Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Middle-earth Total war Based on the Books Alone

bilbobaggins764bilbobaggins764 Registered Users Posts: 36
Many threads have been made suggesting a Tolkien-themed TW based on the movies and books. The main objection is the cost associated with acquiring the rights. But the rights to the books alone are far easier to get as many small companies have done so. CA could as well get the rights and it would allow their amazing artists to invent a new vision of Middle-earth. I think the artists at CA could do as good, or perhaps even better, at presenting Middle-earth. I think they would do a far better job than EA games did with BFME 2 or LOTR online. CA could also hire Alan Lee or John Howe to lead the design team and thus legally have a very similar look to the movies without paying costs on the rights.

Also, new games could be done on the first, second, and fourth ages where CA could create the image [as Jackson did in the movies] that gamers and Tolkien fans associate with and could truly be creative here.

Movie Fans Think About This

I have no doubt that if CA did a LOTR TW the most popular mod would be a visual adaptation to fit the movies. The most awarded and downloaded mod of any TW game is a mod that did just that, third-age total war. However, know the limitations would be removed, and most all the work is done besides adjusting the look of units.
«13

Comments

  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 11,449
    edited March 5
    The Problem, as I see it, is that "recreating" LotR instead of using the movies will lose alot of people, who loves the movies but are not so deep in the books that they even recognize a different version.

    I don't think that hiring Alan Lee or John Howe allows you to use the movie looks or look alike, because it would quite amaze me if WB was so sloppy by securing their rights.
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • dge1dge1 Moderator Arkansas, USARegistered Users, Moderators, Knights Posts: 21,253
    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.
    "The two most common things in the universe are Hydrogen and Stupidity." - Harlan Ellison
    "The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." - Hubert H. Humphrey
    "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin/Mark Twain
    “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”–George Santayana, The Life of Reason, 1905.

  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 30,559
    Has been tried, didn't work.

  • virginia1861virginia1861 Registered Users Posts: 229
    SiWI said:

    The Problem, as I see it, is that "recreating" LotR instead of using the movies will lose alot of people, who loves the movies but are not so deep in the books that they even recognize a different version.

    I don't think that hiring Alan Lee or John Howe allows you to use the movie looks or look alike, because it would quite amaze me if WB was so sloppy by securing their rights.


    It would also gain many that love the books and not the movies. But I think a well-done mod would bring many of those you speak of back.


    They do not have the authors write at all. I play a boardgame that uses Howe and Lee as well could be hired and then they could legally almost replicate the movies.


    Give more credit to the CA artists.
  • virginia1861virginia1861 Registered Users Posts: 229
    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    I am unsure how a statement like this could be made if you have read the books. There is far, far more variety in a game based on the books than just the movies.

    Third age mod was unable to use all the diversity available but you can see what they did. That mod alone [again could not do everything] has more variety and campaign gameplay than every TW game not named Warhammer. I have also taken a look at some Warhammer factions and was underwhelmed by the great diversity i am told they have.

    But what would you suggest ca do that has more diversity than a Tolkien tw based on the books?
  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 10,645
    edited March 6
    Some people keep on talking about about variety, races, rights, diversity, etc... All of these are just opinions.

    What matter is if people will buy it or not. If there is market and demand, it is fine.

    Variety is not the foundation of fantasy title.

    It is the setting and fans!
    Post edited by jamreal18 on
  • BlacedBlaced Registered Users Posts: 562

    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    I am unsure how a statement like this could be made if you have read the books. There is far, far more variety in a game based on the books than just the movies.

    Third age mod was unable to use all the diversity available but you can see what they did. That mod alone [again could not do everything] has more variety and campaign gameplay than every TW game not named Warhammer. I have also taken a look at some Warhammer factions and was underwhelmed by the great diversity i am told they have.

    But what would you suggest ca do that has more diversity than a Tolkien tw based on the books?
    So being honest, what monsters are there in the book?

    Fellbeast (mount only)

    Ent (Treeman) (only recruitable for Fangorn, as well the only unit for Fangorn)

    Eagle

    Troll

    That's it, nothing else, no magic, no monster
  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 10,645
    Blaced said:

    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    I am unsure how a statement like this could be made if you have read the books. There is far, far more variety in a game based on the books than just the movies.

    Third age mod was unable to use all the diversity available but you can see what they did. That mod alone [again could not do everything] has more variety and campaign gameplay than every TW game not named Warhammer. I have also taken a look at some Warhammer factions and was underwhelmed by the great diversity i am told they have.

