Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this column are those of the participants and the moderator, and do not necessarily reflect those of the GIA. There is coarse language and potentially offensive material afoot. I cannot read the fiery letters! Don't say we didn't warn you.

I've written some pretty long-winded responses tonight; some so long as to eclipse what people may have been trying to say. To whom such may concern - my apologies. Individuals as gravely afflicted with diarrhea of the mouth as myself tend to be hard of hearing.

To Rivendell, where Elves yet dwell
In glades beneath the misty fell
Through moor and waste we ride in haste
And whither then we cannot tell....

No, sir, I do not like it

Erin, No LotR games. Nope, nope, nope. Frankly, I'm a bit queasy about the movie itself--it could be decent, I suppose, but I have a hard time dealing with films surrounded massive merchandizing blitzes, and when it comes to one of the most-beloved fantasy novels of all time it just seems especially tawdry. And I'm not even a huge fan of the books. So, as much as this may make me into some sort of pariah, I don't plan on catching the film--but let me tell you, I'd sure as hell rather see a film based on a book than I would play a game based on a film based on a book. A game that was just based on the book, maybe, if it was good, but I just can't stand the kind of kneejerk reaction that spawned the idea of these projected games in the first place: "Ooh, popular movie! We make game based on; we make money!" I suppose I'm really just futilely shaking my fist at the heavens here, and I may well be a hypocrite for buying into ANY forms of popular culture, but it's how I feel, and I'm going with it. And I just realized that this letter contains WAY too many conjunctions. Bah; humbug. Anyway, sorry if I'm coming across as overly snarky. By all means, enjoy the movie. And have a perfectly lovely holiday. --Geo

I think we are unified tonight in our fear that EA's LotR game is going to be another Jedi Power Battles, another Total Recall, another ET. Owners of whichever consoles the games are eventually released to should especially fear that latter possibility - ET, after all, was the beginning of the end of Atari's reign back in the day. Alas, Xbox! We hardly knew ye!

As for the movie... all indications are that it kicks immeasurable amounts of ass, friend. Don't cut off your nose to spite your face - if you want to protest rampant merchandising, just be sure not to put down any money for one of those asinine illuminated goblets at Burger King. "Now, they're not just to behold - they're to be... HELD!" I mean really. WTF?

But hey, as LeVar says, you don't have to take my word for it - especially in light of that fact that I haven't actually seen the film yet, as such.... Farren has, though!

Heaping praise where questionably due

Hey Erin, As you've probably heard from numerous other sources, LOTR : FOTR is one of the greatest literary translations to the big screen ever, if not one of the greatest films, period. As I came out of the theatre yesterday, utterly dumbstruck, I felt certain of one thing : I was going to return Devil May Cry in the morning. You see, I live for experiences like this film : experiences that make me feel the wonder of a child again by their sheer sweeping-ness. Final Fantasy games have it, the Matrix had it, Fight Club had it. What was made so startlingly clear by mr. Peter Jackson, is that most blockbusters nowadays are far more soulless and inferior than I ever admit to myself. Same goes for games : sure, DMC has lavish production design, great set pieces, and riveting action, but where's the depth? The atmosphere? The emotion? The story? I played through to mission 17, and they were all startlingly absent. If Silent Hill 2 was the equivalent of something like Memento (purely talking about depth and quality here, not themes), DMC is more akin to Blade. Therefore, in the future, in cinema, as well as in games, I'll limit my purchases to thematically rich material (oh, and two-player games. And comedies. And a nice thriller every now and then. But you get the idea.) Sir Farren, still slightly incoherent.

Could he be trying to tell us that, despite the thousands of misgivings everyone had that it would lose something - nay, everything - in the translation, the LotR movie is *gasp* good...? And that, moreover, it is not inconceivable that the same could happen with these proposed games...?

...

Nah.

It's all a load of crypto-fascist bourgeois crap!

Dear Erin, Ive been reading the trilogy off and on since the sixth grade, and while Im excited as all heck to see the movie, I feel a game could never do it justice. Sure it sounds like perfect rpg style stuff, and I love a good rpg, but these books have already been whored out to the public since the movies initial inception. Ive even seen some of the action figures(Frodo with sword chop action?!) This crap is horrible. I KNOW If Tolkien were alive today he would have no part of such cheap ways to grab at peoples money. A movie, maybe he would go for it, games and toys, no way. Any true fan may be interested to watch a motion picture,(just cause we all want to see what a Balrog really looks like), but an rpg? Somethings are just better left undone. The attempt, no matter how well done, would come far too short. Some sailor in Spain who hopes the theater here gets the movie soon

My first impulse when I look around at all the LotR merchandise leering at me from store shelves (and indeed when I contemplate another fetch quest for Drexel the wizard's crystal ball) is to groan at the commercialism and mourn as if this fantasy crede has been put to an untimely death.

