Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

EA Trails New Lord Of The Rings Games For 2004

Posted by simoniker on from the and-2005-and-2006-and-2007 dept.

Thanks to EGM for their article discussing the latest Electronic Arts games based on the Lord Of The Rings movie franchise. In talking to executive producer Neil Young, previously creator of unconventional online title Majestic, the existing, well-received Return Of The King game is dissected, but there's also information on further LOTR games due in 2004. Young discusses the already unveiled "[PC] RTS game we're developing called The Battles of Middle-Earth, which is being developed by our Los Angeles studio by the team that did Command & Conquer Generals", but also talks about "a new game - currently entitled The Lord of the Rings Trilogy... due out by the end of next year." According to Young, this multi-platform action title strives not to be a sequel too far: "The idea isn't to just take you back through the fiction again, but to give you some other characters who you might not expect to be able to play, and really extend the multiplayer features.. [and] develop the online feature."

62 comments

  1. Games like this are better than the books by ObviousGuy · · Score: 1

    Books are so linear. Games like this allow you to experience alternate endings better than Choose Your Own Adventure ever could.

    --
    I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    1. Re:Games like this are better than the books by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alternate endings kind of ruin the point when used in a fictional historical account like LotR. Why would you want alternate endings? That doesn't pay much respect to the source material.

    2. Re:Games like this are better than the books by martinthebrit · · Score: 4, Funny

      I disagree. You are free to read the pages of the book in any order you like. Granted, it may not always make much sense, but how more non-linear to you want.

  2. Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    The team in L.A. = the artists formerly known as Westwood?

    1. Re:Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I don't see how they can call it the 'team who worked on C&C Generals' given that 70% of that team left EA shortly after that project. (Attrition)

    2. Re:Hmm by mad.frog · · Score: 1

      If by "Attrition" you mean "Leaving in disgust after being treated like shit", then yes...

      Seriously, most of that team is gone.

    3. Re:Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes -- 1/3 of Westwood was sent to L.A.

      1/3 to other EA offices...
      1/3 let go when Westwood was dismantled.

  3. Neil Young? by jpop32 · · Score: 1

    In talking to executive producer Neil Young...

    So, Neil decided to try for a different career? Well, I guess I like him as a singer/songwriter better.

  4. Re:Oh Goody by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hey, nobody complained about that in Neverwinter Nights...

  5. Oh yeah baby .... by jrc313 · · Score: 0

    ... Milk that license!

  6. ROTK by captainstupid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I really didn't like the ROTK game. I loved TTT, but ROTK fails miserably for only one reason.

    The camera.

    Most of the time while playing the game it is difficult to even see your character. Many enemies will gather around you and beat the living daylights out of you with little chance for you to retaliate because you have no idea where you are. Even if you know that you're in a general area, timing attacks is nearly impossible because your character is COMPLETELY HIDDEN. Even if you're doing relatively well, one enemy can completely obstruct your viewpoint and render your fighter invisible.

    I really wanted to like this game because TTT was so much fun, but ROTK is a perfect example of how an otherwise well produced game can completely fail (IMO) because of a single problem.

    --
    "Anyway, long story short... is a phrase whose origins are complicated and rambling...." - Abraham Simpson
    1. Re:ROTK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      The guy I played this coopratively with had the same problem. I didn't really because they made parrying so easy. Just keep tapping parry until you can figure our where you are, and if you have the move, follow up with an orc/man/uruki bane and booya, damn skippy mode: ACTIVATE. The only time it was something of a problem was when my buddy would space out and drag the camera so that me and my mob were off screen.

      If you play it on the xbox, go to a mission, get through the cinematic, pause it, hold L and R while entering X,B,X,up or X,X,Up,B or B,down,Y,A (L and R must be released and re-pressed between each code) you might have a little more luck.

    2. Re:ROTK by meta-monkey · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Two Towers game was okay. The graphics weren't that great, and some of the levels were boring. However, I thought ROTK was great. I'm not done with it yet...I'm still trying to beat the Pelennor fields. My only real complaint is when it switches to a game-rendered cut scene during the middle of the action, so you can't move, but it lets your enemies have a free swing at you when you get control back. It's like they started the game a half a second before they put the camera back on you and gave you control. Now that's annoying. Other than that, great game!

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    3. Re:ROTK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You still trying to kill the 60 or so guys? Or are you on the blasting Oliphants? Cause if you haven't got to the later part yet, boy are you in for a rude awakening. Worst. Cut scene. Evar!