    But what would you suggest ca do that has more diversity than a Tolkien tw based on the books?
    So being honest, what monsters are there in the book?

    Fellbeast (mount only)

    Ent (Treeman) (only recruitable for Fangorn, as well the only unit for Fangorn)

    Eagle

    Troll

    That's it, nothing else, no magic, no monster
    So what?
  • BlacedBlaced Registered Users Posts: 562
    Not saying
    jamreal18 said:

    Blaced said:

    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    I am unsure how a statement like this could be made if you have read the books. There is far, far more variety in a game based on the books than just the movies.

    Third age mod was unable to use all the diversity available but you can see what they did. That mod alone [again could not do everything] has more variety and campaign gameplay than every TW game not named Warhammer. I have also taken a look at some Warhammer factions and was underwhelmed by the great diversity i am told they have.

    But what would you suggest ca do that has more diversity than a Tolkien tw based on the books?
    So being honest, what monsters are there in the book?

    Fellbeast (mount only)

    Ent (Treeman) (only recruitable for Fangorn, as well the only unit for Fangorn)

    Eagle

    Troll

    That's it, nothing else, no magic, no monster
    So what?
    So lacking Monsters, won't be as fun as Warhammer
  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 10,645
    Blaced said:

    Not saying

    jamreal18 said:

    Blaced said:

    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    I am unsure how a statement like this could be made if you have read the books. There is far, far more variety in a game based on the books than just the movies.

    Third age mod was unable to use all the diversity available but you can see what they did. That mod alone [again could not do everything] has more variety and campaign gameplay than every TW game not named Warhammer. I have also taken a look at some Warhammer factions and was underwhelmed by the great diversity i am told they have.

    But what would you suggest ca do that has more diversity than a Tolkien tw based on the books?
    So being honest, what monsters are there in the book?

    Fellbeast (mount only)

    Ent (Treeman) (only recruitable for Fangorn, as well the only unit for Fangorn)

    Eagle

    Troll

    That's it, nothing else, no magic, no monster
    So what?
    So lacking Monsters, won't be as fun as Warhammer
    LotR is not about monster.

    I like it for its setting and story.
  • BlacedBlaced Registered Users Posts: 562
    jamreal18 said:

    Blaced said:

    Not saying

    jamreal18 said:

    Blaced said:

    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    I am unsure how a statement like this could be made if you have read the books. There is far, far more variety in a game based on the books than just the movies.

    Third age mod was unable to use all the diversity available but you can see what they did. That mod alone [again could not do everything] has more variety and campaign gameplay than every TW game not named Warhammer. I have also taken a look at some Warhammer factions and was underwhelmed by the great diversity i am told they have.

    But what would you suggest ca do that has more diversity than a Tolkien tw based on the books?
    So being honest, what monsters are there in the book?

    Fellbeast (mount only)

    Ent (Treeman) (only recruitable for Fangorn, as well the only unit for Fangorn)

    Eagle

    Troll

    That's it, nothing else, no magic, no monster
    So what?
    So lacking Monsters, won't be as fun as Warhammer
    LotR is not about monster.

    I like it for its setting and story.
    I don't mind lacking monster, but some people do, they will disappointed after they realize nearly zero monster

    CA may be worrying those people and not make LOTR
  • Man2008kindMan2008kind Bucharest, RomaniaRegistered Users Posts: 1,419
    edited March 6
    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    If you think a LotR Total War would not have enough variety, then all historical Total Wars should be dead by now because their variety is close to zero. Just look at the possible races:

    But, if you think LotR's variety is low, please provide another Fantasy IP with more variety.
    Post edited by Man2008kind on
  • Man2008kindMan2008kind Bucharest, RomaniaRegistered Users Posts: 1,419
    Blaced said:

    jamreal18 said:

    Blaced said:

    Not saying

    jamreal18 said:

    Blaced said:

    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    I am unsure how a statement like this could be made if you have read the books. There is far, far more variety in a game based on the books than just the movies.

    Third age mod was unable to use all the diversity available but you can see what they did. That mod alone [again could not do everything] has more variety and campaign gameplay than every TW game not named Warhammer. I have also taken a look at some Warhammer factions and was underwhelmed by the great diversity i am told they have.

    But what would you suggest ca do that has more diversity than a Tolkien tw based on the books?
    So being honest, what monsters are there in the book?

