Thread: LOTRO is Such a WoW Clone

Actually its just that Lotro has been becoming a WoW clone for a few years now. Let's see ... made easier for casual players, dungeon/instance finder, crystals that get socketed onto weapons ...

Seems like Turbine has been trying in many ways to copy what WoW has been doing right. Except for the crystal thing which is obviously just a way to make money - not a way to improve the game.

[And of course, WoW did not come first with MMO standards, and Lotro does some unique things too].

I love the reply that says WoW is boring and tedious. Good thing there is no grind in Lotro. Actually there is much less grind in WoW than Lotro nowadays.

Originally Posted by Cindir

Actually its just that Lotro has been becoming a WoW clone for a few years now. Let's see ... made easier for casual players, dungeon/instance finder, crystals that get socketed onto weapons ...

Seems like Turbine has been trying in many ways to copy what WoW has been doing right. Except for the crystal thing which is obviously just a way to make money - not a way to improve the game.

[And of course, WoW did not come first with MMO standards, and Lotro does some unique things too].

I love the reply that says WoW is boring and tedious. Good thing there is no grind in Lotro. Actually there is much less grind in WoW than Lotro nowadays.

QFT. Much, much, much less grind - and yes, I do remember what it used to be like to try to get rep out in the Eastern Plaguelands, and a few other things you had to go through that made me want to not play. They dialed down so much of the grind in WoW, and I have to commend Blizzard for that, and a few other things.

LoTRO seems to be going the other direction.

I'm not sure if the crystals are mostly store things, but only basing that on three people in my kin, including me (in a Turtle run of all places) got one on Monday. I wouldn't buy them, though, that's just nuts. At this point, they *seem* to be dropping pretty often, let's hope it stays that way.

What keeps me playing this game?

1. Habit.
2. The increasingly faint connection it has to Middle-earth.
3. Foolish belief it will one day return to SoA-style.
4. Lack of an alternative.

As for who clones who. Interesting article on the timelines of MMOs
http://biobreak.wordpress.com/mmo-timeline/

Asheron's Call (Turbine 1999),

AC2 (Turbine, 2nd gen engine 2002) and my understanding set many of the "vanilla" actions for remaining games,

World Of Warcraft (WoW 2004),

Lord of the Rings Online (2007) Using a later gen engine of AC2

I admit some of this is just what I have read on some forums, but seems to make since. So the earliest MMOs are EQ and AC. Everyone esle is a Clone.

Originally Posted by Graycient

It's the Lord of the Rings. Enough said.

This, does it even need any other type of answer ?

Middle-Earth ftw!!

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

Since the game mechanics allow a hobbit to tank a Balrog, I'm afraid you're a bit late saying that.

Well, Gandalf tanked the Durin's Bane. Your are playing a Middle Earth hero, with your own special weapon and so on. I know that Gandalf is a Maiar much like the Balrog, but he isn't invincible. In fact, in the Hobbit, he pretty much climb a tree because of some wargs

EDIT: so what i'm saying is that you, as a middle earth hero, could be quite capable of tanking a balrog. This doesn't surprise me at all.

UO (Ultima Online for you newcomers to the MMO universe) is considered the Mother of MMOs. It was the first to take the principles of MUDs and of pen-&-paper D&D (which actually had it's roots in Tolkien's Middle Earth) and turn them into a perpetual virtual world that you could see, hear, and interact with along with other players from around the world. But UO was more of a sandbox MMO with a story-based setting (from the Ultima series) but an (just about) anything-goes set of rules - EVE Online is probably closer to UO than any other big-name MMO today even though UO is Fantasy-based while EVE is Space-SciFi-based.

Shortly after that came the Daddy of today's fantasy-based MMOs, EverQuest. Asheron's Call came out later that same year but it was EQ that had laid the ground work that every major MMO follows today, including WoW and our beloved LOTRO. Even the space & fantasy Sci-Fi MMOs follow the same tenets of EQ (and to a lesser degree, UO).

That being said, all of those other games are centered around fictional storylines &/or lore, whereas here in LOTRO, we are reliving glories, legends, and actual events from an era of pre-ancient history that Professor Tolkien unearthed after years of research (and it is rumored that he was given visions by the Maiar to help establish the accuracy and to fill-in the gaps of his findings). That's what makes Middle Earth and our LOTRO so special. It's NOT make-believe. It's real!!!