    4. Re:ROTK by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Killing the 60 guys is easy. The Oliphants aren't even that bad. What annoys the hell out of me is, I kill an Oliphant, and then sprint over to shoot the Witch King, but there are a bunch of warriors/uruks there on the platform where I'm supposed to shoot from, so I've got clear them out before I can shoot, and it just takes forever. I'm lucky if I get two shots in on each try, and then I have to run all the way across the battlefield because the next Oliphant convieniently appears on the other side. GAAH!! My health just doesn't last that long :)

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    5. Re:ROTK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      very possibly true. Maybe you're just an idiot. :P

    6. Re:ROTK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      I tried it that way the first time. HARD. Took like a half hour. If your near level 7 and have the sweeter projectiles. It's quick.

      1) The side the Oliphant appears on is somewhat random.

      2) The winning strategy seems to be the minimum number of trips (obviously)

      3) Warrior bane is your friend.

      4) When you run to the witch king ignore the first guy. Let him rush you. Just fling shit at the king.

      5) When he get's close, parry to set up the bane move. Which is long, but it kills him instantly.

      6) This will perfect you up for more damage dishing.

      7) You may wish to stack the perfect mode with your characters 'badass aura.'

      If you don't have uruki bane, orc hewer it is.

    7. Re:ROTK by meta-monkey · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's about what I figured. My guys are all level 7, and have the projectile upgrades, and I tried the sauron's bane/warrior bane move to get perfect, but I just thought it took too long. I forget about the aura, though...I'll give that a try next.

      Actually, I was thinking I might just not bother trying to kill the oliphant before attacking the witch king. It takes awhile for the oliphant to make it all the way to merry and eoywn, and the witch king comes on a timer independent of the Oliphant. You can probably shoot the king, then go kill the oliphant when it's most of the way to the end. You won't have to run as far, and you won't have to worry about losing hits on the king because you were still running along the cliff after killing the Oliphant. Thanks for the advice...I'll give a try when I get home tonight :)

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    8. Re:ROTK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know once I hit level 10, it took MAYBE three shots with Legolas and the king was toast. With the other characters, including the hobbits before they were leveled up, it only took a handful of shots and they only have the gay invisibility cloaks.

      But the perfect aura plus the badass aura puts down some serious smack.

    9. Re:ROTK by Reapy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah, that's what worked with my friend and me in co-op. As soon as the witch king appeared we ran up there and took him out with both of us firing the bows. It also pays to make sure you are fully charged up on each bow shot, since it does damage quicker then if you fired as fast as you can.

      Great game though, one of the best movie licensed game's I've ever seen.

    10. Re:ROTK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh there's no doubt about it.

      You DO suck.

      At flaming as well as gaming, it seems.

  7. Here be logic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Books, written after decades of contemplation of the history of middle earth, just don't stack up against hacking trolls and orcs in a video game churned out in a few months. Why? Because the book is linear and the games, well, pretty much are too.

  8. A few changes.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's been a while since I read the books, but I'm not sure I remember Aragorn having, "a devastating upgrade that allows him to swing his sword and sets enemies on fire and shoots out fireballs in eight directions."

    The Rangers apparently know how to kick some serious ass.

    1. Re:A few changes.... by burns210 · · Score: 1

      These Rangers aren't just any Rangers... They are POWER Rangers. Wait, wrong show. my bad.

  9. Can yo u say "too many games"? by JFMulder · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Am I the only way to think that EA is looking like it's going to milk the LOTR cow too much, driving the video game franchise into the ground? There's bound to be a sucky LOTR game soon. (if there wasn't one already, I haven't played any so far) They can't be all good. Already FOTR was a crappy game (not developed by EA though). TTT and ROTK are supposed to be good. I played the War of the Ring demo and wasn't impressed a lot, it look exactly like Warcraft in MiddleEarth (did they license the engine or what???).

    When MMORPG based on the LORD of the rings story will come out, that's when we'll know that the Tolkien family will have totally sold out.

    1. Re: Can yo u say "too many games"? by Crockerboy · · Score: 1

      There is already one being made based on Middle Earth.

      Milk that cow for all it's worth, baby.

    2. Re: Can yo u say "too many games"? by JFMulder · · Score: 1

      Say this with your best Cartman impersonnation :
      "Goddamit!"

    3. Re: Can yo u say "too many games"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The tolken family shouldn't have any say about it. His innovation is done, he had an extended period of time to milk a monopoly based on that creation, and now he's dead. It's time for the living to pick up the torch, and this generation shouldn't be punished for having been born 100 years too early.

    4. Re: Can yo u say "too many games"? by WWWWolf · · Score: 3, Interesting

      EA is definitely a bunch of Evil Capitalist Pigs[tm], and have been so for a looong time. I have no love left for them after what they did to Bullfrog and Origin.

