely no place in the world.  I think AoC showed that combat can be fun without the NEED to have flashy particle effects.

Yes, I know AoC has particle effects, but what I'm saying is that they aren't needed for the combat to be entertaining.  The animations are enough to make the combat fun.  Also AoC's atmosphere and world design does a much better job portraying what I would picture a Middle-Earth-esque time than LOTRO's cartoony portrayal.

Just FYI:  I don't play AoC and haven't since it was first released.  But I did like the combat and the world design.  The bad PvP just killed the game for me, though.

The LOTRO license needs to be given to a company that can actually do something with it.  I'd like to see what Blizzard or Bioware could do with it.

You're actually going to cite AoC as an example of competent development??

Originally posted by Thillian

Originally posted by pencilrick

Sorry, but I'm not buying the arguments that there is freedom in LOTRO, at least not the perception of freedom.  That game felt very limited and boxed in to me.

While WOW tried to lead me on a path of breadcrumb quests, I always felt I could step off that path.  But LOTRO felt very much on rails, too many invisible walls.

But if you guys enjoyed that game, then Bon Appetit!  Have at it.

 

Well, it indeed is. Each zone is basically made of a couple of walkways and narrow paths surrounded by cliffs (Misty, Trollshaws, Angmar, North Downs, Lone Lands, Ered-Luin), while there are a few open-zones (Forochel, Evendim, Eregion, Shire, Bree) they are all still connected with a narrow path with each other. If you find a house somewhere in wilderness, most of the time you can't enter it. And even if you can, there's a loading screen -> and you are basically teleported into an indoor instance which is always ridiculously much bigger than as the house looked like from the outside.

Each zone has clear linear quest and level progression. Level 60 common stag around Lorien is stronger than most of the Orcs in Angmar just because Moria and Lorien were part of the expansion that came after Angmar and increased level cap.

So yeh, it is linear, it has ridiculous scale (5 minutes walk from shire to bree which should take weeks), and for a world such a strong IP Middle Earth (probably the most popular IP out there based on books/dvds sales), it's hardly acceptable that Turbine couldn't achieve bigger success. That also explains recent no-free content updates, and the fact that the game vision turned into pay to play+regular paid expansions+no free content updates model.

Yes, the landscape can be an issue, but you exaggerate the extent of its confines. They are quite a bit larger than 'paths' or 'narrow walkways.'   The instance interiors don't bother me at all since it allows for two things: changing story and a richer, more detailed interior. Perhaps someday they'll implement the seamless instancing found in VG or Fallen Earth, but until then, it doesn't bother me.

Yes there are level 60 stags, but that is an unfair swipe at the game. How else would one have progression?  Unless there were no levels, not even skill advancement, could you solve that issue.  Power creep is going to happen.  And quite frankly, I'd prefer that they introduce a level 60 stag, then create an entirely new monster that doesn't fit the world.

So you seriously want a game where it takes weeks to walk from the shire to bree?  No one could build that sort of world. And I doubt any one would want to play in that sort of world.

As for the lack of free updates this last year, that has been explained.  They had to stop work on a lot of content in order to fix things involving their server infrastructure and databases.  Steefel admitted the mistakes, apologized for them even.  To me that's a sign of integrity.

Originally posted by Cerion

Originally posted by Thillian

Originally posted by pencilrick

Sorry, but I'm not buying the arguments that there is freedom in LOTRO, at least not the perception of freedom.  That game felt very limited and boxed in to me.

While WOW tried to lead me on a path of breadcrumb quests, I always felt I could step off that path.  But LOTRO felt very much on rails, too many invisible walls.

But if you guys enjoyed that game, then Bon Appetit!  Have at it.

 

Well, it indeed is. Each zone is basically made of a couple of walkways and narrow paths surrounded by cliffs (Misty, Trollshaws, Angmar, North Downs, Lone Lands, Ered-Luin), while there are a few open-zones (Forochel, Evendim, Eregion, Shire, Bree) they are all still connected with a narrow path with each other. If you find a house somewhere in wilderness, most of the time you can't enter it. And even if you can, there's a loading screen -> and you are basically teleported into an indoor instance which is always ridiculously much bigger than as the house looked like from the outside.

Each zone has clear linear quest and level progression. Level 60 common stag around Lorien is stronger than most of the Orcs in Angmar just because Moria and Lorien were part of the expansion that came after Angmar and increased level cap.

So yeh, it is linear, it has ridiculous scale (5 minutes walk from shire to bree which should take weeks), and for a world such a strong IP Middle Earth (probably the most popular IP out there based on books/dvds sales), it's hardly acceptable that Turbine couldn't achieve bigger success. That also explains recent no-free content updates, and the fact that the game vision turned into pay to play+regular paid expansions+no free content updates model.

 

Yes, the landscape can be an issue, but you exaggerate the extent of its confines. They are quite a bit larger than 'paths' or 'narrow walkways.'   The instance interiors don't bother me at all since it allows for two things: changing story and a richer, more detailed interior. Perhaps someday they'll implement the seamless instancing found in VG or Fallen Earth, but until then, it doesn't bother me.