(And to answer the question, "Just how do you know all of this?"... I'm rapidly closing-in on the big Six-Oh and have played nearly all of the major MMOs since UO, played many a MUD beginning way back in '89, and was DMing the original D&D before many of you were born. I read my first copy of the Hobbit and then gobbled up the Trilogy at the tender age of 11 and KNEW that the Prof was reciting tales of a long-lost era that our present day Earth had long forgotten. )

Sorry to be another nitpicker here, but this is a WoW clone. See Guild Wars 2 for a game that´s NOT a WOW clone, yet still a fantasy MMO.

If you really wanted to nitpick, you'd have to do it accurately as WoW is just a clone of Ultima Online, EverQuest, Dark Age of Camelot, and AC.


WoW is not the template form which MMOs are based. They are simply a MMO that used an already existing genre, tweaked it, added a couple things and then marketed it really well.

Originally Posted by Adder

UO (Ultima Online for you newcomers to the MMO universe) is considered the Mother of MMOs. It was the first to take the principles of MUDs and of pen-&-paper D&D (which actually had it's roots in Tolkien's Middle Earth) and turn them into a perpetual virtual world that you could see, hear, and interact with along with other players from around the world.)

My favorite thing to do in that game was fishing for treasure chests. And working on my house.

Originally Posted by Adder

UO (Ultima Online for you newcomers to the MMO universe) is considered the Mother of MMOs. It was the first to take the principles of MUDs and of pen-&-paper D&D (which actually had it's roots in Tolkien's Middle Earth) and turn them into a perpetual virtual world that you could see, hear, and interact with along with other players from around the world. But UO was more of a sandbox MMO with a story-based setting (from the Ultima series) but an (just about) anything-goes set of rules - EVE Online is probably closer to UO than any other big-name MMO today even though UO is Fantasy-based while EVE is Space-SciFi-based.

Shortly after that came the Daddy of today's fantasy-based MMOs, EverQuest. Asheron's Call came out later that same year but it was EQ that had laid the ground work that every major MMO follows today, including WoW and our beloved LOTRO. Even the space & fantasy Sci-Fi MMOs follow the same tenets of EQ (and to a lesser degree, UO).

That being said, all of those other games are centered around fictional storylines &/or lore, whereas here in LOTRO, we are reliving glories, legends, and actual events from an era of pre-ancient history that Professor Tolkien unearthed after years of research (and it is rumored that he was given visions by the Maiar to help establish the accuracy and to fill-in the gaps of his findings). That's what makes Middle Earth and our LOTRO so special. It's NOT make-believe. It's real!!!

(And to answer the question, "Just how do you know all of this?"... I'm rapidly closing-in on the big Six-Oh and have played nearly all of the major MMOs since UO, played many a MUD beginning way back in '89, and was DMing the original D&D before many of you were born. I read my first copy of the Hobbit and then gobbled up the Trilogy at the tender age of 11 and KNEW that the Prof was reciting tales of a long-lost era that our present day Earth had long forgotten. )

I'm curious, wonder if you or someone else might have an answer. How does ATITD (A Tale in the Desert) compare with UO? I never played UO but played many/most of the MMORPGs since, and I agree with how much EQ "fathered" the current tech. Although I like Lotro's rendition the best of them all, even excluding the idea that it's Tolkien based (which is important to me). I've played ATITD and find it strikingly different than all the rest, a true "sandbox" game. Thanks for any input!

