Kotaku 
Enter your username and password.
Denver, 3:04 AM
Wed Nov 25
53 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip us:
Editor-In-Chief:
Brian Crecente
| AIM | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Stephen Totilo
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Editor:
Michael McWhertor
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor, Japan:
Brian Ashcraft
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, East Coast:
Michael Fahey
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Oceania:
Luke Plunkett
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Weekends:
Owen Good
| AIM | Twitter
Correspondent, San Francisco:
AJ Glasser
| AIM | Twitter
Columnist:
Leigh Alexander
Columnist:
Tim Rogers
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
05/21/09
05/20/09
But seriously, why do hardcore gamers begrudge every game made for a different demographic? It's not like if they hadn't made this they would have made some guaranteed amazing mature title. I'm sure a kids game team will be working on this, not a team that specializes in FPS, TPS or RTS. I mean, really. I'm a 34 year old dad and it doesn't seem like a bad idea to make a LoTR game I could play with a young child. I love LoTR and even enjoy LoTR Conquest but I could never play that with a small child. Wouldn't you parents out there rather play this than some Barney game or My Little Pony? Seriously.
05/20/09
05/20/09
05/20/09
05/20/09
05/20/09
Mario series
Sonic the Hedgehog
Zelda series
Metroid
Smash Bros.
Donkey Kong series
Mega Man series
Ratchet and Clank
Little Big Planet
The majority of games in these series' range from great to classic. Granted, this will probably suck because most licensed games do, but to automatically dismiss it because a family friendly demographic is absolutely absurd and is a huge problem with this generation of gaming.
To me this is more than just LOTR fandom. I can't help but feel that this could've been anything, even a new IP, and it still would've been slammed just because it's a family friendly title. Maybe I'm alone in this, but games don't have to be playable only by adults to be good. But apparently you guys, and the majority of the industry don't think so, and it's why gaming is so stagnant and chock full of M-rated action shooter after M-rated action shooter.
05/20/09
There's nothing wrong with games for kids, as long as they're well-made. But a kids' game based on a book that was never written, or intended, for children? Uhm.. nothankyou.jpg
05/20/09
05/20/09
No, you're not.
05/20/09
The Hobbit was written for children. LotR was not (neither was The Silmarillion, for that matter). Hell, I think Tolkien even says so himself in one of his letters (I looked it up, and he essentially said that LotR was "a fairy story for adults").
05/20/09
05/20/09
Stop whining. Look up letter #189 in Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien. This is what it says:
"I find that many children become interested, even engrossed, in the Lord of the Rings, from age 10 onwards. I think it rather a pity, really. It was not written for them". Are you now going to tell me that Tolkien was "selfish and ignorant" for flat out saying that he didn't write his book for children? And what 7 year old kid would be able to read and understand The Silmarillion, BTW?
Also, the cartoon versions of Lord of the Rings suck.
05/20/09
"And what 7 year old kid would be able to read and understand The Silmarillion, BTW?" I enjoyed that around the same time, maybe 8 or 9, not sure. So what.
05/21/09
05/21/09
Go back and read what I wrote some posts up. I specifically mentioned that I wasn't saying that children or teenagers couldn't read or enjoy LotR, but they were not Tolkien's target audience for LotR.
The animated movies suck. Especially the first one by Bakshi (in fact, I think Bakshi's admitted in hindsight that his movie sucked, but I'd have to look it up) where the Balrog is wearing slippers, Sam looks like a mentally disabled ogre and Saruman changes name to Aruman in the middle of the movie, before putting on a light show worthy of a Christmas tree. The cartoon adaption of Return of the King is better, but still not what I'd call a good movie (the hobbits look like they were beaten with the ugly stick and Gollum looks like a mutated frog). The Hobbit wasn't exactly awesome either, with a Bilbo that looks like a mildly retarded chipmunk, and a Thranduil that looks like some horrendous mutation of human, frog and God know what. They might've been well-received back then (but according to Wikipedia Bakshi's adaption got a mixed response), but if one would watch them again today without the rose-tinted nostalgia glasses one, one would most likely realize they're terrible adaptions.
05/21/09
05/21/09
05/21/09
The female dwarfs having beards thing wasn't strictly meant for humorous effect only, though. Dwarfs of both genders were actually born (!) with beards (no, seriously, look it up, it's mentioned in one of the History of Middle-earth books).
@subnet6:
Obviously not every video game has to target me personally (if it did, we'd have nothing but Final Fantasy 7 and 9 spinoff games, endless God of War sequels and rehashes of Sonic 1 and 2, but that's another story). My point is, LotR is a book written for adults. Its main themes (war, loss and sacrifice) are aimed at adults. So why the Hell would anyone make a cartoony mini game collection based on it? Sure, a children's game based on LotR isn't impossible (there was a LotR RPG for the SNES that I guess kids might've enjoyed.. Hadn't it been for the game sucking), but reducing the story to happy happy joy joy minigame fun time with Aragorn is just plain stupid. It's kinda like making a children's game based on From Hell; it simply reeks of impending failure.