    Fellbeast (mount only)

    Ent (Treeman) (only recruitable for Fangorn, as well the only unit for Fangorn)

    Eagle

    Troll

    That's it, nothing else, no magic, no monster
    So what?
    So lacking Monsters, won't be as fun as Warhammer
    LotR is not about monster.

    I like it for its setting and story.
    I don't mind lacking monster, but some people do, they will disappointed after they realize nearly zero monster

    CA may be worrying those people and not make LOTR
    Again, if you think people play Total War for the monsters, how is any historical Total War still alive?
  • Man2008kindMan2008kind Bucharest, RomaniaRegistered Users Posts: 1,419
    Blaced said:

    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    I am unsure how a statement like this could be made if you have read the books. There is far, far more variety in a game based on the books than just the movies.

    Third age mod was unable to use all the diversity available but you can see what they did. That mod alone [again could not do everything] has more variety and campaign gameplay than every TW game not named Warhammer. I have also taken a look at some Warhammer factions and was underwhelmed by the great diversity i am told they have.

    But what would you suggest ca do that has more diversity than a Tolkien tw based on the books?
    So being honest, what monsters are there in the book?

    Fellbeast (mount only)

    Ent (Treeman) (only recruitable for Fangorn, as well the only unit for Fangorn)

    Eagle

    Troll

    That's it, nothing else, no magic, no monster
    Now you just proven that you have absolutley no knowlege of LotR.
    No magic?! One of the most important characters in LotR is Gandalf, a wizard, and one of the main antagonists of LotR is Saruman, also a wizard. There are also the two Blue Wizards.
    No monsters?! Fellbeasts, Trolls, Giant Eagles, Ents, Barlogs, Giant Spiders (Shelob), Giant Bats, Beornings, Were-Worms, Wargs, Mumakils and more.
  • bilbobaggins764bilbobaggins764 Registered Users Posts: 36

    Has been tried, didn't work.

    There is a Total war based on the books of J.R.R Tolkien? please link me i want to buy it today and i have multiple family members that would as well.
  • bilbobaggins764bilbobaggins764 Registered Users Posts: 36
    jamreal18 said:

    Some people keep on talking about about variety, races, rights, diversity, etc... All of these are just opinions.

    What matter is if people will buy it or not. If there is market and demand, it is fine.

    Variety is not the foundation of fantasy title.

    It is the setting and fans!

    agreed, i wont touch warhammer, but i would pay anything for a tw. besides what would offer more variety than tolkiens world based on the books?
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 30,559

    Has been tried, didn't work.

    There is a Total war based on the books of J.R.R Tolkien? please link me i want to buy it today and i have multiple family members that would as well.
    Sure, wire over $500 and you'll get it.

  • bilbobaggins764bilbobaggins764 Registered Users Posts: 36
    Blaced said:

    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    I am unsure how a statement like this could be made if you have read the books. There is far, far more variety in a game based on the books than just the movies.

    Third age mod was unable to use all the diversity available but you can see what they did. That mod alone [again could not do everything] has more variety and campaign gameplay than every TW game not named Warhammer. I have also taken a look at some Warhammer factions and was underwhelmed by the great diversity i am told they have.

    But what would you suggest ca do that has more diversity than a Tolkien tw based on the books?
    So being honest, what monsters are there in the book?

    Fellbeast (mount only)

    Ent (Treeman) (only recruitable for Fangorn, as well the only unit for Fangorn)

    Eagle

    Troll

    That's it, nothing else, no magic, no monster

    You ignored the question, what has more diversity than Tolkiens world that you would suggest? why does only diversity matter? Tolkien has more diversity than any game ca have ever made not named Warhammer. Why do you think diversity is all that matters? I won't touch Warhammer but I woulda LOTR tw. Maybe the reason TW fans in poll and voting show they want Tolkien is that either diversity is not everything, or Tolkien offers enough diversity, or no other game offers more diversity.



    But if you want monsters you would love the first age. In the third age, I would add the balrog, wargs, multiple varieties of trolls, Nazgul, an army of the dead, Hurons, beorn or beroings, Sauron, mumakil, giant spiders, a dragon, the Mouth of Sauron, the watcher in the water, crabain, old man willow, a goblin king....well that's all I have off the top of my head. But dont Ignore the great variety of dwarves, elves, men, hobbits

    No magic? have you read of the wizards? of the elves like Galadriel or Elrond? of the rings of power? of the sorcery and witchcraft of the witch king, Sauron, Saruman. But i must say once more all the stuff you seem to desire, the first age provides more than the third.
  • BlacedBlaced Registered Users Posts: 562

    Blaced said:

    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    I am unsure how a statement like this could be made if you have read the books. There is far, far more variety in a game based on the books than just the movies.

