|
Firmly planted in the straightforward beat-em-up genre, Lord of the Rings: Conquest seems a bit like a relic. Like a game from generations past, it lacks the thrill and polish required to compete with today's top-tier titles. This third-person hack-and-slash is decent fun at times, but it's also a reminder of just how mediocre games can be.
In this game by developer Pandemic Studios, famous large-scale battles from the "Lord of the Rings" books and films play out over eight missions, with players commanding four classes of fighters and occasional "heroes" from the series. In a twist, another seven missions follow Sauron and his minions, depicting an alternate story in which the forces of evil control the One Ring. This third-person hack-and-slash is decent fun at times, but it's also a reminder of just how mediocre games can be.
On both sides, the character classes are the same. The "Warrior" is a sword-wielding soldier that can string together combo attacks and throw axes; the "Scout" can turn invisible and perform stealth kills, but can also throw bombs and swing a pair of knives; the "Archer" fires a variety of arrows; and the "Mage" shoots lightning and fireballs, pounds the ground with shockwave attacks and can heal himself, along with any nearby allies. The "heroes" in the game, such as Gandalf and Legolas from the good side and Saruman and the Witch King from the evil side, are basically souped-up versions of the basic classes who step in at pivotal moments in each mission.
It's a pretty straightforward affair overall. Objectives usually require destroying a landmark, capturing a territory, killing a high-priority enemy, or running from point A to point B. Each mission comprises roughly a half dozen of these goals, and the pace never slackens between them. Along the way, players will slay hundreds of enemy Orcs — or humans, in the evil campaign. Failure comes when the player runs out of lives or cannot complete one of the objectives.
A fair number of non-player characters, good and evil, run around in the midst of all this, giving the sense that the player is just one soldier among many on the battlefield. Even as the player dies and prepares to respawn, the fighting in the background never stops. Because of the fast pace, and the feeling that the battle is happening all around the player the Lord of the Rings: Conquest campaign seems like a multiplayer game trapped in a single-player body.
That's okay, in a way. The instant, button-mashing action is a welcome departure from games that are steeped in character and plot development. It's also a shame, given the subject matter. The story is told completely through hacked-up movie clips with voice-over narration. For people that know the series, it doesn't reveal anything new, and for people that don't, it's a pretty bare-bones depiction of Tolkien's narrative. The "Rise of Sauron" campaign is most disappointing, because it fails to describe the evil takeover with any real depth.
Indeed, the action itself is Lord of the Rings: Conquest's main driver. It banks on wowing the player when he or she fells a giant Oliphaunt, takes command of a brutally powerful Troll, or smashes hordes of enemy humans as Sauron. There are plenty of thrilling moments like these scattered throughout, but they don't quite make up for the meat of the combat, which lacks the polish of a real premium title.
Maybe that's because of the interface. While other beat-em-ups have devised clever ways to convey the condition of your enemies, Lord of the Rings: Conquest still relies on health bars. If the game is indeed trying to relive classic moments from the Ring canon, it shouldn't be so thoroughly rooted in outdated video game conventions.
Graphics likely share some of the blame as well. Fluidity is sorely lacking from the game's countless enemy encounters, and it almost seems as if player and foe are acting independently of each other when they lock horns. There's a combo executed on one end, and a flailing back that happens on the other, but it doesn't quite seem like cause and effect.
There are a couple other nitpicks that bring Conquest down a few notches. Though the game flaunts its various player classes as catering to different play styles, it tends to be obvious when to use each character. Unfortunately, this means players will usually stick with the Archer and the Mage, since the former's ranged attacks and the latter's ability to heal make them so much more viable for staying alive. Also, there's a strange system where players can become a hero character at pivotal moments in a mission, but lose that privilege if the character dies. Weirder still, the hero comes back when only a couple of lives remain, forcing the player to endure brutal challenges as the regular characters in the interim. It seems like an artificial way to make the game harder.
Conquest is not a terribly difficult game, but it tends to fluctuate pretty widely with each objective. Some challenges can be downright frustrating without a very specific battle plan and perfect execution, while others simply require good positioning and a solid sequence of attacks. On average, the learning curve rises gradually, so some of the hardest missions are positioned at the end, but there are plenty of challenges to be had early in the game as well.
Difficulty takes a major turn for the worse during online play. In a month's time, it seems Conquest's players have a pretty good grasp of the game's mechanics. Success over Xbox Live doesn't come easy, and even skilled players should expect to die lots of times before becoming competitive. On the bright side, multiplayer takes better advantage of the characters' strengths and weaknesses. The Warrior is still somewhat obsolete, but the Scout truly shines because his stealth kills can easily pick apart opposing Archers and Mages. Still, the objectives — capturing control points, delivering the Ring, and killing the opposing team — aren't much different than the single player game. It won't stay interesting for people who aren't gripped by the main campaign.
At this point, the old game review cliché that Lord of the Rings: Conquest "will please fans of the series" doesn't seem right. It provides some light amusement, but is too mediocre to really recommend.
Fun Factor: It's a thrill to control the heroes and accomplish some of the more unique objectives, but most of the combat is just so-so
Game Length: A skilled player can plow through both campaigns in 10 to 12 hours. Then, there's the multiplayer.
Difficulty: The learning curve rises gently, but there are some spikes and drops throughout.
On the Negative Side: Presentation and graphics seem dated compared to other recent games, and some design decisions are questionable.
Bang for Your Buck: A split-screen campaign mode and online multiplayer extend the game's longevity.
|
