Why this game is getting unfair reviews

[Survivor]

Im new to the forums but I have to say that I Agree with weverything you said ( as almost everyone else did but anyway ), there are still opportunities to enhance the game. Add-ons could help everyone out, although after seeing the menu and all, the game does not look modification friendly, but maybe this is just something to hope for? For example, I would love a add-on that enable more challenge missions for example. To wrap it all up, the game could get better reviews if add-ons were made, that my opinion. feel free to judge.

I agree. Games like Borderlands also became much better with DLC.
What WitN needs is challenge maps that scale to your level (so the Lorien/Osgiliath challenge maps are still very challenging at level 40) and maybe some new challenge maps. If they also add loot to the challenge maps and maybe a very strong farmable boss at the end, it would give us a lot more replay value. Also, welcome to the forums!

As for WitN not welcoming new content, I think it would be easy to add new challenge maps to the map (I suggested Mines of Moria, including the bridge of course, and The Black Gate).
A level increase with new content would be a lot more difficult to make and it would also take time. Perhaps for now it's best if they stick to smaller DLC's, like challenge maps or cosmetical DLC's (item add-ons). A farmable boss, like a dragon, would also be a simple but nice addition that would give us more reason to keep playing.

[Frankilicious]

This game was rated 5.5 out of 10. (Game informer magazine) Which the game is way way way better than that.
And I mean if you look back, no lotr games have got a high rating.
And I think i know the reason why. It could be because like all other successful games, they have commercials on tv.
Or a demo or beta to get people intrested. It can also be that the fact it is a Lord of the Rings game. And people just write it off like it is the worst. It also needs a 2nd making of the game. Like Modern Warfare 1 was not that popular but MW2 people went crazy over it and then MW3. (people went insane lol) So Snowblind needs to make another game like this one but continue the story. (The story was not that great. :/) And definetly have some DLC. Maybe next LOTR game needs to show off the game more. Or at least make it like a open world RPG...

[AHC]

I agree, I can't seem why it got so bad reviews. Perhaps it is because many gamers out there are "spoiled" with Crysis-graphics and WoW-play.

Sure, there are flaws, but it's an overall enjoyable experience.

[bjmarler]

Ok first of all.. I am enjoying the game, but I am a LOTR fan so I'm biased.

Now, having played pc games since the early 1980's, I've seen a HUGE range of both good and bad games. So, I have a very good basis for what to compare a new game against.

War in the North is about average. It was released too early, probably for some accountants money reason. So, having the number of problems, glitches, buggs, etc... that it has is one big reason that it is getting not great reviews.

Secondly, having decided to "dumb down" the game is also huring the reviews. For example, not being able to know what adding 1 point of armor really does.. well... it's just STUPID. Thus the bad reviews.

[TMJonsson]

I absolutely agree with the OP:

WitN has gotten extremely unfair reviews from the majority of gaming outlets.

I work for a fantasy media social community/radio station called The Middle-earth Network.

I actually sat through and played the entire game in one marathon stretch and reviewed it for our network.

You can check out my review here if you so desire:

http://witncast.mymiddle-earth.net/2...-north-review/

Also, for all WitN fans, we would love to have you on board with our community! We have given away tons of free WitN merchandise recently, and always have live radio and podcast content that I am sure will interest you.

http://www.mymiddle-earth.net

Check out that review: I think you will find it more objective than most.

[greener]

ya its a great game


i dont understand why people would say it sucks.

[Modedit: removed profane language]

[Zevric]

I wouldn't give this game an 80 honestly, I think that the game deserves a score in the mid 70's.

I enjoyed the Hack & Slash style of gameplay. I'm not much of a LOTR fan, so there isn't much room for disappointment when it comes to lore.

I think the game had a great story to follow, a decent combat system, and the racial abilities was a pretty cool thing to put in the game.

I disliked a few things about the game though. One of the flaws in my opinion is the lack of difficulty at certain parts, such as the boss battle against Saenathra.
I also was disappointed in the number of "big" glitches to start with, such as the analog stick glitch, or the glitch where your character became stuck.

I think the game had great potential, but was released just a bit too soon. I would give the game 7.6, but I think the game has the potential to have gotten between 8.4 and 8.7, but that's only my opinion.

Edit: I forgot to mention that I have only played on Normal difficulty, so my point of the game being to easy at points could be changed if I were able to play the higher difficulties. My character lost his ability to walk after my first play through.

[Passive Chicken]

I can understand that Zevric. The game, while accessable to players who haven't read the books or seen the film, is certainly geared for Lord of the Rings fans. And I agree about the difficulty - there were parts that I had trouble with, but other parts were very, very easy. My sister and I kicked the crud out of Saenathra. That was a fair review, my friend.

[silvernicky]

its a great game. but i would agree it also sucks big time.

[HolyTemplarKnight]

War in the North currently holds a Metascore of 66 (PS3), 67 (Xbox 360) and 68 (PC). While everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, I think some of the reviews this game got are pretty unfair. This game gets trashed for very minor issues while many things it does right are ignored. Some critics just don't know how to play this game (more on that later) or they had no idea what to expect of it.