05/21/09
"It's kinda like making a children's game based on From Hell"
Actually, no, it's nothing like that.
05/21/09
No, I don't have any kids, and I have no intentions of ever getting kids. I simply don't like kids very much. They annoy me.
And BTW, I didn't ask why anyone would make a children's game based on LotR, I asked why anyone would make a cartoony mini game collection based on LotR. There's a difference there, y'know.
And yes, it's exactly the same as making a children's game based on From Hell, as in both cases they'd be taking source material written for adults and dumbing it down to make it appealing to kids.
05/21/09
I think this is probably for the best.
"And BTW, I didn't ask why anyone would make a children's game based on LotR, I asked why anyone would make a cartoony mini game collection based on LotR. There's a difference there, y'know."
I missed the part where they said this was a mini game collection. But even so, kids games are generally cartoony. Sorry. That's just the way it is. Like I said, not every game is for you. Don't get so butt-hurt about it. I have no interest in RTS games. You don't see me getting all butt-hurt because they make some of my favorite franchises into RTS games.
"And yes, it's exactly the same as making a children's game based on From Hell, as in both cases they'd be taking source material written for adults and dumbing it down to make it appealing to kids."
First of all, it doesn't matter who the source material of the books was for. We've established this game is based on the movies which were PG-13 and barely so. Definitely not only for Adults. So enough of that nonsense please. What this comes down to is you're butt-hurt that this game isn't for YOU. You can deny it, but it's obvious.
And LoTR is absolutely chock full of valuable material for children. From Hell? (assuming you're referring the graphic novels) Not so much. There is a HUGE difference. If you can't see it, you have no business procreating at this time.
05/21/09
There are plentiful action figures, trading cards, bedsheets, etc based on the LotR films; do you think these were being marketed towards adults?
The fact is, regardless of Tolkien or anyone else's intentions, LotR is a franchise for all ages at this point.
That being said, why be upset that one out of a thousand LotR games is finally coming out aimed at a younger audience? This isn't going to be the last LotR game to come out, you know...from what I hear, it's a pretty popular franchise.
05/21/09
To be honest, I'm pretty fed up with all the action figures, trading cards, pencil cases and all that shit too (same goes for all the Harry Potter merchandise, I love the books and the movies are good too, but goddamn I'm fucking sick of seeing all kinds of shitty Potter merchandise everywhere). They're assraping LotR for what it's worth. It's a crying shame.
I'm not upset that the game is aimed at a younger audience. I'm upset because they're dumbing down the story (which was already dumbed down for the movies) to make a cartoony mini game collection. Had it been a platformer, an action-adventure for kids or whatever, I wouldn't have had much of an objection to it, but a cartoony mini game collection starring Aragorn, set in a "colorful and friendly" Middle-earth? That shit won't fly with me.
05/21/09
05/21/09
05/21/09
I don't see anywhere in this description where this says mini-game collection. If anything, this does sound like a platformer or action-adventure, considering they say Strider "embarks on his greatest quests" and it offers "sword fighting, lancing, and archery." You know what else fits that description perfectly? Zelda, which this sounds like a watered down version of, so I'm dying to know how you came up with the conclusion that this is a minigame collection.
05/21/09
05/22/09
Let's look on some articles on Aragorn's Quest, shall we, and read the comments?
[www.joystiq.com]
[www.vg247.com]
[www.psxextreme.com]
"You know, they're crazy that way. Adult oriented GTAIV releases with HUGE sales numbers. Fallout 3 releases with HUGE sales numbers. Add the adult oriented Halos and Gears sales numbers and you're looking at a serious market there. Do they bring justice to LotR? No. Let's aim for the kiddy demographic. Why? Why do that? I'm not going to play it either. I've got kids and there's no way in hell I'd buy it for them. Kiddy oriented or not."
"Saw this last night and was so dumbfounded by it I couldn't bring myself to post it. LotR is gonna end up like Star Wars.
Makes this Tolkien nerd want to cry a bit."
"Forget rolling in his grave. Tolkien's body must have burst into flames when this title was announced."
"Others have echoed this, but if they wanted to go Family-friendly, they could have taken The Hobbit, and committed very little damage to canon in the process
Aragorn's back-story, while awesome, does not family-friendly make"
"I could totally picture a Hobbit game with things going on around in the Shire being a good game for kids. But Aragorn?!? His world is gritty, hard, and full of fighting and death. The only thing they could do is ruin his image."
"And here I thought I was going to read about a LotR game that plays like GoW. What do I get? Family oriented? Whaaaat?? If anything screams "chopping heads off" it's an Aragorn game. They finally got Wolverine right... when will they get LotR right?"
"I'm going punch EA (sic) in the face. Nobody (seriously, NOBODY) is asking for Strider's Adventures in Happyland."