But when I make an effort to think about it objectively, somehow I can't help but think that if Tolkien were alive today, he'd be thrilled to death to see all his brainchildren cast in plastic and doubly thrilled with his royalties.

J.K. Rowlings certainly isn't complaining about the veritable hatrack made of money Harry Potter's pulling in - and seeing as how a lot of those earnings go to charity group Comic Relief UK, I'd say it's no bad thing.

I'd like to think that if good old J.R.R. were around today to see what's become of his precious, he'd be delightedly funnellng money into some elf preservation endeavor somewhere, secure in the knowledge that if people didn't want the truckloads of commercialized merchandising shyte, they wouldn't be buying it.

All I know is... If I wrote a book... I'd be pretty goddam tickled if I could buy and put together its various settings, characters and key scenes in Lego form. I'd be positively ecstatic to pop my vision into my PS2 and play as my very own protagonists. How could you not be, principles be damned?

The story so far....

Erin, Speaking of LotR games, while EA has the rights to games based off of the movies, some other company holds the rights to games based off of the books. Too bad I'm too lazy to try and figure just what company that is. Anyway, what do I think of the idea? Conceptually, the LotR series, and indeed all of Middle-Earth is quite possibly the finest place to draw gaming inspiration from. The books basically spawned D&D, which spawned computer RPGs, which are somewhat related to our whole console thing. In a perfect world, we'd look back at the source as the inevitable inspiration from which to draw the perfect RPG (as an aside, I'd love an MMORPG set in Middle-Earth). Of course, "concept" usually ends up meaning "jack shit" in this new fangled real world thing we've got going. The fact is, LotR is a huge license, now more than ever, it its being gobbled up by huge companies. I foresee massive amounts of crappy shovelware until someone like Bioware steals the license. Its a pity really, because with the right team, I think LotR could do better things in the gaming world than in the film world (and FotR was an excellent flick). Either way, I think LotR's potential lies strictly in the PC realm, and if we see console games based on the license, I'm really going to run. -Justin Freeman

Funny you should mention MMORPGs and crappy shovelware in the same letter that you inquire after Sierra's game based on Tolkien's books, Mr. Freeman....

The story is long and confusing, but I shall make an effort to string together what I know.

Some time back - before Peter Jackson had even confirmed his involvement with the LotR films - Sierra acquired the rights from Tolkien Enterprises to make a trilogy of games based on the beloved novels. Their ambitious initial gameplan was to create a massive MMORPG set in Middle-Earth, but then for various sketchy reasons, the development team was fired and the idea scrapped. Tolkien Enterprises then dragged Sierra to court for breach of contract as they'd failed to deliver an LotR game.

As I understand it, Sierra then attempted to weasel out of this particular debacle by churning out a quick & dirty single player strategy title, which TE furiously rejected. At this point things get pretty vague, and I'm not entirely sure what went down, but there were rumblings earlier this year that Sierra was back at LotR and shooting for a 2002 release of their own Fellowship for an undisclosed platform.

Personally, I think watching the sibling rivalry between these fraternal twins could be pretty damned interesting if Sierra actually makes good on their promises.

Messing with creed

Erin - As much as I know it will suck, I'll buy a LotR game just because. Actually, I though the movie was going to suffer the same fate as Spirits Within, and not be able to develop the characters in such a short period of time. Since I was proven wrong once, maybe it will happen again. Though to be perfectly honest, I think a LotR game is a pretty crappy idea. A game based on a lesser known story, such as the Simarillion, would be a great way to introduce more people to lesser known works by Tolkien, without offending too many people because "they weren't the book". Peace, Ray Stryker, who challenges Hidoshi to a duel, just because...

I got a few letters nominating the Silmarillion as the better thread from which to spin a good game or series of games. Almost certainly any derivative title would face less cruel scrutiny than the LotR license has, is, and will continue to, simply because markedly fewer people have read Tolkien's histories of Middle Earth. Certainly there's plenty there from which to draw inspiration.

So why don't you just say "Eff Eff Ten" like normal people?

Erin, About the *only* thing that could get me to buy a LotR:FotR game is if it were some sort of Puzzle Adventure game, a la ICO, or Sierra adventure games of yore. LotR to me isn't about the fighting, but rather it's about the journey, and the wonderful (and terrible) sights that can be seen along the way. As much as I love RPGs, I wouldn't want to play an RPG with random encounters (and all the other baggage of the genre), based on LotR, because that's just not what the story is about. And really, most other genres would also bog the story down with little battles and other baggage that would get in the way of the journey. So I guess what I'm saying is that I don't particularly have faith that any of today's accepted genres are up to the task of making a game faithful to the LotR legacy. And finally, am I the only one who feels like I'm saying SSX with a lisp when I say FFX out loud as 'Eff Eff Ecks'? -Bop, making people self-conscious since 199

LotR's seeming suitability for the RPG format does become questionable with any considerable thought...