Yes there are level 60 stags, but that is an unfair swipe at the game. How else would one have progression?  Unless there were no levels, not even skill advancement, could you solve that issue.  Power creep is going to happen.  And quite frankly, I'd prefer that they introduce a level 60 stag, then create an entirely new monster that doesn't fit the world.

 

So you seriously want a game where it takes weeks to walk from the shire to bree?  No one could build that sort of world. And I doubt any one would want to play in that sort of world.

As for the lack of free updates this last year, that has been explained.  They had to stop work on a lot of content in order to fix things involving their server infrastructure and databases.  Steefel admitted the mistakes, apologized for them even.  To me that's a sign of integrity.

Actually it could be solved. Lorien should be a haven not full of level 60 stages with more power than orcs in angmar. Giant Turtle a new solo-boss raid instance should not be stronger than Balrog. They messed it up before and it keep messing it up with every expansion. They needed to make the game more catchy to appeal to different sort of players, so they added a Balrog players could kill. They sacrificed the story and the lore for the vision of new customers.

They again sacrificed the story lore and existing playerbase when they introduced full mage class that hurls fireballs and ice storms. They did it to attract and appeal to a new playerbase. Same goes with goats, panthers, ghost allies..

Indeed, each company is always interested in seeking new markets and attracting new sort of players, but Turbine went further ahead and wasn't afraid to sacrifice their own playerbase.

But in the end, what could we expect from a company that released a paid expansion in May, 2005 - announced everything is all right and it's the best time to join the game, and then 2 months later July, 2005 - announced to shut down the whole game (yeh talking about Asheron's Call 2).

Originally posted by jiveturkey12

Also to Mr.Bloodworth, no not everything we are talking about was only in writing. Again There was clearly a video with Evil and Good armor and characters in it, there was dungeons with destructible objects like Walls and doors, and there was emphasis on quests and travel with freinds like using a different race to read certain "Lore" from another race.

 

 

 

Distructble objects = In Game.

Quests and travale = In game.

Reading diffrent race lore = Ingame.

Originally posted by Toquio3

 

also, what nerve do you have to say MEO would be any better then lotro? did you plauy the finished game? with thousands of other people? no, so stop assuming the game would carry you to the promised land on clouds made of cake.

Well, that is true, no one knows for sure if the game would have been good, even considering if the features they promised were put in. Just because someone says they will include x features and just because they might even work doesn't mean that players woul warm up to them.

However, though LOTRO is a very free game as far as where one can go, it still has some oddities about it which can be very frustrating.

I'm talking about the ability to enter certain areas when "not on the quest". My more memorable example was a time I was in East Angmar and I saw in the distance a large "castle like' structure" that was clearly evil in nature.

Getting close I saw that it was heavily guarded and that getting in to look around might be problematic. But given that that is why I play these games I set forth and after the umpteenth try I was able to get to the door.

Monsters following me all shouting that they were going to mug me and take my credit cards.

I clicked on the door with the hope that:

A; I would be able to get in and at least look around and/or

B; due to some sort of zoning issue, none of the mobs would be able to follow me inside.

Either way I would get to see inside.

So I click on the door and instead of heading straight in I get "you are not on the appropriate quest". that's when the mobs descended and took my lunch money.

That is not the first time I ran into this as it has happened in moria and even happened when I tried to help a fellow player with a quest, only to not be granted access to the cave we had to go into.

So "yes" LOTRO is a lot more open but one will find frustrating barriers to entry in certain places. I think when people complain that is part of the problem.

I mean, the world is large so rendering the entire thing is just going to be problematic. Especially when content also needs to be added. But there is a palpable difference between the open world of Vanguard or Lineage 2 where one can seriously move in many directions. It think it just has to be the nature of the beast with reagards to how this game is being developed.

You can't just have areas without content as all people are going to say is "It's an empty world". And that is just as bad as adding areas that are highly focused.

Still, the world of LOTRO is a lot more open than say Aion which really is a world that is designed with the idea that if you are going to go somewhere the dev's meant it to be a place that you have to go.

edit: oh and as someone noted and as I mentioned MEO was set in the 4th age:

One thing that I think we did right was to set the game after the main story, in the Fourth Age, the Age of Men. This was a daring decision but really makes a lot of sense in terms of freedom from continuity problems.

Originally posted by Thillian

 

Yes, the landscape can be an issue, but you exaggerate the extent of its confines. They are quite a bit larger than 'paths' or 'narrow walkways.'   The instance interiors don't bother me at all since it allows for two things: changing story and a richer, more detailed interior. Perhaps someday they'll implement the seamless instancing found in VG or Fallen Earth, but until then, it doesn't bother me.

Yes there are level 60 stags, but that is an unfair swipe at the game. How else would one have progression?  Unless there were no levels, not even skill advancement, could you solve that issue.  Power creep is going to happen.  And quite frankly, I'd prefer that they introduce a level 60 stag, then create an entirely new monster that doesn't fit the world.

 

So you seriously want a game where it takes weeks to walk from the shire to bree?  No one could build that sort of world. And I doubt any one would want to play in that sort of world.

