Slashdot Mirror


The Destiny of Lord of the Rings Online

An anonymous reader writes "Julian Murdoch over at Gamers With Jobs posits that the recently released Lord of the Rings Online, for all it's flaws, is a new kind of game — the Destiny-Locked RPG: 'The reason that Story sets LOTRO apart is because you know how it ends. This is a luxury World of Warcraft simply can never have. There is no logical end to WoW, where the evil WoW faction of the Horde is victorious, and every member of the good-aligned Alliance dies. The viciously PvP nature of EVE Online means that the story can only sit on the sidelines and inform, not take center stage. But in LOTRO, the game is the story. In this, the game has far more in common with Oblivion than it does with WoW.' The argument here is that a game in which the outcome is known is fundamentally a different (and possibly better) form of gameplay than that the current rage of emergent-gameplay sandbox weak storied games. A challenging idea." It's not so much that the game's ending is already known, as that there is an ending.

18 of 184 comments (clear)

  1. Not the first... by C0rinthian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think Star Wars Galaxies qualifies, as it's set between two pre-existing movies.

    I also think the fact that the story was already written was part of it's downfall. The developers had no room to work with because they would keep bumping into canon.

    1. Re:Not the first... by Liquidrage · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. When SWG came out, I truely questioned the decision to place the game into a known timeline. KotOR, while a completely different type of game, showed what was possible when given dramatic license in a known universe. Parts of the world SWG, at it's launch, removed the one lone aspect of the SW that would have allowed for a good game. Namelt, the Force. I see similar issues with this LotR game. I tried it, but wasn't captivated. The lack of class variety, due to the game trying to hold onto the ideals of the time and place of the story around it, leaves much to be desired. If I play a LotR game, I want to be Gandalf. I don't want to be background_character_01 which is what the game forces you to be even though it does weave your toon into the tale. When you read LotR it's a tale full of magic and conflict and excitement. When you play this game, it's a game of 1000 dwarves with swords and no magic. Much like SWG removing the force, they've taken magic out of the game to hold true to the story and in the end it ruined the game for me.

    2. Re:Not the first... by C0rinthian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      SWG set in the KotOR would have been perfect. Everyone could be some form of Jedi/Sith and it would fit the setting perfectly. They were just too hell-bent on using their recognizable charaters to sell the game. "ZOMG u cn tlak 2 VADAR!!1!"

    3. Re:Not the first... by PHPNerd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When you read LotR it's a tale full of magic and conflict and excitement. Wrong. When you read LotR, magic is a very rare thing. Only 6 wizards have it, and even then, they use it sparingly. It also only HINTS at the elves ability to use it, never outright saying it (perhaps with the exception of Elrond and the river outside of Rivendell in FotR). Anyway, my point is, this game is very true to the novels: magic in the LotR universe is very rare and not seen very often. This comes in an age of gameplay where every shmuck and his dog can have magic (see: Any MMORPG). I, personally, love the way its made. Magic isn't special anymore when everyone is a Gandalf.
    4. Re:Not the first... by pjr.cc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I disagree, the problems facing SWG weren't really about its setting in time as it were, and if you disconnect from the movies to some extent it still is a believable mmo but it suffers so many game-play problems... (keeping in mind i've played it since about 3 months after the release of JTL) for eg:

      1) pvp - the pvp in this game was so badly thought out compared to just about ANY mmo out there (DAoC, WoW, EVE, etc)
      2) towns and building - great idea but very terribly implemented (take a look at the boundaries around the major cities), they really should have done something alot better when it came to people being able to plonk buildings down everywhere.
      3) Jedi - the hologrind sucked... the new system sucked... and in between we couldn't actually become jedi for like 6 months (what the hell were they thinking?!?!?), one of the stupidest moves in a game full of bad moves made by SOE.
      4) JTL - something we were promised from the start and was made a paid-for expansion (and i really despise how MMO's can charge for an expansion when you already pay a monthly fee - this is one thing EVE got very right). DAoC is another example of this, sure they have development costs but those dev's are there full time anyway, which means your $15/mon (or whatever) is already paying their incomes. What was really painfull about this was when people didn't buy the expansions... 'nuff said.
      5) Nerfing - everytime you turned around something was nerfed, sure you needed balance but you can hardly shoot for balance when SWG just kept changing everything all the time, there was just never any time to see if this balance was finally right.