      And they have the game license to LotR movie, which naturally has one problem: EA is in position where it doesn't matter to them if the game is any good, they'll still make tons of money. Just a little twitch in the marketing muscle and they're set...

      The movie trilogy has been a success so far: The makers actually cared about the book, and it shows. Now, as for the game licenses, those things always end up being snatched by people who can only say "hey, this is a profitable license".

      Then again, if the license ever did happen to fall into the hands of a caring team of developers, it's always easy to ask if a "LotR game" even could be done. Book is a story in written form, movie is an interpretation of a story for another medium, but game is nonlinear and interactive. If they ever handed the license to me and gave me a bunch of artists and code slaves and plenty of budget, I'd definitely think of the thing for more than a while. How not to do a watered-down adventure game or a mediocre strategy game? How to be loyal to the original work without following right on the master's heels?

      Let's just ask, "What Would 'Betrayal at Krondor' Developers Do?"

      (End of a "want to be a NNirvi in place of the NNirvi" ramblerant. =)

    5. Re: Can yo u say "too many games"? by Matrix272 · · Score: 2, Informative

      When MMORPG based on the LORD of the rings story will come out, that's when we'll know that the Tolkien family will have totally sold out.

      First, there already IS a MMORPG based on LOTR... but that's already been mentioned.

      Second, no offense, but FUCK THE TOLKIEN FAMILY. Especially Christopher Tolkien, the old piece of shit. It's HIS FAULT that Peter Jackson won't get to make The Hobbit. Although that article doesn't mention it, I've read other places that JRR's grandson, the son of Christopher Tolkien, DOES like the new trilogy, and wanted the movies to be made. Unfortunately, that probably means that if The Hobbit will ever be made into a movie, we'll have to wait until Christopher Tolkien dies.

      --
      "It's better to have a gun and not need it than need a gun and not have it." ~ Christian Slater, True Romance
    6. Re: Can yo u say "too many games"? by Ty_Webb · · Score: 1

      On a different note - the same concept applies to the Star Wars franchise. Until George Lucas dies, there will be no more SW movies after Episode 3 (unless he has a drastic change of mind, but that's extremely doubtful). The question is - who will Lucas give the rights of the franchise to?

    7. Re: Can yo u say "too many games"? by JFMulder · · Score: 1

      I don't agree. While I don't like the idea that Peter Jackson may not make The Hobbit, I still want the Tolkien family to allow talented people who actually give a shit about the story to make games, and not anyone who has deep pockets.

      You know how a lot of people feel disgusted at the Pokemon franchise. I wouldn't want LOTR to suffer the same fate.

    8. Re: Can yo u say "too many games"? by Matrix272 · · Score: 1

      I don't agree. While I don't like the idea that Peter Jackson may not make The Hobbit, I still want the Tolkien family to allow talented people who actually give a shit about the story to make games, and not anyone who has deep pockets.

      The only Tolkien that has a problem with Peter Jackson or the new movies is Christopher. His son, whose name I can't remember, is a grown man, and likes the idea of The Hobbit... and actually likes the new movies.

      Besides, can you really say that the people that made the original animated Hobbit movie are talented, or that the movie somehow complemented the book?

      --
      "It's better to have a gun and not need it than need a gun and not have it." ~ Christian Slater, True Romance
    9. Re: Can yo u say "too many games"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you! I enjoy thievery very very much! I will wear this gold star proudly as I play my pirated games! AAAAARRRRR!!!!

    10. Re: Can yo u say "too many games"? by syrinx · · Score: 1

      Actually it's just that a different studio has the rights to the Hobbit movie, and is reluctant to give them up to New Line.

      Chris Tolkien's out of the picture as far as a Hobbit movie goes. JRR sold the rights to Hobbit and LOTR movies a long time ago (or else Chris wouldn't have even let LOTR get made).

      If they ever want a Silmarillion movie, then they have to deal with Christopher.

      --
      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
    11. Re: Can yo u say "too many games"? by JFMulder · · Score: 1

      I haven't seen it, but being made by Disney Or WB means it probably sucked. :)

      I really would like to see Jackson make The Hobbit. I just don't one to see bad games one after the other come out and drive the video game franchise into the ground.

    12. Re: Can yo u say "too many games"? by JVert · · Score: 1

      JRR sold LOTR rights but not the Hobbit.

    13. Re: Can yo u say "too many games"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like I care as much about that as you do about what they do with the LotR franchise.

      Which is to say not at all.

      Get fucked, matey.

  10. Trails? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    EA trails it? What the hell does that mean?
    And if it was supposed to be "trials," well, THAT'S NOT A FUCKING VERB.