As for the lack of free updates this last year, that has been explained.  They had to stop work on a lot of content in order to fix things involving their server infrastructure and databases.  Steefel admitted the mistakes, apologized for them even.  To me that's a sign of integrity.

 

Actually it could be solved. Lorien should be a haven not full of level 60 stages with more power than orcs in angmar. Giant Turtle a new solo-boss raid instance should not be stronger than Balrog. They messed it up before and it keep messing it up with every expansion. They needed to make the game more catchy to appeal to different sort of players, so they added a Balrog players could kill. They sacrificed the story and the lore for the vision of new customers.

They again sacrificed the story lore and existing playerbase when they introduced full mage class that hurls fireballs and ice storms. They did it to attract and appeal to a new playerbase. Same goes with goats, panthers, ghost allies..

Indeed, each company is always interested in seeking new markets and attracting new sort of players, but Turbine went further ahead and wasn't afraid to sacrifice their own playerbase.

But in the end, what could we expect from a company that released a paid expansion in May, 2005 - announced everything is all right and it's the best time to join the game, and then 2 months later July, 2005 - announced to shut down the whole game (yeh talking about Asheron's Call 2).

 

Earlier someone complained about lack of classes n lotro compared to MEO, and now you're complaining because they added more classes? Having said that, I admit that a out right mage class like the rune keeper doesnt exactly "fit" in the lotro world, but what do I know. Its fun to play, and it doesnt break immersion, not to me at least.

Originally posted by Cerion

 

As for the lack of free updates this last year, that has been explained.  They had to stop work on a lot of content in order to fix things involving their server infrastructure and databases.  Steefel admitted the mistakes, apologized for them even.  To me that's a sign of integrity.

He did say that the decision to utilize a new solution in Moria where the ceiling was somehow a mirror fo the ground (thus allowing for the sense of great height) put quite a lot of stress on their servers, something they didn't realize until it was happening.

Originally posted by Unreal024

I doubt it. I think that LOTRO and sandboxes in general would have to be more popular to ever see developement on MEO or any other Lord of the Rings sandbox like it.

But sandboxes ARE popular. It would help if games companies actually put more effort into making some good ones though because then we would find out for sure. We currently dont actually know. All we have to go by are a small number of failed attempts which isnt proof of anything at all. All that proves is that people dont like playing badly designed sandbox games. I think there are tonnes of people clamouring to play a decent one. Currently though if someone wants to play a good sandbox what do they have to choose from? EVE or Darkfall?.......and a number of barely known cheapo games that very few people bother with. Its hardly surprising that not many people play many sandbox games. They're not exactly spoilt for choice are they.

It always baffles me when I keep seeing people say stuff like "Well no-one plays sandboxes so that means they dont like them". If people are offered bad games then of course they wont want to play them. Its a bit like feeding mouldy apples to a room full of people and then when they refuse to eat them reaching the conclusion that people dont like apples. How about giving them lots of good apples to taste......and lots of different types too? Then we would find out how popular apples really are.

Originally posted by Toquio3

Earlier someone complained about lack of classes n lotro compared to MEO, and now you're complaining because they added more classes? Having said that, I admit that a out right mage class like the rune keeper doesnt exactly "fit" in the lotro world, but what do I know. Its fun to play, and it doesnt break immersion, not to me at least.

So now if they add jedi class with ligthsabre, your only counter argument against Middle Earth lore-fans who would feel it's inappropriate would be "you complained about lack of classes, and now you're complaining they added one? Even if it's a jedi?"

They managed to create a perfectly lore-fitting class warden. They can create any number of non-lore breaking classes (scouts, sages, thugs.. whatever), but yet they decide to sacrifice a bit of the lore and its playerbase (assumably the most lore-loyal playerbase - which again assumably is the playerbase that already paid and bought the lifetime subscribtion).

Originally posted by Thillian

Originally posted by Toquio3

Earlier someone complained about lack of classes n lotro compared to MEO, and now you're complaining because they added more classes? Having said that, I admit that a out right mage class like the rune keeper doesnt exactly "fit" in the lotro world, but what do I know. Its fun to play, and it doesnt break immersion, not to me at least.

 

So now if they add jedi class with ligthsabre, your only counter argument against Middle Earth lore-fans who would feel it's inappropriate would be "you complained about lack of classes, and now you're complaining they added one? Even if it's a jedi?"

They managed to create a perfectly lore-fitting class warden. They can create any number of non-lore breaking classes (scouts, sages, thugs.. whatever), but yet they decide to sacrifice a bit of the lore and its playerbase (assumably the most lore-loyal playerbase - which again assumably is the playerbase that already paid and bought the lifetime subscribtion).

Yeah but cmon man, Jedi? I agree with you on the fact that rune keepers are a bit out there, but you exaggerated a bit too much. Like I said, you make a fair point with this, Wardens > rune keepers when it comes to lore, but it doesnt break immersion for me. For you it might, all I can say is its a shame.

Im gonna stress this again, Im not directly disagreeing with you, im just saying this affects me in a different way, thats all.