      What they got right:
      1) the economy - Bar none THE BEST implementation of a player-owned economy. Eve likes to think its market is played controlled but thats really not true in any sense of the word. Everything in Eve comes back to NPC prices one way or another, sure t2 is mostly player controlled but even the base price of those items is set back towards what the npc related things are going to cost (even if the high-price is sometimes upwards of 100 or 1000 times its actual build cost).
      2) the wide variety of professions (well thought out and the inter-dependence was quite well done) until JTL, what JTL did to the profession tree's was really quite painfull.
      3) generally speaking, the concepts introduced in the game were fantastic ideas and if it wasn't implemented by SOE it probably would have worked. It was a very big shame SOE got the contract for it because they just had no idea at all... If you went back to the start and got another company to implement swg and made some minor changes to things like pvp and so forth it probably would have been up there with WoW.

      Lucas arts were never particularly smart about the way they went about alot of the things they did, but oh well.

    5. Re:Not the first... by C0rinthian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, you nailed the issue with SWG. The developers thought everyone would be cool with being 'normal' people in the Star Wars universe. Not a very good assumption, as Jedi is the biggest draw to the franchise. To make matters worse, they set the game in a time period where Force user population was at it's lowest. According to canon, there were 3 educated force users in existance. Palpatine, Vader, and (arguably) Luke. No matter how rare you make player character force users, there are still too many to fit with canon. And if you make them really rare, then the playerbase bitches up a storm.

      Basically, SWG was in an unwinnable situation. If they gave their playerbase what they wanted, they killed lore. If they stuck to lore, then people didn't like the game.

      You seem to think that everyone playing mundane characters made the game good, and everyone being a Jedi/Sith would automatically make it bad. Why? Why can't the originally well done crafting system and economy work in a KOTOR setting? All the things that made the game good are not tied to the character archetypes available.

    6. Re:Not the first... by ThousandStars · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Warning: LOTR nerd nitpicks ahead. There are only five wizards, two of whom are never named, and they don't use "magic" but have unusual power. Two of the wizards wander into the East and are never heard from again; Radagast is not terribly effective, Saruman lusts for power and becomes corrupt, and only Gandalf remains true to his purpose. The elves may or may not use the same thing, and they certainly do use what Sauron does, as Galadriel says in Book II of Fellowship in "The Mirror of Galadriel":

      'And you?' [Galadriel] said, turning to Sam. 'For this is what your folk would call magic, I believe; though I do not understand clearly what they mean; and they seem also to use the same word of the deceits of the Enemy. But this, if you will, is the magic of Galadriel. Did you not say that you wished to see Elf-magic?'
      Overall your point is well taken, and if everyone could use 'magic" in the way Gandalf does, the LOTR world would lose much of its appeal and just become another of the innumerable MMORPGs. Part of what's so special about Tolkien is that he doesn't translate well to video games, and his wars are not just modern combat but with funny clothes. When there's money to be made, however, the story can be damned.
    7. Re:Not the first... by MontyApollo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't think magic is that rare in the books, but that extravagant displays of magic are rare. You have elven swords that glow when orcs are near, the palantir, the gates of Moria respond to voice commands, trolls that turn to stone in sunlight, etc... The one ring and the 3 elven rings are of course magical.

      I like that they limit magic wielding players, but I hope the developers don't get caught up in the whole "magic is rare" thing in terms of player experience.

    8. Re:Not the first... by ThousandStars · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The rings augment what power their bearer naturally has; Galadriel has a ring, which is actually covered in the same chapter I cited:

      [Galadriel] lifted up her white arms, and spread out her hands towards the East in a gesture of rejection and denial. Earendil, the Evening Star, most beloved of the Elves, shone clear above. So bright was it that the figure of the Elven-lady cast a dim shadow on the ground. Its rays glanced upon a ring about her finger; it glittered like polished gold overlaid with silver light, and a white stone in it twinkled as if the Even-star had come down to rest upon her hand. Frodo gazed at the ring with awe; for suddenly it seemed to him that he understood.