I for one have multiple resons for loving this game one of them is important to me, there is this huge game out there that ca not or will not get a handle on what amounts to gae killing behavior and what is it Gold Spammers , turbine is superb at stomping the majority of these yahoos quickly and i ma glad and Speaking of that there was a game that was by far superior to WoW that came out before before WoW that was by far better a game then wow would ever be and it was called "Istaria chronicles of the gifted" which having played from beta had unbelievable graphic at the time and was very successful till they had financial problems and i know that things from it were so lifted and includes into wow. that being said i like Lotro because of what it doesnt have and those things are
1 massive gold spammers uncontrolled
2. uber leek ganking idjits running around killing lowbies just for fun
3 no super futureistic weapons ie guns lasers
4.true story line and a history that is background
5. mature player base (overall)
6. because it refuses to move towards actually becoming a WoW clone

Originally Posted by EldarMenil

Well, Gandalf tanked the Durin's Bane. Your are playing a Middle Earth hero, with your own special weapon and so on. I know that Gandalf is a Maiar much like the Balrog, but he isn't invincible. In fact, in the Hobbit, he pretty much climb a tree because of some wargs

EDIT: so what i'm saying is that you, as a middle earth hero, could be quite capable of tanking a balrog. This doesn't surprise me at all.

You do talk a lot of nonsense. If a hobbit could stand up to a Balrog then those things would hardly have been considered the most deadly bane of Elves (worse than dragons!) nor would Durin's Bane have been able to drive all the Dwarves out of Moria. Neither Dwarves nor Elves were short of 'special weapons' (they were, after all, the people who made them in the first place!) but that didn't do them all that much good.

Besides which, Gandalf could tell the Balrog "The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udûn!" and mean it because of who he is. He's not daunted by its power, he's just cool like that. By contrast, a hobbit would just find himself on fire, or rather he would if he hadn't dropped his sword, soiled his breeches and run away first.

Originally Posted by Adder

UO (Ultima Online for you newcomers to the MMO universe) is considered the Mother of MMOs. It was the first to take the principles of MUDs and of pen-&-paper D&D (which actually had it's roots in Tolkien's Middle Earth) and turn them into a perpetual virtual world that you could see, hear, and interact with along with other players from around the world. But UO was more of a sandbox MMO with a story-based setting (from the Ultima series) but an (just about) anything-goes set of rules - EVE Online is probably closer to UO than any other big-name MMO today even though UO is Fantasy-based while EVE is Space-SciFi-based.

Shortly after that came the Daddy of today's fantasy-based MMOs, EverQuest. Asheron's Call came out later that same year but it was EQ that had laid the ground work that every major MMO follows today, including WoW and our beloved LOTRO. Even the space & fantasy Sci-Fi MMOs follow the same tenets of EQ (and to a lesser degree, UO).

That being said, all of those other games are centered around fictional storylines &/or lore, whereas here in LOTRO, we are reliving glories, legends, and actual events from an era of pre-ancient history that Professor Tolkien unearthed after years of research (and it is rumored that he was given visions by the Maiar to help establish the accuracy and to fill-in the gaps of his findings). That's what makes Middle Earth and our LOTRO so special. It's NOT make-believe. It's real!!!

(And to answer the question, "Just how do you know all of this?"... I'm rapidly closing-in on the big Six-Oh and have played nearly all of the major MMOs since UO, played many a MUD beginning way back in '89, and was DMing the original D&D before many of you were born. I read my first copy of the Hobbit and then gobbled up the Trilogy at the tender age of 11 and KNEW that the Prof was reciting tales of a long-lost era that our present day Earth had long forgotten. )

Interesting that you compare UO with Eve as there's been a discussion on the Eve forum about this recently. Did you prefer UO pre-Trammel?

Originally Posted by Widoch

WoW is not the template form which MMOs are based.

Which is neither the topic of this thread nor the OPs initial question.
Albeit the discussion has been interesting it has been derailed somewhat.

Blizzard´s WoW may not be the "root" of all evi..MMOs but its overwhelming and unprecedented success has defacto made MMO´s synonymous with WOW. Simple fact.

And LotrO is very well copying major parts of the formula. Just like Star Wars TOR is doing (even more slavishly IMHO) for the Star Wars "SciFantasy" crowd.

And as others already mentioned UO and EVE, it is VERY much different from those game designs. They are mainly based on "sand-box" style gameplay, where players create the actual gameplay with the tools the developers design for them. This makes these games quasi never ending.

LotrO on the other hand is almost completely "theme park" based. And as such has a very finite lifetime.

Once the Devs stop making "new rides", it is dead.
It is also dead when the rides (new&old) get too easy or too obviously grindy thus boring. My current main worry for this game. Something the Devs hopefully understand too.