    Third age mod was unable to use all the diversity available but you can see what they did. That mod alone [again could not do everything] has more variety and campaign gameplay than every TW game not named Warhammer. I have also taken a look at some Warhammer factions and was underwhelmed by the great diversity i am told they have.

    But what would you suggest ca do that has more diversity than a Tolkien tw based on the books?
    So being honest, what monsters are there in the book?

    Fellbeast (mount only)

    Ent (Treeman) (only recruitable for Fangorn, as well the only unit for Fangorn)

    Eagle

    Troll

    That's it, nothing else, no magic, no monster
    Now you just proven that you have absolutley no knowlege of LotR.
    No magic?! One of the most important characters in LotR is Gandalf, a wizard, and one of the main antagonists of LotR is Saruman, also a wizard. There are also the two Blue Wizards.
    No monsters?! Fellbeasts, Trolls, Giant Eagles, Ents, Barlogs, Giant Spiders (Shelob), Giant Bats, Beornings, Were-Worms, Wargs, Mumakils and more.
    "I have absolutely no knowledge"

    Barlogs: You mean Balrog? There is only one active in Third age, and killed by Gandalf, not join any war

    Giant Spiders: Shelob not join any war, you can add Giant Spiders to Dol Guldur, but not exactly loreful

    Giant Bats: Not loreful

    Beorning: not all Beornings can become bear, besides bear are not monster, are Nanman Tigers monster?

    Were-Worms: Their only appearance in the book is mentioned by Hobbits that they live in the last desert, not join in any war

    Warg: I don't consider them as monsters

    Mumakils: Most Total war games have Elephants, not monsters

    Magic: LOTR magic is more "depth" than regular magic, you can't cast a fire storm on the enemy

    In conclusion, other video games and movie are NOT loreful
  • BlacedBlaced Registered Users Posts: 562

    Blaced said:

    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    I am unsure how a statement like this could be made if you have read the books. There is far, far more variety in a game based on the books than just the movies.

    Third age mod was unable to use all the diversity available but you can see what they did. That mod alone [again could not do everything] has more variety and campaign gameplay than every TW game not named Warhammer. I have also taken a look at some Warhammer factions and was underwhelmed by the great diversity i am told they have.

    But what would you suggest ca do that has more diversity than a Tolkien tw based on the books?
    So being honest, what monsters are there in the book?

    Fellbeast (mount only)

    Ent (Treeman) (only recruitable for Fangorn, as well the only unit for Fangorn)

    Eagle

    Troll

    That's it, nothing else, no magic, no monster

    You ignored the question, what has more diversity than Tolkiens world that you would suggest? why does only diversity matter? Tolkien has more diversity than any game ca have ever made not named Warhammer. Why do you think diversity is all that matters? I won't touch Warhammer but I woulda LOTR tw. Maybe the reason TW fans in poll and voting show they want Tolkien is that either diversity is not everything, or Tolkien offers enough diversity, or no other game offers more diversity.



    But if you want monsters you would love the first age. In the third age, I would add the balrog, wargs, multiple varieties of trolls, Nazgul, an army of the dead, Hurons, beorn or beroings, Sauron, mumakil, giant spiders, a dragon, the Mouth of Sauron, the watcher in the water, crabain, old man willow, a goblin king....well that's all I have off the top of my head. But dont Ignore the great variety of dwarves, elves, men, hobbits

    No magic? have you read of the wizards? of the elves like Galadriel or Elrond? of the rings of power? of the sorcery and witchcraft of the witch king, Sauron, Saruman. But i must say once more all the stuff you seem to desire, the first age provides more than the third.
    Look, I don't mind, but some people do. Some my friends tell me they want TWW LOTR even they have no idea what's that, (clearly their information is from Internet hype) they neither read book nor watch movie. They expect there will be a ton of monsters and magic.

    Speak of first age, I don't mind, but even fewer people have read Silmarillion
  • BlacedBlaced Registered Users Posts: 562
    Anyway, I just point out that LOTR will not have as much monsters and magic as many expected, not saying that I really care ton of monsters

    Another disadvantage is there will not be much dlc to make, which is Extremely important for CA
  • bilbobaggins764bilbobaggins764 Registered Users Posts: 36

    Has been tried, didn't work.