      'Yes,' she said, divining his thought, 'it is not permitted to speak of it, and Elrond could not do so. But it cannot be hidden from the Ring-bearer, and one who has seen the Eye. Verily it is in the land of Lorien upon the finger of Galadriel that one of the Three remains. This is Nenya, the Ring of Adamant, and I am its keeper.

      But the rings themselves are not magic, or at least not magic as the Elves perceive magic. Saruman and Gandalf have staffs, which are of the Five Rods of Wizards, as Saruman makes clear when he accuses Gandalf of being power hungry in The Two Towers after the Ents lay waste to Isengard. I'd quote that too but don't feel like looking it up as well.

      Sauron, like Gandalf and Saruman, originated as a Maiar, and they have some inborn power that can be augmented in various ways, like the rings. Saruman has a Palantir, which allows him to see farther than normal and communicate with other users. Sauron has one, which explains his coordination with Isengard, as well as Denethor's despondency. None of these items are "magic" in the sense Tolkien would imagine the word, as he would see magic as chiefly being used in a Faustian, evil way. As the quote in my post above demonstrates, the Elves are cognizant of the difference, and are careful with their language. Sam only calls their gifts "magic" because he's a bumbling Hobbit who doesn't know any better.

      None of this mystery and uncertainty translates well into video games, which by their nature are mathematical and designed to be egalitarian in the sense that time spent = abilities gained. Middle Earth, like the Earth we know, does not work in so linear a fashion.

    9. Re:Not the first... by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 3, Funny

      > Gandalf you know and love is probably like level 100 or something.

      Far greater than that. I know of no games where a topped out caster class could win a melee fight against a giant flaming demon.

      And that's ironic because caster classes in games are far better at ignoring giant swords swung at them from point blank range by ogres. Isn't it odd that they can't wear armor because it "disrupts their delicate spell-casting hand movements", yet they can completely ignore a 10 foot tall, 4000 lb. ogre standing right in front of them, swinging a 10 foot long, 200 lb. sword, and not even flinch?

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  2. The downside of having an ending.... by GrnArmadillo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Unfortunately, the well-defined "end" to LOTR has resulted in the first licensed game I can think of where you can't actually go to most of the cool locations from the book (and movies, though Turbine doesn't have that particular license) because the plot hasn't advanced that far yet. They CAN'T expand into Mordor because once they do, that's Game Over. They can't expand to the White City or Rohan because that would make the game half over. They're not even adding the Mines of Moria during the game's first year of release (according to a recent dev chat), cause that would make the game 1/4 over.

    The challenge for Turbine is that, with the "ending" (and so much about locations in the middle) already known, players want to actually get there sometime. That's a problem when your business model is, essentially, stalling the players for time as you continue to collect your monthly fees.

  3. The Road Goes Ever On and On by DLG · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As a preface, I spent some 10 years as an administrator at a LOTR based MUSH. With a time ratio of 3:1 It meant 3 years in Middle Earth (ME) went by in 1 year of real life. For you hobbits, that means that you give a birthday party every 4 months. Having started to play just a few years before the third age yr 3000, there was little real concern about what would happen in the 5 or so years when we had to actually stage the War of the Ring. Original founders had not really considered this an issue as the point was to create an environment for RP in the Tolkien world, not to play out the script of the books. However there was always some pressure from various philosophies of role play and game play in general, on whether we should in some way develop the long term story arc and whether to allow deviations from the general thread of events. This becomes pretty complicated as Tolkien had a sort of longer story arc than most, with events that occurred thousands of years before, in books some of the players had never read, having some impact. In fact, the more a player knew, and cared about Tolkien, the harder it was to play the game, knowing that on the one hand they might realisticly play their characters role, and on the other hand, they might run into situations where quality role play and story making conflicted with the actual plot in ways that only an expert might detect ahead of time.

    This meant the typical uses of comic book/soap opera/RP retcon techniques (retroactive continuity...) which, ill used, creates a hostility so fierce that the term retcon in the MUSH gained the status of fighting words, i.e., if you did not intend to cause someone to freak out and begin an anti-fascist march at your home, you said things like 'we might want to adjust the outcome to match the theme a little more closely, and perhaps there is some backstory we could RP out to clarify why your character suddenly had to NOT slay Boromir as a 12 year old for kissing your pig. (That never happened... Or did it! Retcon!)

