User Score
6.9

Mixed or average reviews- based on 105 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 64 out of 105
  2. Negative: 24 out of 105

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. 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. 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 modeThe 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. Expand
  2. MikeH
    Jan 23, 2009
    3
    I will admit that I sort of enjoyed the mostly broken gameplay however as a game this had soooo much more potential. The missions are short and require little to no fighting if you just make b-lines from point to point. Online experience is mediocre at best, overpowered classes destroy the balance in the game and take away from the fun.
  3. MikeCoon
    Feb 3, 2009
    3
    The game really doesn't appeal to either the LotR fan in me or the Battlefront fan in me. The gameplay failed to excite me in any way, and as a fan of the books, I found nothing but errors with the source material that would be just as easy to get right as they were to get wrong. I'll have to hold out for either Battlefront III or another LotR game along the lines of The ThirdThe game really doesn't appeal to either the LotR fan in me or the Battlefront fan in me. The gameplay failed to excite me in any way, and as a fan of the books, I found nothing but errors with the source material that would be just as easy to get right as they were to get wrong. I'll have to hold out for either Battlefront III or another LotR game along the lines of The Third Age. Best world would give me both. Expand
  4. Jul 28, 2011
    1
    Lord of the Rings will not appeal to any Lord of the Rings or even a Star Wars Battlefront fan. This game is just a dumb button masher that fails to impress anyone. There is a lot of glitches and bugs in the games. The graphics are dated , the voice is ugly , and the overall presentation is bland. Do not get this game!!
  5. Oct 15, 2014
    4
    I wouldn't recommend it. You will spend 25% of the time on lying down on the floor and being unable to get up because the enemies keep hitting your rising body and quite a lot of that time being glitch-ly pushed across the floor especially while playing one of the classes that isn't the warrior as the gameplay seems to be suited to that class; and even that class isn't that good. MostI wouldn't recommend it. You will spend 25% of the time on lying down on the floor and being unable to get up because the enemies keep hitting your rising body and quite a lot of that time being glitch-ly pushed across the floor especially while playing one of the classes that isn't the warrior as the gameplay seems to be suited to that class; and even that class isn't that good. Most time he decides to take a little rest in the middle of fighting making you be pushed onto the floor et cetera. His ability make you run with your sword on fire burning anyone you hit but then you will fly way to far past all of the enemies and this apparently is quite tiring so you decide to, once again, take a rest leaving your lovely back open to attack and (somehow) it being hit leads to you being on the floor again. Now, as I said the game seems to be suited to the warrior and that's because of the weakness' of the other classes compared to the combat and their weakness' in general and here's why (looking at each class): The archer has a ludicrous reloading time and no sensitivity setting seems to be suited to his form of combat, and missing constantly would be fine if the reloading time wasn't so bad. He also has three abilities the first one fire three arrows, one forward, one of to the left and of course the other to the right which is alright. The second is a small vicinity AoE poison attack which is quite useful as most enemies stay in large clumps. And the third attack is a fire attack which just does more damage, which doesn’t come in handy when your mostly being attacked by grunts (worse enemies) and the aiming is bad so when fighting the enemy warrior (harder enemies) you miss them quite a bit. The only special thing about the scout is it's ability and that is quite poor; it makes you go invisible but when you hit someone you become visible and this whole game is about fighting hordes of enemies so when you hit one person they all spot you and your ability wont work properly so you become just a weaker version of the warrior. And the mage, he has bad cool down on his main spell which also has a charge so you will find yourself just using your bad melee attack most of the time. There is an infinite ability that gives you a shield that can defend you from all ranged attacks but in single player this useless because the AI is not so smart so they don't use it and then there’s an AoE ground slam, a heal and a short ranged, ranged attack that has a gravity curve. The graphics are less than good especially as it was published by EA and you might be saying "Give it a break it came out in 2009" yeah but so did Arkham Asylum, Halo 3 ODST, MW3 and Final Fantasy XIII (I know it was a disappointing game but it looked quite good). The friendly AI is useless they don't help at all and that’s not in your combat it's in helping with the objective, like they should be. You may start your mission with 15 companions but you will probably end it with less than 4 of them because the rest have buggered off into walls. The game also has two different campaigns but this just seems to be there to add more hours and therefore a bigger price tag. All it is, is just the same thing as the first campaign just mixed up a bit with different sprites (because you play as the enemy), a different story and maybe the chance to control a troll or Oliphant (which is slow and clunky). Talking about repeating things that's what all the levels are just the same things over and over again: capture the base, defend the base, get to the base, destroy the thing and the base kill the boss and if the combat wasn't so boringly repetitive this would be fine but unfortunately it is. 4/10 Expand
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. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.