Lord of the Rings Online

Originally posted by KorovaMB

 

Your argument is flawed though.  There is a difference between telling a story and creating a fun game.  In a story, it is important to make your readers empathize with the main characters.  To do this, you can't make the "evil" characters in such a way that the readers might empathise with them.  That can create issues in a game, and thus adaptions are frequently made.  This applies to a variety of game mechanics.  For instance, Boromir was killed at the tail end of Fellowship.  Yet in game, killed players respawn.  Does that make the game incongruous with Tolkien's vision?

No because the game is based on Morale, not hit points or life points.  When your morale runs out you are defeated.  And when you are defeated a little box pops up that you live again to fight another day.  So then your logic is flawed on the game mechanic.  As to making evil characters personable it is done by other writers all the time, Stephen King and Anne Rice come to mind.

To use your example, but from another IP, George Lucas created Stormtroopers and Darth Vader with helmets and masks.  A key reason was to de-humanize them.  This helped the movie-goer empathize with the main characters without cluttering their emotions by making them feel for the slaughtered stormtroopers.  Likewise, ST's were shown having little or no free thought.  They followed orders like lambs to the slaughter.

Oh ya lets use that example of a completly failed game with three revamps and a customer base that is nil and deserted servers.

Yet when SWG was launched, players could play Imperials (complete with ST armor).  The game focused around the GCW (although the implementation was not all it could be).  Had the game allowed for Rebel only play, it would have been disastrous and caused the game to feel extremely disconnected from the movies.

It pretty much is disastrous so we are hypothocating once again.  Using a failed game is not a real good to get your point across.

Thus, pvp and evil races could have been implemented without causing the game to feel like it had abandoned Tolkein. 

And the sad fact is, that based on current customers that ENJOY the game, and a large percentage of those that actually read his books, we in a huge majority disagree.  But it is your right to have an opinion just as it is our right to have ours.

Bottom line, when converting from one medium to another (book to video game) some changes are necessary to convey the story although it may break from a pure literal translation.

Unless of course you have a situation like this one.  Tolkien Enterprises controls the IP, but based on the contract when the rights were sold in the 70's there is set standard of performance and guidelines on how the story can be utilized.  If they go outside that agreement the Tolkien family can sue and have the rights returned to them.  It is the perfect system of checks and balances.  So while you can hypothocate what coulda, shoulda, woulda..........we have what is!

Originally posted by WSIMike

 

Wait... Hold the phone...

You've actually seen a ganker get ganked themself? Shoot. In my experience, the ganker is usually either quitting out of the game or running away at the first sight of someone who might actually beat them... like the cowards they are.

 

I wanna see a screen-shot of that.

 

Actually my experience in WoW is that they are the first to scream on the forums for nerfs, crying how some other class than their own is "overpowered".  These are often the same peeps that take cheap shots on PvP servers, like wait till someone is battling an NPC and their health is down before they attack.

And for the record KorovaMB, I play WoW, I pvp regularly.  I have one character in full pvp gear, and two that are nearly half suited in pvp gear.  I like WoW pvp to a point, it is different and fluid.  And since there are alternatives for PvP MMO's why the need to turn every single MMO out turn into some gank feast epeen compitition?  I like LoTRO, and I have seen way too many game succomb to the crys of a few because some marketing VP THINKS it will bring more business in.  Please Turbine, don't change it into a all out PvP game!!

Originally posted by KorovaMB

Originally posted by DragonOak

So the fact that it could be worse makes it ok that a game based on such a strong IP has weak sub numbers?  Most successful people in the business world are that way because they are willing to risk failure to achieve greatness.  Rarely does taking the safe route pay off.

Wait... Who says it has weak numbers? No one even *knows* with any reliability what LoTRO's numbers are.

You're not the first one to come in there with these baseless, unspecific claims, of what "LoTRO's population should be". You're also not the first to claim that it having world PvP would guarantee a substantial boon to its population.

Been there. Debated that. Buried the horse.

 

 

Originally posted by DragonOak

 

 

Actually my experience in WoW is that they are the first to scream on the forums for nerfs, crying how some other class than their own is "overpowered". 

lol! Indeed. All else being equal, I have seldom ever met someone who'd say they lost in a PvP fight because the other player was better. It's almost always because either their class is too gimped, or the other's is too overpowered. Too funny.

These are often the same peeps that take cheap shots on PvP servers, like wait till someone is battling an NPC and their health is down before they attack.

... and then they call it "skill", or brag on the forums how they "pwned" you. Yep... seen that before too.

That kind of behavior demonstrates another perfect example of why I'm happy LoTRO doesn't have open or world PvP... we don't have to deal with the of kind of crap those kinds of games tend to attract... at least nowhere *nearly* as often as I did in WoW, or some other more PvP focused MMOs.

PvMP also introduces an interesting kind of friendly rivalry I've never seen in your more "traditional" PvP settings... I was on my Warg in the 'moors and this one Burglar was hanging around Gramsfoot attacking random players as they came out. I was one of them. The next day, I was on my Warg again and someone in my raid group goes "Hey, I killed you a few times yesterday on my Burglar". I said something about "now I know who to come after when I'm on the other side". We had a good laugh about it and proceeded to enjoy more general mayhem.