    There is a Total war based on the books of J.R.R Tolkien? please link me i want to buy it today and i have multiple family members that would as well.
    Sure, wire over $500 and you'll get it.
    its sad to say but i am that desperate i would pay $500.
  • bilbobaggins764bilbobaggins764 Registered Users Posts: 36
    Blaced said:

    Blaced said:

    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    I am unsure how a statement like this could be made if you have read the books. There is far, far more variety in a game based on the books than just the movies.

    Third age mod was unable to use all the diversity available but you can see what they did. That mod alone [again could not do everything] has more variety and campaign gameplay than every TW game not named Warhammer. I have also taken a look at some Warhammer factions and was underwhelmed by the great diversity i am told they have.

    But what would you suggest ca do that has more diversity than a Tolkien tw based on the books?
    So being honest, what monsters are there in the book?

    Fellbeast (mount only)

    Ent (Treeman) (only recruitable for Fangorn, as well the only unit for Fangorn)

    Eagle

    Troll

    That's it, nothing else, no magic, no monster

    You ignored the question, what has more diversity than Tolkiens world that you would suggest? why does only diversity matter? Tolkien has more diversity than any game ca have ever made not named Warhammer. Why do you think diversity is all that matters? I won't touch Warhammer but I woulda LOTR tw. Maybe the reason TW fans in poll and voting show they want Tolkien is that either diversity is not everything, or Tolkien offers enough diversity, or no other game offers more diversity.



    But if you want monsters you would love the first age. In the third age, I would add the balrog, wargs, multiple varieties of trolls, Nazgul, an army of the dead, Hurons, beorn or beroings, Sauron, mumakil, giant spiders, a dragon, the Mouth of Sauron, the watcher in the water, crabain, old man willow, a goblin king....well that's all I have off the top of my head. But dont Ignore the great variety of dwarves, elves, men, hobbits

    No magic? have you read of the wizards? of the elves like Galadriel or Elrond? of the rings of power? of the sorcery and witchcraft of the witch king, Sauron, Saruman. But i must say once more all the stuff you seem to desire, the first age provides more than the third.
    Look, I don't mind, but some people do. Some my friends tell me they want TWW LOTR even they have no idea what's that, (clearly their information is from Internet hype) they neither read book nor watch movie. They expect there will be a ton of monsters and magic.

    Speak of first age, I don't mind, but even fewer people have read Silmarillion
    So then I must ask what is this game that everyone will play? you could sell the idea for a great amount of money since you seem to think not everyone would be happy with the variety of monsters given so far in the third age.

    Perhaps you have a false assumption that people must only want LOTR for diversity in monsters. I love the diversity of ME and its monsters, that is part of why i want it. But warhammer has more and i have no interest because it's not Tolkien. If you could provide another game [you cannot] that has more diversity then please share it. Otherwise, are you suggesting Tw stop doing fantasy?
  • BlacedBlaced Registered Users Posts: 562

    Blaced said:

    Blaced said:

    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    I am unsure how a statement like this could be made if you have read the books. There is far, far more variety in a game based on the books than just the movies.

    Third age mod was unable to use all the diversity available but you can see what they did. That mod alone [again could not do everything] has more variety and campaign gameplay than every TW game not named Warhammer. I have also taken a look at some Warhammer factions and was underwhelmed by the great diversity i am told they have.

    But what would you suggest ca do that has more diversity than a Tolkien tw based on the books?
    So being honest, what monsters are there in the book?

    Fellbeast (mount only)

    Ent (Treeman) (only recruitable for Fangorn, as well the only unit for Fangorn)

    Eagle

    Troll

    That's it, nothing else, no magic, no monster

    You ignored the question, what has more diversity than Tolkiens world that you would suggest? why does only diversity matter? Tolkien has more diversity than any game ca have ever made not named Warhammer. Why do you think diversity is all that matters? I won't touch Warhammer but I woulda LOTR tw. Maybe the reason TW fans in poll and voting show they want Tolkien is that either diversity is not everything, or Tolkien offers enough diversity, or no other game offers more diversity.