"I would really like to see a LotR game done right where its dark and more true to the books. I agree that The Return of the King was good but it could have been so much better and with the PS3's hardware they really could bring the scale of the movies to the consol but no one has come close to that yet imo. I probably won't even rent this if its "kid friendly"
"There's not even going to be any combat. It's just going to center around the love story of Arwen and Aragorn. You will use the Will Remote and Nunchuck to simulate the gentle, subtle rubbing of Arwen's cheeks as she cries every 5 seconds."
So, are you now going to call each and every one of them butthurt because they don't want a children's game based on LotR?
05/22/09
05/22/09
Jesus Christ. You're actually calling everyone who doesn't agree with you butthurt. You really are a either a complete tool, or an amazing troll. It's over, I won't bother wasting my time arguing with you.
05/22/09
You don't own LoTR. Nor do gaming forum posters, as amazing as that may seem to you. Sorry, but there is a big bright world out there full of people who would like to share LoTR with their young children, particularly via a video game. You are not in that demographic and THAT's TOTALLY FINE. But that doesn't give you the right to control those of us who are, and it doesn't give you the right to keep a product from the marketplace that we would enjoy. When you grow up, you'll understand.
I remember when I first saw Episode I the phantom menace. I was TOTALLY butt-hurt. Damn you George Lucas for destroying my beloved franchise. But then I read interviews with Lucas and learned about what into making the films, and how as man getting older with kids, he really wanted to do something for them. I realized that the movie wasn't made simply for die-hard long time Star Wars fans. Then my immature butt-hurt slowly and grudgingly turned into simple disappointment that the movie wasn't what I had been waiting for. Then I had the opportunity to watch Episode I with a big group of my neices and nephews. I was amazed. A movie I literally HATED, gave them so much joy. It was obvious they enjoyed the movie as much as I EVER enjoyed Eps IV-VI. Perhaps more. Then I realized how wrong I was, how immature I was simply because the movie was not what _I_ wanted (and what legions of hardcore fans wanted) and so I had dismissed it. But who am I to begrudge the joy those kids experienced? Now, you say you don't like kids and that's, well, it's whatever. But anyway, maybe someday, you'll understand what I'm talking about, and your butt-hurt over a little LoTR game might slowly change into simple disappointment, and maybe if you're lucky, into mature understanding. One can only hope.
05/20/09
05/21/09
05/21/09
The Hobbit and LotR are two very different things, though. Lord of the Rings is dark, unforgiving, and to some degree just feels like a war horror story.
Aragorn's quest was not a happy one, to say the least.
05/20/09
05/20/09
No seriously, I'm genuinely interested (not in the game, but how they will make it look)
05/20/09
Gameplay-wise, I think it would be trimmed down to make it easier, considering that family audience are factored in.
05/20/09
04/02/09
04/02/09
This is most upsetting because I have the interview on tape and I was very likely the only girl who interviewed him at the event, so I thought I'd be easy to remember. But from what he's said over on the Dragon Age forums, I believe he has me mixed up with a different journalist.
Not only am I not a man, but I do not have a recording of ever discussing Battlestar Galactica with David because I've actually never seen the show.
Emails have been sent to BioWare to try and clear this matter up, but so far, Kotaku has not received a response.
04/02/09
I understand why this difference is set up and why it is viewed as crucial here re: public perception and sales. But to step back from that it seems problematic to set up these categories in the first place. Yes, I know, it's something humans tend to do. Yes, I know, to be a functioning person in this world, a certain number of boxes have to be set up and people/things/experiences must, to an extent, be shoved in.
But why do it with literature? It's not a tangible thing; it's entirely man-made; it ought to be up to us. Categories do violence to whatever they are trying to contain. And why bring class into something that does not HAVE to be about class, per se? Because what is the linguistic implication behind high/low fantasy? Yes, I know, they are dated to specific authors and movements, but what is the impression? Sleaze vs. an almost academic precision. And who cares? Every book is different. I understand that, in many facets of life, it is too difficult to take things on a case-by-case basis. But not in literature, dammit. You don't need those labels. We wouldn't clamor for them if the publishers didn't give them to us. Tell them to stop.
04/02/09
"What I find interesting is that I never discussed High or Low Fantasy with this particular interviewer, nor did I offer an opinion on Ray and Greg's thoughts on the subject (or even know they had offered any). He asked me about the fantasy sources for Dragon Age's story, and I talked about George R.R. Martin and Tolkien (amongst other things, like Battlestar Galactica) but he makes it sound like we debated the meaning of High and Low Fantasy and where Dragon Age falls on that scale.
Never happened."
here's the link: [dragonage.bioware.com]
04/02/09
I have him on tape, though... I seriously hope this is a misunderstanding.
04/01/09
That aside, SoIaF is easily one of the best fantasy series to come out -since- LotR. Anyone who has yet to read it simply must!
04/01/09
Low fantasy is generally (not always) more focused on individuals and the ambiguities of life.
There is cross-over and fluidity between the definitions -- there is NO absolute. So, if they want to define it that way, they're more than welcome to.