For me it is because of the beautiful scenery and graphics + I think it feels "realistic" with hobbits, dwarfs and elves.

Playing with a talking and walking bull with cartoon like-colours is just too weird.


And I also love the maturity of people playing this game, and not some kids who sit in front of their computer 10+/7 who have no respect for others at all...

Originally Posted by Norowen

I'm curious, wonder if you or someone else might have an answer. How does ATITD (A Tale in the Desert) compare with UO? I never played UO but played many/most of the MMORPGs since, and I agree with how much EQ "fathered" the current tech. Although I like Lotro's rendition the best of them all, even excluding the idea that it's Tolkien based (which is important to me). I've played ATITD and find it strikingly different than all the rest, a true "sandbox" game. Thanks for any input!

Between UO and ATitD, there really is nothing to compare. ATitD is unique in that there is no combat. It's an MMO based solely on social interaction between players - a social sandbox set in Ancient Egypt with its main focus on crafting and trade - and the game pseudo-ends every 1 1/2 to 2 years, starting over again with a new Tell (very loosely, an expansion of sorts). If I had to compare it with another MMO, Second Life would be the closest but even there the similarities are few.

UO on the other hand, at its inception was an MMO based on combat between players - an open PvP sandbox set in the Ultima Universe (think Camelot time period more-or-less) - but with a strong secondary focus on crafting and establishing your house/stronghold/community. Note that since the introduction of Trammel in May of 2000, the open PvP is somewhat restricted. On Trammel (a mirror of Felucca, UO's original map) non-consensual PvP is not allowed BUT there is still PvE. Hence, even with Trammel, there is no way realistically to compare UO with ATitD.

Originally Posted by BangoTwinkletoes

Interesting that you compare UO with Eve as there's been a discussion on the Eve forum about this recently. Did you prefer UO pre-Trammel?

I haven't been to the EVE forums for awhile now but I may have to stop by and have a look at that discussion. As to your question, I haven't played UO since Trammel was introduced. I went to EQ in '99 just a few weeks after its release and Trammel wasn't added until May of 2000. What I know about it though, I can see its merits for those who dislike PvP or who don't like non-consensual PvP, and for newbies who want to get their feet wet first and learn the ropes without the constant threat of death at the hands of stronger players &/or griefers who get a kick out of laying-in-wait for noobs and ambushing them at every turn. Merits aside though, overall, I think it took away the main point (and overall theme if you will) of the original UO... Learn to survive quickly or you won't.

Originally Posted by Adder

Between UO and ATitD, there really is nothing to compare. ATitD is unique in that there is no combat. It's an MMO based solely on social interaction between players - a social sandbox set in Ancient Egypt with its main focus on crafting and trade - and the game pseudo-ends every 1 1/2 to 2 years, starting over again with a new Tell (very loosely, an expansion of sorts). If I had to compare it with another MMO, Second Life would be the closest but even there the similarities are few.

UO on the other hand, at its inception was an MMO based on combat between players - an open PvP sandbox set in the Ultima Universe (think Camelot time period more-or-less) - but with a strong secondary focus on crafting and establishing your house/stronghold/community. Note that since the introduction of Trammel in May of 2000, the open PvP is somewhat restricted. On Trammel (a mirror of Felucca, UO's original map) non-consensual PvP is not allowed BUT there is still PvE. Hence, even with Trammel, there is no way realistically to compare UO with ATitD.


I haven't been to the EVE forums for awhile now but I may have to stop by and have a look at that discussion. As to your question, I haven't played UO since Trammel was introduced. I went to EQ in '99 just a few weeks after its release and Trammel wasn't added until May of 2000. What I know about it though, I can see its merits for those who dislike PvP or who don't like non-consensual PvP, and for newbies who want to get their feet wet first and learn the ropes without the constant threat of death at the hands of stronger players &/or griefers who get a kick out of laying-in-wait for noobs and ambushing them at every turn. Merits aside though, overall, I think it took away the main point (and overall theme if you will) of the original UO... Learn to survive quickly or you won't.

Thanks for the info, much appreciated. "You must spread some reputation around before giving it to Adder again." *sigh*