    But if you want monsters you would love the first age. In the third age, I would add the balrog, wargs, multiple varieties of trolls, Nazgul, an army of the dead, Hurons, beorn or beroings, Sauron, mumakil, giant spiders, a dragon, the Mouth of Sauron, the watcher in the water, crabain, old man willow, a goblin king....well that's all I have off the top of my head. But dont Ignore the great variety of dwarves, elves, men, hobbits

    No magic? have you read of the wizards? of the elves like Galadriel or Elrond? of the rings of power? of the sorcery and witchcraft of the witch king, Sauron, Saruman. But i must say once more all the stuff you seem to desire, the first age provides more than the third.
    Look, I don't mind, but some people do. Some my friends tell me they want TWW LOTR even they have no idea what's that, (clearly their information is from Internet hype) they neither read book nor watch movie. They expect there will be a ton of monsters and magic.

    Speak of first age, I don't mind, but even fewer people have read Silmarillion
    So then I must ask what is this game that everyone will play? you could sell the idea for a great amount of money since you seem to think not everyone would be happy with the variety of monsters given so far in the third age.

    Perhaps you have a false assumption that people must only want LOTR for diversity in monsters. I love the diversity of ME and its monsters, that is part of why i want it. But warhammer has more and i have no interest because it's not Tolkien. If you could provide another game [you cannot] that has more diversity then please share it. Otherwise, are you suggesting Tw stop doing fantasy?
    No, I cannot provide another fantasy game that has more diversity, so I'm curious what will be next Fantasy Title, besides, I just want to point out the problems with LOTR, I never say something as TWW LOTR will not come
  • Man2008kindMan2008kind Bucharest, RomaniaRegistered Users Posts: 1,419
    Blaced said:

    Anyway, I just point out that LOTR will not have as much monsters and magic as many expected, not saying that I really care ton of monsters

    Another disadvantage is there will not be much dlc to make, which is Extremely important for CA

    There is more than enough DLC to be made. The First and Second Age may be made DLCs like the Three Kingdoms chapter packs (tough I would prefer if they were unique, Saga like, games). If CA follows the policy of 4-6 starting races there's a lot of races left for DLCs, and, hell, they may even flesh out races like the Variags, the Druedain and the Forodwaiths (especially since CA worked with GW, wich has made some Variags models, CA may be let to borrow them).
  • Man2008kindMan2008kind Bucharest, RomaniaRegistered Users Posts: 1,419
    Blaced said:

    Blaced said:

    Blaced said:

    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    I am unsure how a statement like this could be made if you have read the books. There is far, far more variety in a game based on the books than just the movies.

    Third age mod was unable to use all the diversity available but you can see what they did. That mod alone [again could not do everything] has more variety and campaign gameplay than every TW game not named Warhammer. I have also taken a look at some Warhammer factions and was underwhelmed by the great diversity i am told they have.

    But what would you suggest ca do that has more diversity than a Tolkien tw based on the books?
    So being honest, what monsters are there in the book?

    Fellbeast (mount only)

    Ent (Treeman) (only recruitable for Fangorn, as well the only unit for Fangorn)

    Eagle

    Troll

    That's it, nothing else, no magic, no monster

    You ignored the question, what has more diversity than Tolkiens world that you would suggest? why does only diversity matter? Tolkien has more diversity than any game ca have ever made not named Warhammer. Why do you think diversity is all that matters? I won't touch Warhammer but I woulda LOTR tw. Maybe the reason TW fans in poll and voting show they want Tolkien is that either diversity is not everything, or Tolkien offers enough diversity, or no other game offers more diversity.



    But if you want monsters you would love the first age. In the third age, I would add the balrog, wargs, multiple varieties of trolls, Nazgul, an army of the dead, Hurons, beorn or beroings, Sauron, mumakil, giant spiders, a dragon, the Mouth of Sauron, the watcher in the water, crabain, old man willow, a goblin king....well that's all I have off the top of my head. But dont Ignore the great variety of dwarves, elves, men, hobbits

    No magic? have you read of the wizards? of the elves like Galadriel or Elrond? of the rings of power? of the sorcery and witchcraft of the witch king, Sauron, Saruman. But i must say once more all the stuff you seem to desire, the first age provides more than the third.
    Look, I don't mind, but some people do. Some my friends tell me they want TWW LOTR even they have no idea what's that, (clearly their information is from Internet hype) they neither read book nor watch movie. They expect there will be a ton of monsters and magic.

    Speak of first age, I don't mind, but even fewer people have read Silmarillion
    So then I must ask what is this game that everyone will play? you could sell the idea for a great amount of money since you seem to think not everyone would be happy with the variety of monsters given so far in the third age.