A simple visit to the Steam page of War in the North tells you all you need to know about this game. It's an action RPG, it's a co-op game and it's set in the northern part of Middle-Earth. Then why are so many people complaing that:
- this game is not an open-world RPG
- this game has no moral choices like Dragon Age
- the main characters don't have the same depth as the characters in Dragon Age or Mass Effect
Many comparisons made by critics and players are just off. Compare this game to Diablo, Titan Quest, Left 4 Dead and Borderlands but not to Skyrim, The Witcher 2 or Mass Effect. That's like trashing GTA IV because the driving is much better in Forza Motorsport.

Here are some quotes from various reviews to prove my point:

Wow. He actually complains that you can switch characters? How immersive were the main characters in Titan Quest, Diablo and Borderlands? I'd say that War in the North does a pretty good job. Sure, it's not Dragon Age, but that's not what it was meant to be.

What did this reviewer expect? To cry when one of the main characters gets injured? Same as above, his expectations are off. A little bit of research would've prevented this.

That's why it's a hack&slash game! Orcs and goblins are the common enemies in Lord of the Rings, what did he expect? That you would be fighting orcs with pink dresses, uruk-hai with guns and goblins with matrix-dodge abilities?

Sigh. Clearly this guy has not played hack&slash games before or previous Snowblind titles. How hard is it to understand that this is a hack&slash co-op game set in the LotR universe? It has nothing to do with what he described. You can't even play as Aragorn.

Just when I thought it couldn't get any worse. So because this game doesn't follow the exact same idea as the books (focus on hope, war is bad etc.), it's a disservice? This game is full of references and lore, how can it be a disservice? It probably taught many people who only saw the movies a thing or two about the lore and The Hobbit, how can that be a bad thing? If anything, this game is full of fan service. This reviewer probably doesn't understand that this is a game and that's why it has violence.

Now he confirmed that he's just stupid. You must be really bad if it takes you 2-3 minutes to take down one Orc. Even with bad equipment and without using any abilities, it never took me more than 1 minute to take down a normal orc/goblin. It's always 4 hits + crit, then another crit or 3-4 hits + crit again. As for the solo endeavor, what is he talking about? You play with three players all the time. Did he even play this game?
Enemies get more health and you deal more damage. That's how every action RPG / hack&slash game works.

Maybe he is the same guy as above? He trashes this game because enemies become more powerful and use more abilities as you level up? Are you kidding me? And uninterruptable attacks.. he probably never heard of the block and dodge button.

No indeed, the game would've been so much better if you could instantly revive each other and if all the enemies would stop attacking you for a while when you're busy reviving someone.

So as you can see, many reviews are unfair. Unfortunately these reviews already did their damage and probably convinced a lot of people to get Skyrim/MW3/BF3 instead of War in the North.

I do agree with some of the criticism (bad checkpoints, scattered abilities in the skill trees, some overpowered abilities, some bugs) but there are so many things this game does right. The combat sets a new standard for hack&slash games. The soundtrack and sound effects are very well done. The graphics are really good. Co-op is challenging and a lot of fun.

This is by far the best Lord of the Rings game I've ever played. I think most people who are enjoying this game knew what to expect. If you expected something similar to previous Snowblind titles, LotR: Return of the King or simply a good hack&slash game (with co-op), then this game is worth at least a solid 8 in my opinion. However if you didn't do your research and expected something different, then surely this game will disappoint.

I wonder if these reviewers will also trash Skyrim because the combat in that game can't stand up to War in the North. Probably not .

To end this long thread: I think WitN is underrated. Wrong expectations, unfair comparisons and complaining about minor issues resulted in mediocre ratings. Honestly, when a reviewer is complaining that enemies attack you when you try to revive someone or that you can switch characters, then I can no longer take them seriously.

Damn Survivor. You are a good debater. If we ever get into a debate one day, I'd be honored to argue against you.

You completely nailed those geezers. I agree with everything you said. Those geezers were expecting the wrong type of game. I agree that the characters haven't the depth of Bioware characters but they never were meant to. Still, I had more attachment to them than I did to characters from Borderlands (which I hated). Borderlands was a repetitive game in my opinion which consisted of overpowered Sons of God with 70,000 HP and the game offered you zero customization in terms of armor and accessories. The skill trees weren't interesting and the characters didn't even have any depth to them. Don't get me started about dialogue because what dialogue the game did have...SUCKED. The story was terrible and only picked up about 80% through the game but even then, all quests consisted of going to Point A to Point B collecting useless junk. Yet Gamespot, IGN, Gamespy and Game Informer happily rates Borderlands as a great game when 99% of the game consists of senselessly shooting against overpowered mutant slugs and GIANT humans wielding giant axes and hammers with ONE hand.

WITN was too hard for those people evidently and those people probably didn't even hear of using abilities.

WITN's story isn't the greatest but it was pretty decent and interesting. There was plenty of dialogue and I actually rather enjoyed meeting Gloin, Ragadast and Bilbo who made me laugh on several occasions.