    1. Re:Trails? by Quinn · · Score: 1

      Someone mod this up, because I also have no idea what the fuck that sentence is supposed to mean. Maybe I could have RTFA, but isn't the title supposed to tell you what it's about, not throw you into a conniption of confusion like trying to understand the punchline in some goddamned Beetle Bailey cartoon?

      --
      #19845
    2. Re:Trails? by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      I suspect it's "trails" as in "trailers".

  11. Secret Characters that should have been: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Illsiador, Sauron, Sauruman, The Balor, Galadriell, Arowen, Ring Wraith, Bilbo, Treebeard, Golum ...
    I could go on. *At length*.

    1. Re:Secret Characters that should have been: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, and Butterbur, the bumbling barkeep from Bree. I bet he would kick some uruk ass!!!!

    2. Re:Secret Characters that should have been: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A fighting game that uses Tolkien characters would be awesome, in my opinion. Make it like street fighter, soul calibur, etc. You start out as one of the fellowship, give everyone special moves that fit the character, and fight your way up to Saruman or Melkor. Then you can unlock the bad guys or the powerful guys (Elrond/Galadriel/maybe put Gandalf here, also include Durin's Bane, Ring Wraiths, Shelob) for playing against friends. The characters in the book are certainly diverse enough to fill up a fighting game. It would be pretty funny to play Pippin VS Saruman, or fun to put Frodo with the ring against Saruman (maybe they can take turns fighting for control over the wraiths for special moves against each other).

    3. Re:Secret Characters that should have been: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Saruman doesn't control the wraiths, maybe you mean Sauron? It does sound like a good idea. Parent of parent poster had even worse mistakes in the names, so don't feel bad ;)

    4. Re:Secret Characters that should have been: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't read the books yet, as in all things movie first then book.

      Also, I suck at spelling.

  12. Well if it's a fighting game.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then The One Ring would have to be a secret character itself. It wouldn't have regular damaging attacks to to speak, but it couldn't be hurt.

    To win the person playing the Ring would have to flop around, parrying waiting to excecute a successful grapple attack on the other player. A couple of different versions doing damage based on how difficult they were to pull off, and the moral disposition of the opposing character. To run the ring would roll. And to beat the ring, you'd have to knock it out of the ring. Obviously only one person could play the ring at a time.

    That would be the funniest/sweetest secret character of all time.

    1. Re:Well if it's a fighting game.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or Sauron is the last enemy, with the ring. You beat him and whatever character you used takes the ring and becomes the new bad guy :)

    2. Re:Well if it's a fighting game.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first end character would be Sauron, sans ring. That would open up the opportunity to fight him while he has the ring. Then if you can beat him, you've unlocked The One Ring as a playable character.

  13. Wheres the strategy? by MMaestro · · Score: 1

    Other than a few parts in the books/movies the battles usually ended up sounding/looking like a sloppy mass X unit attack on the enemy position. I just can't see the LOTR series making it in the strategy genre. Action genre? Hell yeah. Adventure genre? If you can do it right. RPG genre? Maybe. Strategy genre? Doubtful. Racing genre? Over J.R.R. Tolkain's dead body.

    1. Re:Wheres the strategy? by Samedi1971 · · Score: 1

      Other than a few parts in the books/movies the battles usually ended up sounding/looking like a sloppy mass X unit attack on the enemy position. I just can't see the LOTR series making it in the strategy genre.

      Tolkien invented the Orc Rush!

    2. Re:Wheres the strategy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Over J.R.R. Tolkain's dead body.

      Uh.
      1) Tolkien
      2) It's been "over his dead body" for about 30 years.

    3. Re:Wheres the strategy? by Colazar · · Score: 1
      Well, when I think "strategy" I think of fighting out the whole war, not just one battle. Resource and troop allocation, and that whole bit. Probably more of a turn-based game than RTS, though you could probably do it both ways. (You know, something with the Europa Universalis engine would be fiendish, now that I think about it.)

      Of course, I also played Middle-Earth PBM for several years, where you do just that, so maybe I'm biased. (MEPBM is a fun game, btw, if you've got a year or two.)

      --
      He decided to just watch the government, and kind of scale it down to size, and run his life that way. --Laurie Anderson
  14. Neil Young by fallingdown · · Score: 1

    I'm happy to see that Neil Young's career didn't suffer from the whole Majestic debacle. The concept of Majestic was so exciting and I think it would have been a much bigger hit if they had only allowed users to play at their own speed rather than in the 20 minute spurts dictated by the designers. I hope that EA has seen past the mistakes of this first implimentation and on to other iterations of this exciting and different form of gameplay.