    Perhaps you have a false assumption that people must only want LOTR for diversity in monsters. I love the diversity of ME and its monsters, that is part of why i want it. But warhammer has more and i have no interest because it's not Tolkien. If you could provide another game [you cannot] that has more diversity then please share it. Otherwise, are you suggesting Tw stop doing fantasy?
    No, I cannot provide another fantasy game that has more diversity, so I'm curious what will be next Fantasy Title, besides, I just want to point out the problems with LOTR, I never say something as TWW LOTR will not come
    TWW LOTR? Did you know TWW stands for Total War Warhammer? I don't think it's yet time to mix and match Fantasy IPs into an Elysium type of game.
  • BlacedBlaced Registered Users Posts: 562
    edited March 6

    Blaced said:

    Blaced said:

    Blaced said:

    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    I am unsure how a statement like this could be made if you have read the books. There is far, far more variety in a game based on the books than just the movies.

    Third age mod was unable to use all the diversity available but you can see what they did. That mod alone [again could not do everything] has more variety and campaign gameplay than every TW game not named Warhammer. I have also taken a look at some Warhammer factions and was underwhelmed by the great diversity i am told they have.

    But what would you suggest ca do that has more diversity than a Tolkien tw based on the books?
    So being honest, what monsters are there in the book?

    Fellbeast (mount only)

    Ent (Treeman) (only recruitable for Fangorn, as well the only unit for Fangorn)

    Eagle

    Troll

    That's it, nothing else, no magic, no monster

    You ignored the question, what has more diversity than Tolkiens world that you would suggest? why does only diversity matter? Tolkien has more diversity than any game ca have ever made not named Warhammer. Why do you think diversity is all that matters? I won't touch Warhammer but I woulda LOTR tw. Maybe the reason TW fans in poll and voting show they want Tolkien is that either diversity is not everything, or Tolkien offers enough diversity, or no other game offers more diversity.



    But if you want monsters you would love the first age. In the third age, I would add the balrog, wargs, multiple varieties of trolls, Nazgul, an army of the dead, Hurons, beorn or beroings, Sauron, mumakil, giant spiders, a dragon, the Mouth of Sauron, the watcher in the water, crabain, old man willow, a goblin king....well that's all I have off the top of my head. But dont Ignore the great variety of dwarves, elves, men, hobbits

    No magic? have you read of the wizards? of the elves like Galadriel or Elrond? of the rings of power? of the sorcery and witchcraft of the witch king, Sauron, Saruman. But i must say once more all the stuff you seem to desire, the first age provides more than the third.
    Look, I don't mind, but some people do. Some my friends tell me they want TWW LOTR even they have no idea what's that, (clearly their information is from Internet hype) they neither read book nor watch movie. They expect there will be a ton of monsters and magic.

    Speak of first age, I don't mind, but even fewer people have read Silmarillion
    So then I must ask what is this game that everyone will play? you could sell the idea for a great amount of money since you seem to think not everyone would be happy with the variety of monsters given so far in the third age.

    Perhaps you have a false assumption that people must only want LOTR for diversity in monsters. I love the diversity of ME and its monsters, that is part of why i want it. But warhammer has more and i have no interest because it's not Tolkien. If you could provide another game [you cannot] that has more diversity then please share it. Otherwise, are you suggesting Tw stop doing fantasy?
    No, I cannot provide another fantasy game that has more diversity, so I'm curious what will be next Fantasy Title, besides, I just want to point out the problems with LOTR, I never say something as TWW LOTR will not come
    TWW LOTR? Did you know TWW stands for Total War Warhammer? I don't think it's yet time to mix and match Fantasy IPs into an Elysium type of game.
    Why care my small typo? There is no need to be angry, not worth
  • Man2008kindMan2008kind Bucharest, RomaniaRegistered Users Posts: 1,419
    Blaced said:

    Blaced said:

    Blaced said:

    Blaced said:

    dge1 said:

    I personally don't think it would go very far. Just not enough variety between the potential factions/races to be able to generate a reasonable level of campaign conflict.

    I am unsure how a statement like this could be made if you have read the books. There is far, far more variety in a game based on the books than just the movies.

    Third age mod was unable to use all the diversity available but you can see what they did. That mod alone [again could not do everything] has more variety and campaign gameplay than every TW game not named Warhammer. I have also taken a look at some Warhammer factions and was underwhelmed by the great diversity i am told they have.