Get your greying arse in the back row with the token females and the rest of the magic users, Gandalf!

Everyone always says they want to play LOTR games--D&D players want a D&D sourcebook for Middle-Earth, videogame players want an LOTR RPG, there actually is a trading card game already (which might be good; I don't know). But we all know that any attempt to make such a game is just a marketing gimmick that poorly tries to shove a beloved story into a pre-established framework that isn't meant for Tolkien. We should learn from our past mistakes. Any and all video games based on LOTR have failed miserably. ICE's LOTR pen-and-paper roleplaying game didn't work (despite not being forced to fit into a D&D rules framework). The previous trading card game was boring and took hours to play. The problems for videogames specifically are many. The current RPG paradigm includes as essential elements lots of battles and character growth (by which I mean, increase in power, not what a novelist would call character growth). The heroes of LOTR are not plucky teenagers with big swords who gain a level after every encounter with the Nazgul until halfway through the story they're ready to do battle at the black gates of Mordor. They grow in courage and self-understanding, not in physical strength and magical ability. They spend the whole trilogy trying to hide from the Eye of Sauron, not courageously standing up to him once they've found all the power-ups and special items. I won't say it can't be done--past Tolkien-based films have always failed as well, while this one looks like it has a real chance for success. But without a radical shift in the genre, I don't think there can be a successful RPG version of Frodo's journey. A PC game might have a better chance of working--I can imagine a great, open-ended, non-linear game that just lets one explore Middle-earth. But a story-driven console RPG of the kind so beloved here at the GIA? Not anytime soon (though we'll surely see some mediocre, derivative efforts--along with "LOTR:FOTR Racer" and "Super Hobbit Brothers"). Greg Gates

It could be asserted that Tolkien's trilogy is THE archetype on which all Western genre fantasy is built, so naturally it should pour like Dwarven silver into the RPG mold, right?

Despite our wariness to have this classic bit of literature messed with in this fashion, I think that's something of a universally shared impulse.

But c'mon. What did we hate about that flop SNES game? The tortuously long codes we had to write down in order to resume play were a bitch, to be sure, but how about the absolute absurdity that abounded as a result of trying to cram console RPG conventions into a story that was largely character-driven and featured diminutive non-warriors as its primary cast?

Frodo doesn't kill 4,793 wolves and snakes and make constant, frantic side-trips to pick up some healing moss lest he die in some inexplicably huge, lamplit cavern in the Shire in his initial quest for Gaffer Gamgee's glasses, by all the hells!

If a LotR game is going to be successful, it just cannot be wrought with the conventional RPG mold - it's gotta specifically break it.

*cough* Then of course there's this whole matter of EA being the first vulture to the carcass...

Typecasting

First of all: Star Wars? What's Star Wars? A new trilogy is in town, baby. And it's baaaad. All mid-80's bad action movie pseudo-machismo posturing aside, LotR has a great video game potential. The movie's almost a video game already. You have your legendary quest, you have your racially diverse band of warrior characters, you have Ian McKellan. It's all there. Then again, Episode One should have been a foolproof movie-to-game transition, and we all know what happened *there.* (Until SW: Starfighter, of course.) My knee-jerk reaction is that I'm disappointed that EA got the license and not a solid RPG company. Obviously, LotR is custom-made to be an RPG - it was the primary inspiration for D&D, which in turn was the grandfather of all modern RPGs - and EA just isn't known for its RPGs. In fact, pretty much the only good EA titles are sports games, although I will admit that seeing Hobbit Football 2k1 would be pretty hilarious. At any rate, I hope EA actually does something with the property instead of crapping something out and letting it ride on the license. It has been proven that the movie license curse can be broken, with time and effort. EA has a year. Now let's just hope they have the effort. -Eightball, will probably buy whatever they end up making anyway, being a shameless LotR whore Hey, Erin. First off, I saw Fellowship of the Ring yesterday. Twice. Wow. That said, the prospect of a Lord of the Rings game at once intrigues and terrifies me. I mean, we all know what past efforts (or, rather, the past effort) to bring the series into video-game format have spawned. Also, the fact that Electronic Arts snagged the rights has me weary. EA makes awesome sports titles, but I doubt LotR would work as a hockey game. EA they isn't and never will be known as a landmark maker of RPG's, which is the genre I think LotR would work best in. If someone like Bioware, Blizzard, or (dare I say it?) Square had picked up the rights, though, I'd be salivating all over myself at the thought of an epic 50-hour RPG based on this, the greatest fantasy story ever written. Just the thought of it makes me tingly, and I sincerely hope EA doesn't drop the ball here. I love LotR too much to see it desecrated by being trasformed into a crappy game. Again. -Eric Lord, who still maintains that Sam Gamgee is The Man. Erin, EA? EA is making a game out of arguable the best fantasy series of all time? EA the same guys who bring you umpteen sports game every month? EA????????? WTF is up with that. If square or enix had it, or nacmo even, I'd consider it dependiong on the style of the game, but a sports-like game in all probability in a medium whihc cream RPG/adventure. Ewww. Heck even a DMC or tournament fighter kind of game would be better. Gandalf says : Frodo its 4th and long, I'm gonna toss the ring to you, I need to run a scen pattern then break away and grab it in the mordor zone. Sam you block for him. Any questions? Ok BREAK! Score: EA loses, no matter what. Efrate, horribly dissappointed. PS Thank for telling me the release date of the two towers. That was good at least. After seeing LoTR Monday I so wanna see the next step in the series.