    Anyway, the point is that, there were legitimate arguments to let things play out as if we got to year 3000 and let things diverge. There were others that said, lets get to year 3008 or so and then freeze until we figure things out, allowing the game clock to advance but maintaining the pre LOTR environment. Others wanted to move towards a sort of scripted version of the war, but of course focus also on the places that were not described, to explore how such a big event effected the other populations. (Places mentioned in a sentence have a whole life when you have 2000+ active players trying to play their favorite characters)

    As an admin, alot of my effort was aimed towards providing guidance in resolving conflicts both operationally and thematically.

    Now LOTR Online is not a MUSH. Players do not drive the content the same way. Most folks just want to see the sights and participate in the battles, and get that Tolkien feel. But the fact is that I won't be playing this game, having spent a decade of my life trying to combine fun, Tolkien, role play, and computers. I will never be real happy watching hordes of hobbits wandering around, making Frodo and Bilbo seem like homebodies, nor will Noldo elves dancing topless on mailboxes make me happy.

    I prefer original works of fantasy. I love to read Tolkien. I first read the hobbit when I was 6, and was done with all the books (including Silmarilian which had just recently come out in soft cover) by the time I was 8.

    I am glad more people are buying the books, and are excited by what I consider some of the greatest examples of story telling and most graceful uses of the English language. But to claim that knowing what will happen makes a game more playable, or that such an idea is new, is really quite absurd. There have been 100's of games in which we know the story. And if you really expect LOTR online to END for plot purposes, rather than because they are no longer making money, you are in the gardens of Lorien, dreaming away.

  4. Re:An ending? WHAT?!! by DuckDodgers · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem with that in the setting is that the Fourth Age is the age of man. The elder elves head across the sea. The wizards are gone (although if you read the Silmarillion, some of the other wizards are still out there somewhere). The rings of power that survived are powerless.

    Tolkien's books have the really cool events in the ancient past, the moderately cool events in the distant past, the last little footnotes to the story happen in [i]The Hobbit[/i] and [i]The Lord of the Rings[/i], and everything gets really boring afterwards.

    I think anyone writing a Middle Earth MMORPG should toss that out the window - invent lieutenants of Melkior and new species that remained hidden. Invent new rules for regular humans to master the magic of Gandalf or Saruman. Basically Dungeons and Dragons'ify Middle Earth for the sake of making the game interesting. But I bet millions of diehard fans would call it blasphemy.

  5. Re:Noone gets it right by SuperMog2002 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I submit to you the following for consideration, all of which can be learned by doing the quests in Ratchet and Westfall. At the end of the third war (Warcraft III), both the Alliance and Horde capitals were destroyed. The leadership of both factions paid for skilled craftsmen to build new capital cities. Thrall, leader of the Horde, hired a group of goblins from the Steamwheedle Cartel to build the orcish capital of Orgrimmar. He was very grateful for the their fine work and paid them well. The goblins were impressed enough with the orcs that they decided to start their own port town not far from Orgrimmar (Ratchet).

    Meanwhile, the humans hired Edvin VanCleave and his guild of craftsmen to build the city of Stormwind. They likewise did an excellent job building the city. However, when they attempted to collect their pay after finishing, the government conveniently "forgot" that they had offered VanCleave any pay at all for his work. They threw him out on the streets of the city he built without a penny. Disillusioned with the kingdom of Stormwind, VanCleave and his guild reformed in to the Defias gang, who frequently terrorize Alliance players in the level 1 to 30 range. VanCleave himself is the last boss of Dead Mines, the first Alliance instance.

    Which one of these sounds evil to you?

    --
    Sunwalker Dezco for Warchief in 2016
  6. Re:Noone gets it right by shinma · · Score: 4, Informative

    Which is why World of Warcraft's orcs, trolls, and even Forsaken, to a point, are interesting. They break the mold. You may not see it, because you assume they fit old stereotypes, but they don't. The Orcs, Tauren and Trolls are all generally honorable races. In some ways, they are more "good" than either the humans or the elves.