Also, in no other PvP MMO that I've played, have I ever logged out at, say, midnight, to log back in 7+ hours later and see that it was still going on, with most of the same people still going at it. That happens almost all the time in the 'moors. I've literally re-joined the same party I'd left hours before a couple times and got right back into the groove.

That said, LoTRO in my experience has an almost entirely mature community. I've run into, maybe 4 idiots in my time playing it. Actually... make that 3. I ran into one of the idiots on two different occasions.

Like you said... there are other MMOs out there that give the rush of world PvP already. There's nothing wrong with MMOs being available for those who *don't* like it.

Originally posted by DragonOak

Originally posted by KorovaMB

 

Your argument is flawed though.  There is a difference between telling a story and creating a fun game.  In a story, it is important to make your readers empathize with the main characters.  To do this, you can't make the "evil" characters in such a way that the readers might empathise with them.  That can create issues in a game, and thus adaptions are frequently made.  This applies to a variety of game mechanics.  For instance, Boromir was killed at the tail end of Fellowship.  Yet in game, killed players respawn.  Does that make the game incongruous with Tolkien's vision?

No because the game is based on Morale, not hit points or life points.  When your morale runs out you are defeated.  And when you are defeated a little box pops up that you live again to fight another day.  So then your logic is flawed on the game mechanic.  As to making evil characters personable it is done by other writers all the time, Stephen King and Anne Rice come to mind.

So, if I understand your argument correctly, you are saying that when you get hit by a mob's sword, you take no actual damage, but just become demoralized?  That is in keeping with the books?  I must not have caught that detail in Tolkein's writings.

To use your example, but from another IP, George Lucas created Stormtroopers and Darth Vader with helmets and masks.  A key reason was to de-humanize them.  This helped the movie-goer empathize with the main characters without cluttering their emotions by making them feel for the slaughtered stormtroopers.  Likewise, ST's were shown having little or no free thought.  They followed orders like lambs to the slaughter.

Oh ya lets use that example of a completly failed game with three revamps and a customer base that is nil and deserted servers.

My paragraph above doesn't refer to the game, but rather the movies.  Not sure how I could have made that clearer.

Yet when SWG was launched, players could play Imperials (complete with ST armor).  The game focused around the GCW (although the implementation was not all it could be).  Had the game allowed for Rebel only play, it would have been disastrous and caused the game to feel extremely disconnected from the movies.

It pretty much is disastrous so we are hypothocating once again.  Using a failed game is not a real good to get your point across.

Here I am refering to the game, so I'm glad you caught that.  As to the game being a disaster, you should talk to people who played the game.  The game did not become a "disaster" until a couple years in.  The issues that the game had originally, and later on when it did become a "disaster" had nothing to do with players being allowed to play Imperials, so my point still stands.

Thus, pvp and evil races could have been implemented without causing the game to feel like it had abandoned Tolkein. 

And the sad fact is, that based on current customers that ENJOY the game, and a large percentage of those that actually read his books, we in a huge majority disagree.  But it is your right to have an opinion just as it is our right to have ours.

I agree.  We each have our opinion, and neither of us is alone in it.

Bottom line, when converting from one medium to another (book to video game) some changes are necessary to convey the story although it may break from a pure literal translation.

Unless of course you have a situation like this one.  Tolkien Enterprises controls the IP, but based on the contract when the rights were sold in the 70's there is set standard of performance and guidelines on how the story can be utilized.  If they go outside that agreement the Tolkien family can sue and have the rights returned to them.  It is the perfect system of checks and balances.  So while you can hypothocate what coulda, shoulda, woulda..........we have what is!

My original point in my original post was not about "what colda, shoulda, woulda", you took the conversation there.  My point was "what was going to be".  My point was based on numerous posts on the MEO boards by developers from Vivendi and Turbine.

 

Originally posted by WSIMike

Originally posted by KorovaMB

Originally posted by DragonOak

So the fact that it could be worse makes it ok that a game based on such a strong IP has weak sub numbers?  Most successful people in the business world are that way because they are willing to risk failure to achieve greatness.  Rarely does taking the safe route pay off.

Wait... Who says it has weak numbers? No one even *knows* with any reliability what LoTRO's numbers are.

You're not the first one to come in there with these baseless, unspecific claims, of what "LoTRO's population should be". You're also not the first to claim that it having world PvP would guarantee a substantial boon to its population.

Been there. Debated that. Buried the horse.

 

 

 

I look at MMOGCHART, where it shows LOTRO with a 0.9% market share.  I would have expected that the IP that was an important inspiration to so much of the Fantasy market would capture a larger market share than that.  Even assuming Sir Bruce has the number wrong by half, a 1.8% market share with such a strong IP is embarrasing.

Originally posted by Grindalyx

It is middle earth. A place i have dreamed about exploreing since i was ten years old. I get to walk around in the places i have only read about.

I think this is the biggest problem I have with LOTRO. You're not actually exploring Middle Earth because Middle Earth was/is a wide open space that covered a huge amount of territory. For me, LOTRO makes Middle Earth look small and uninspired, particularly after I saw the movies and really got a good feeling for the area.

The game was originally called Middle Earth Online, and was supposed to be a big sandbox MMO and a relatively dark world. Then suddenly the game became LOTRO online and everything became happier and more WoWish.

LOTRO is just not how I want to imagine Middle Earth.