Oh come on. You're being a little unfair. No, EA is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a big name in RPGs. But they don't just do sports games. They've got quite a few noteworthy, non-sports franchises: The Sims, Command & Conquer, Medal of Honor... And don't forget subsidiary Origin and Ultima. Hmm ... Origin's also responsible for Wing Commander....

You know ... on second thought ... forget I said anything.

The final say

Erin: Queen of Scots, Lord of the Rings is yet another one of those phenomenons I just don't get. Much like Star Wars, Star Trek, and other fanboy obsessions, I find myself at a loss when people gush and argue endlessly about every single minute detail. Regardless, I enjoyed the books and the Fellowship movie, while ungodly long, is certainly an entertaining piece of cinema. As for any game that would spawn from it, my decision to purchase/not purchase it would be based on the same qualities any other game is judged on. Being a book/movie-licensed game made by EA, it already has two strikes against it (in my eyes, anyway). However, I would still be willing to give it a look if it got positive buzz and was from a genre that I enjoy. Griffin, who would kill for a Whack-a-Hobbit mini game. P.S. You know you should really look in to that whole pre-ordering thing, Ms. Mehlos. It might save you some of the heart-ache of tracking down ridiculously hard-to-find games. Then again, the chase is often more exciting than the conquest. Ugh, what a day. Between 12:01am and 11:59 pm Wednesday, I saw FotR twice, finally got my grimy claws on FFX, and got my DDR pads in the mail. And slept for an hour or two. 'Twas a long but rewarding day for geekyness, and now you expect me to tell you what it would take for me to buy a LotR game. I think it depends... If Peter Jackson has ANYthing to do with it, I'll buy three copies. If it's a cheap Diablo-clone like Record of Lodoss War or a 3-D platformer abomination, no thanks. Anything in between, and we'll have a tough decision on our hands. The fanboy in me would be willing to sit through a sub-par game if all the mythos was well in place, for much the same reason I watched the Final Fantasy Movie over and over again, forcing myself to like it. Then there's the geek in me who nitpicks and points out all the minor differences between movie and game...basically, I'd be torn between my loyalties to Tolkien and my loyalties to quality games. But who knows? Maybe it'll be as engrossing and beautiful and haunting and wonderful as the movie is...right. How about this: when the thing comes out, dear Agent Erin, you play it, tell me how it is, and I shall blindly follow your counsel. Deal? Oh, one more thing: go see that bloody movie. Twice is not enough. Cheers ~ Pikafoo son of Pikaforn

And that's their nice way of saying, folks, that we ought to just wait & see. Oh, and Peter Jackson is God.

Closing Comments:

Well, since no one offered up a delectable topic for me, I'm lumbered with dusting off my own brain and devising one of my own.

Unfortunately I'm unable to think of something wholly original today, so we're going to revisit a somewhat oft-visited but timeless DA topic in hopes that it will spark some fresh discussion.

What, in your opinion, generally makes for a good central character in a game?

Attitude? Zidane Tribal and Squall Leonhart could both be said to have "attitude," yet one is egregiously less well-liked.

Character design? Crono's infamous 'do and badass grin managed to imbue a leading man who was essentially a mime with a modicum of likability.

Easy to identify with? Do you like your characters like Alex, mournfully bland and consequently easier to project your own personality unto?

Tomorrow's Friday, and while I realize you're used to having your head on Fridays, try and be good at mummy's garden party - just this once. I'll buy you a chocolate bar.

-Erin Mehlos