    Humans have enslaved Orcs and humiliated them for years, they kept them in concentration camps. Not to mention that one of their faction leaders is Onyxia.
    Night Elves are selfish and desperate, and they even made it possible for the Burning Legion to attack.
    Dwarves are nearly as bad as the Venture Co. at destroying the environment they live in, and therefore they clash with the nature-loving Tauren.
    Gnomes IRRADIATED their own city to drive out invaders, and now they sponge off the Dwarves.
    The Draenei are the opposite of the Blood Elves, in that they are ostensibly the only race in the game that can be called unreservedly "good." (This kind of falls flat when you consider hints that the Naaru aren't exactly the angels they're cracked up to be, and the Draenei become simply "naive" rather than truly "chosen" or anything of the sort.)

    Orcs were oppressed, put into concentration camps and simply want their own homeland where people will leave them alone now. Sound familiar?
    Tauren are members of the Horde because the orcs saved them from the centaurs that were invading their home. They are extremely honorable.
    The Darkspear Trolls have forsaken cannibalism and embraced the Shamanistic culture of the Orcs.
    The Forsaken have a faction that wants to kill everyone, yes, but other members are described by humans near Dalaran as "possessing more humanity than my fellow humans."
    The Blood Elves are, arguably, the only truly "evil" race in the game. But even they are portrayed as more or less out of control, rather than blatantly malicious.

    Everyone in Azeroth is generally far more nuanced than simple "good" or "evil." If you choose to only see the races as Tolkienn portrayed them, you're missing out on a lot of the story of World of Warcraft.

    --
    Shinma
  7. Re:For all it's flaws? by Hydian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I find LOTRO to be nearly flawless when compared to other MMOs. LOTRO had about as smooth a launch as one could hope for and put other MMOs to shame in this regard. Also, allowing characters to transfer from Beta to Live, and discounted pricing for pre-orders, is a welcome "innovation." This is Turbine's 4th MMORPG release, so you would think that they'd be able to manage a launch by now. Allowing preorders to get into the game early (which is not really allowing beta characters to transfer over to live) and pre order discounts is hardly innovative as that has been done for quite a while now.

    As far as flaws go, it certainly isn't flawless. Don't get me wrong, the game has great stories and is awesome in a lot of ways. It's obvious that they let DDO flounder in order to devote more resources to making this game as deep and rich as it is. That said, the combat system leaves a lot to be desired and is a step backwards from most other MMORPGs IMHO. It's come a long way since alpha, but it still annoys me too much for me to actually play post release. The crafting stuff obviously still needs work as does the economy, but they are tweaking those and should have them balanced out a lot better pretty quickly.

    Overall the game is pretty good, but certainly not anywhere near flawless.
  8. Re:The whole point.. by Rhys · · Score: 3, Informative

    Everyone keeps bringing this up as a point "they just want to keep you hooked and paying."

    I'm not sure that's the case with LOTRO. The $199 lifetime membership, while steep, has to be a break-even point for Turbine. The other pre-order option is a $10/month lifetime rate, which lets you calculate that at $199 they expect you to play for about 20 months over the lifetime of the game. They've already built in an end to the game. The fact they give a lifetime membership tells you that much. If they are really smart, they're going to run the MMO through the story of ME, and then close it down shortly after the war.

    Given a usual rate of expansions (free or paid), you can estimate the story will finish in 3-5 years. In which time the graphics will have started looking fairly dated. Either they'd have to go back and refresh them (lots of art and dev time)... or they could be in their twilight and say, "story's about to be over folks, we're not doing that sorry! But look at our next project: B5 Online!"

    It'll be interesting to see how it plays out. Especially given this is Turbine aka "exploit early, exploit often." They've had one semi-successful games and two flops, one of which closed just after three years.

    --
    Slashdot Patriotism: We Support our Dupes!
  9. Re:Noone gets it right by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In a lot of ways, World of Warcraft is a critique of the Tolkienesque ideas of good and evil. Tolkien might be said to combine a Christian metaphysics of good and evil with English cultural imperialism: for the most part, the heroes are the "Men of the West" while the villains are "swarthy," dark-skinned, uncivilized, etc.

    Blizzard took this set-up and exposed it as being a reflection of European colonialism and imperialism. The Alliance is trying to "clean up" the land, getting rid of those cultures that don't resemble itself sufficiently. The result reveals just what the historical cultural origins of the traditional heroic fantasy categories of "good" and "evil" races really is - a veiled form of racism.