Metascore
55

Mixed or average reviews - based on 58 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2 out of 58
  2. Negative: 15 out of 58
  1. We are going to go ahead and declare The Lord of the Rings: Conquest as a great game concept.
  2. Lord of the Rings Conquest succeeds in bringing Tolkien's fans a solid videogame, with intense action and a good representation of battles. But there is a strong difference between playing it multiplayer and single player, less fun than the former. Solo players should think twice the purchase.
  3. The Lord of the Rings: Conquest is a fun title that should keep many diehard fans, especially younger players, engaged. However, if you're looking for something with a bit more depth than button-mashing your way to glory, you will likely find the game shallow and frustrating.
  4. What The Lord of the Rings: Conquest boils down to is a third person action fantasy game with small glimmers of tactical depth and the occasional epic confrontation that just happens to be set in Tolkien's universe.
  5. The graphics look decent (despite some broken animations), and the game allows players to smash both Orcs and Hobbits. That said, the mindless button mashing grows redundant and some enemies are mind-numbingly difficult.
  6. Standing at the gates of Mordor, listening to epic music and feeling as a part of a huge battle – these are the great moments in Conquest. Unfortunately the unbalanced difficulty, repetitive missions and dated graphics kill these moments.
  7. While there are some great elements to multiplayer game, Conquest comes across as a somewhat rushed game that falls into the realm of pretty average.
  8. 70
    Diehard fans of both online, class-based games and The Lord of the Rings might want to invest the sixty bucks, but if redundant and unimaginative gameplay are things you despise, you'll want to steer clear.
  9. The Lord of the Rings: Conquest has some good movielike moments but overall suffers from a boring and difficult single player mode and lousy controls on the PC. The multiplayer is decent enough if you're into epic but rather simple fantasy action. [Feb 2009]
  10. It passes out achievements like their cheap candy and there is a certain charm when playing as your favorite characters. It also draws heavily from the movies and, like it did to me, might reignite your desire to watch them. Yet, none of these traits make for great gameplay. With short campaigns, frustrating combat, and chaotic multiplayer LotR: Conquest feels like a $60 reminder that Peter Jackson makes awesome movies.
  11. A weekend rental at best due to the game being wildly unbalanced and not a fun game but just a mediocre title. If it is patched and it’s balancing and multiplayer issues are addressed it might be worth a second look. Hopefully EA will return to the fold and give us another great game like Lord of the Rings: The Third Age, an awesome Role Playing Game that I would love to see a similar game released this generation.
  12. Lord of the Rings: Conquest is a videogame too far from excellence to be recommendable without making some kind of warning marks before. Those who don't like the senseless button smashing will not enjoy this game, but if you are a fan of both the Tolkien universe and the online battles you will find here an honest but reiterative entertainment.
  13. Like the One Ring, Conquest is beautiful to behold and highly tempting, but it comes with some big hidden flaws.
  14. Fans of LotR or team-oriented multiplayer masters should pick this one up—sooner than later if possible. But for those thinking that The Lord of the Rings: Conquest’s core gameplay is like Ninja Gaiden with chain mail…this ain’t your “precious.”
  15. Star Wars: Battlefront stood ahead in a long list of rubbish Star Wars licenses games, and it seems that this time around Pandemic have fallen on the wrong side of the fence, sitting amongst many poor Lord of the Rings licensed games.
  16. The Lord of the Rings: Conquest is an exciting and action-packed way to experience Middle-earth, provided that you have the patience and fortitude to shoulder a few frustrating burdens.
  17. Using the fun Star Wars: Battlefront style, Conquest has all the right elements but they’re not implemented as smoothly or as it should have been on the Xbox 360. The controls make for some frustrating button-mashing battles even with some fun match types or the various heroes you can use on the many battlefields.
  18. Unlike the memorable Peter Jackson Lord of the Rings film trilogy (which are used to provide Lord of the Rings: Conquest’s cut-scenes), this newest EA Lord of the Rings title is more like the latest summer blockbuster: fun for the short time it lasts, but instantly forgettable once it’s over.
  19. 65
    Despite having its moments, The Lord of the Rings: Conquest can only be recommended to die-hard fans.
  20. Whilst often frustrating and lacking in complexity, Lord of the Rings: Conquest still has a limited appeal for die-hard fans. For everyone else, it's a real disappointment.
  21. It is fun for a while, but despite the epic landscapes and chance to control (even fleetingly) the heroes of the Middle-Earth, once that first half an hour is over you’ll be looking elsewhere for your fun.
  22. Unless you fall in love with the deathmatch modes, the main draw here is the two campaigns - and most gamers will be able to cut their way through both in under five hours. Even if you're a massive fan of the series, we'd advise you to approach this game with caution.
  23. Despite its many flaws, there is some fun to be had. Poor design choices, sloppy controls and a lack of any soul or polish keep it from being anything but a brief distraction, but hacking your way through the armies of Sauron to the tune of Howard Shore’s epic soundtrack is enjoyable up to a point.
  24. Overall Lord of the Rings Conquest is a decent game.
  25. A very hastily put together offering with gameplay that falls far behind what other titles have been doing on current systems for years.
  26. Lord of the Rings: Conquest is an average game at best, which could have been improved in so many ways – better graphics, more refined combat, decent camera etc.
  27. 60
    Clunky controls and redundant gameplay all point to the guilty party: mediocre game design.