    But what would you suggest ca do that has more diversity than a Tolkien tw based on the books?
    So being honest, what monsters are there in the book?

    Fellbeast (mount only)

    Ent (Treeman) (only recruitable for Fangorn, as well the only unit for Fangorn)

    Eagle

    Troll

    That's it, nothing else, no magic, no monster

    You ignored the question, what has more diversity than Tolkiens world that you would suggest? why does only diversity matter? Tolkien has more diversity than any game ca have ever made not named Warhammer. Why do you think diversity is all that matters? I won't touch Warhammer but I woulda LOTR tw. Maybe the reason TW fans in poll and voting show they want Tolkien is that either diversity is not everything, or Tolkien offers enough diversity, or no other game offers more diversity.



    But if you want monsters you would love the first age. In the third age, I would add the balrog, wargs, multiple varieties of trolls, Nazgul, an army of the dead, Hurons, beorn or beroings, Sauron, mumakil, giant spiders, a dragon, the Mouth of Sauron, the watcher in the water, crabain, old man willow, a goblin king....well that's all I have off the top of my head. But dont Ignore the great variety of dwarves, elves, men, hobbits

    No magic? have you read of the wizards? of the elves like Galadriel or Elrond? of the rings of power? of the sorcery and witchcraft of the witch king, Sauron, Saruman. But i must say once more all the stuff you seem to desire, the first age provides more than the third.
    Look, I don't mind, but some people do. Some my friends tell me they want TWW LOTR even they have no idea what's that, (clearly their information is from Internet hype) they neither read book nor watch movie. They expect there will be a ton of monsters and magic.

    Speak of first age, I don't mind, but even fewer people have read Silmarillion
    So then I must ask what is this game that everyone will play? you could sell the idea for a great amount of money since you seem to think not everyone would be happy with the variety of monsters given so far in the third age.

    Perhaps you have a false assumption that people must only want LOTR for diversity in monsters. I love the diversity of ME and its monsters, that is part of why i want it. But warhammer has more and i have no interest because it's not Tolkien. If you could provide another game [you cannot] that has more diversity then please share it. Otherwise, are you suggesting Tw stop doing fantasy?
    No, I cannot provide another fantasy game that has more diversity, so I'm curious what will be next Fantasy Title, besides, I just want to point out the problems with LOTR, I never say something as TWW LOTR will not come
    TWW LOTR? Did you know TWW stands for Total War Warhammer? I don't think it's yet time to mix and match Fantasy IPs into an Elysium type of game.
    Why care my small typo? There is no need to be angry, not worth
    Angry? How can you know wether I'm angry or not?
  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 11,449

    SiWI said:

    The Problem, as I see it, is that "recreating" LotR instead of using the movies will lose alot of people, who loves the movies but are not so deep in the books that they even recognize a different version.

    I don't think that hiring Alan Lee or John Howe allows you to use the movie looks or look alike, because it would quite amaze me if WB was so sloppy by securing their rights.


    It would also gain many that love the books and not the movies. But I think a well-done mod would bring many of those you speak of back.


    They do not have the authors write at all. I play a boardgame that uses Howe and Lee as well could be hired and then they could legally almost replicate the movies.


    Give more credit to the CA artists.
    I doubt the numbers of people coming for a book only version match those lost to the lack of movie aesthetics.
    And selling a game in the hope someone makes an mod, which may or may not get copyright claims, would be a rather "optimistic" operation.

    Has that boardgame an name? Are you sure that they don't simply use the movie licence in the first place?
    Still I doubt that CA could do "Aragon" like the actor without WB approval. Which is what I think most people hope for, when they hear "TW: LotR".
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • Man2008kindMan2008kind Bucharest, RomaniaRegistered Users Posts: 1,419

    SiWI said:

    The Problem, as I see it, is that "recreating" LotR instead of using the movies will lose alot of people, who loves the movies but are not so deep in the books that they even recognize a different version.

    I don't think that hiring Alan Lee or John Howe allows you to use the movie looks or look alike, because it would quite amaze me if WB was so sloppy by securing their rights.


    It would also gain many that love the books and not the movies. But I think a well-done mod would bring many of those you speak of back.


    They do not have the authors write at all. I play a boardgame that uses Howe and Lee as well could be hired and then they could legally almost replicate the movies.


    Give more credit to the CA artists.
    What boardgame? I know there's Middle Earth Strategy Battle Game, but it uses the movie license.
Sign In or Register to comment.