  28. 60
    Conquest offers much sound and fury but little substance.
  29. On paper this game is a winner but too many areas that made Star Wars Battlefront so great have been left out. Fans of the LOTR films will enjoy and the multiplayer will keep you going.
  30. Lord of the Rings: Conquest offers the player the same gameplay from the Star Wars: Battlefront franchise, but located in the Middle Earth. Pandemic had a great idea including two different campaigns; we love being the bad guys. But the game is a bit repetitive and offers little variety along the 16 different levels and the graphic are far from the finest examples of this generation. Although LOTR isn't a AAA game, you'll have a good time with it thanks to a great multiplayer mode.
  31. 60
    Conquest hits the same beats that we’ve hit over and over again in previous titles. It’s not that they don’t hit them well, but they hit the exact beats we’ve come to expect from a Lord of the Rings title.
  32. If you are a fan of the series or this style of hack and slash gameplay, there is enough here to warrant your time. Otherwise, you may want to keep your distance or stick to a rental.
  33. Conquest relies too much on retreading old ground in almost every way. Numerous bugs, unpolished mechanics, and average presentation are the telltale signs of a rushed game, and this one has all three. It's not quite bad enough to cast into Mount Doom, but only those who can't get enough of Tolkien's tales need apply.
  34. This game is nothing but a plain insult to all Fans of The Lord of the Rings as well as all other gamers.
  35. And so The Lord of the Rings: Conquest is a disappointing outing.
  36. While there is some enjoyment to be had here, it is hard-won and rarely fulfilling. The imprecision of the combat and its lightweight feel combined with the ropey visuals conspire to date the game considerably.
  37. If you enjoyed the Conquest demo you'll no doubt like the full game. But I just found it a bit dull. Too dull even to get annoyed about.
  38. Lord of the Rings: Conquest feels like a cut down, simplistic version of Star Wars: Battlefront. Battlefront was far from flawless, but the gampley worked more than fine in a sci-fi setting. The translation into a fantasy setting didn't.
  39. It seems that Pandemic should stick to making games with blaster rifles instead of swords and arrows, those are infinitely better than Conquest.
  40. I simply can’t recommend The Lord of the Rings: Conquest. The game is riddled with both minor and major mistakes, the camera is awful, it looks like a PlayStation 2-game, and the gameplay consists of little more than mindless hacking and slashing of countless enemies. The only positive aspect is the decent multiplayer-mode, but even that feels outdated, compared to Call of Duty 4, Gears of War 2 or anything in that direction.
  41. 50
    We were hoping for more from The Lord of the Rings: Conquest, and we're disappointed that the game didn't do more with such a powerful license. Star Wars: Battlefront hasn't aged very well, and to get essentially the same game with a different theme left us wanting more.
  42. While fans of the franchise will get a kick out of re-enacting their personal favorite battles, most folks will probably be wishing that hacking up hobbits was more like blasting Ewoks. And even if you do get a kick out of it, much like dating a crazy hot chick, the enjoyment will be short-lived once you start to look beyond the surface and see the glaring flaws.
  43. The Star Wars: Battlefront formula performs at expectation, but the execution of sizeable battles doesn’t wholly answer to the promise of making a difference in the War of the Ring.
  44. Outside of clips stolen from the motion picture, you won’t find any kind of story here, either. Pandemic worked wonders with Star Wars, but couldn’t grasp the One Ring. Conquest is a joyless trip through familiar territories, and sadly, nothing more than that.
  45. 45
    Conquest is very uncharacteristic of what Pandemic is capable of. Playing through Conquest, it was surprising to see the attention to detail in the visual department and the failure to execute in creating a smooth experience juxtaposed in the same game.
  46. Lord of the Rings: Conquest follows in the same tradition of so many other games based on Tolkien’s world: full of promise but lacking in execution.
  47. To add to its problems the game is also surprisingly ugly, often looking much more like an original Xbox game.
  48. Very much throwaway gaming, Conquest is wholly lacklustre, devoid of any real purpose, and is a real low point for Pandemic, which after Mercenaries 2 is really saying something. 'Must do better' is a gross understatement.
  49. It’d be too easy to say that Conquest will appeal only to diehard Tolkien fans; in fact, they’re the ones most likely to hate it.
  50. The pairing of large-scale online battle game with the thrill-packed Lord of the Rings series should've been a winner, but as it's turned out, Conquest won't possibly satisfying any Battlefront fan or Lord of the Rings buff at all.
  51. How the developer of Star Wars: Battlefront and the publishers of the Battlefield series let this one out the door in this state I will never understand.
  52. If Conquest is indicative of the level of quality and care the company is willing to invest in LOTR-themed games, maybe it's time for them to let someone else give it a try.
  53. With nothing to recommend it, I say toss this disc into the cracks of Mount Doom and be done with it.
  54. As soon as you pass the initial novelty of feeling like Legolas, or whatever character the Scout corresponds to - though we’d argue its inspiration is the Spy class from Battlefront - half of the gameplay disappears into the ether. [Feb 2009, p.118]
  55. It’s uglier than Gollum and twice as annoying as that whiny Frodo chap. Even brutalising fat hobbitses as Sauron himself can do little to alleviate the feeling that Conquest is a cheap, lazy and regressive game that is the very worst kind of franchise cash-in.
  56. A pointless, unfinished, unpolished, joyless, broken experience.
  57. EA's glitchy multiplayer servers place you in a one-on-one match of capture the flag.
  58. Everything about LOTR: Conquest is bad. [Mar 2009, p.80]
User Score
6.9

Mixed or average reviews- based on 104 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 12 out of 24
  2. Negative: 5 out of 24
  1. NickM.
    Jan 31, 2009
    6
    Ignore Tess A. After having played the game for about six hours, it is indeed a button masher of the highest caliber. There are some majorIgnore Tess A. After having played the game for about six hours, it is indeed a button masher of the highest caliber. There are some major balancing issues, at least several major bugs and various glitches, among other things. The levels are too short, it's just not that fun, and at times it can be frustratingly difficult.

    There are several announcers in the game; each more excitable and petulant than the last. They just will NOT shut up. They shout the same order to you every five seconds or so, just in case you forgot, I guess.

    I'm trying to think of positives... Oh, the character models are a little ugly, but could be worse. The overall presentation isn't too bad. The sound (besides the voice acting) is pretty good. I'm sure there's more.

    This isn't the worst game in the world, but it's not very good, either.
    Full Review »
  2. Dec 28, 2013
    4
    The Lord of the Rings: Conquest is a great example of why you definitely shouldn't get your hopes up for a game based off a movie/book. ThisThe Lord of the Rings: Conquest is a great example of why you definitely shouldn't get your hopes up for a game based off a movie/book. This game is a complete button-masher and the story should have been good because it is LOTR, but the characters had absolutely no emotion. The graphics were OK enough, but the game suffered from minor bugs and glitches and the levels in the story mode were sometimes frustrating and too short. The online multiplayer is imaginative and pretty fun. This game is for people who want a LOTR game and don't care too much about quality. Full Review »
  3. Feb 2, 2012
    8
    I agree with NickM. ...... to some extent. This game is a button masher, but not like you would typically think. You button mash, but it hasI agree with NickM. ...... to some extent. This game is a button masher, but not like you would typically think. You button mash, but it has to be done strategically and at certain times. You can't always use one attack all the time, some of the enemies are to strong for that. You have to mix up your button combinations to kill certain enemies. I love the evil story mode, and if it's to easy for you, Turn Up The Difficulty Level!! There are some bugs with the game, but overall the game is fun to play. Now that this game has been out for a while it is well worth it's price, I bought mine for cheap. Definitely recommend this game to whoever wants a fun LOTR game!!! Full Review »