Talk:The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 2, 2013.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
January 5, 2009 Good article nominee Listed
January 27, 2009 Featured article candidate Promoted
August 7, 2009 Featured article review Kept
Current status: Featured article

General Cleanup?[edit]

NEW Cleanup section BELOW.

I'm not sure how many people care around this time (July 2008), but I have several suggestions regarding the polishing/rewriting of this page.

- More details in the Plot section, outlining the campaign storylines in a couple of paragraphs

UPDATE (02 Sep 2008): Mission-by-mission added. Great job folks, but a shorter paragraph or two would be nice, I think.

- Adding a new Factions section, with general style of play and unique characteristics of each faction

- Reducing the Heroes section, replacing the story descriptions of the heroes with short descriptions of how they play (and possibly merging it into Factions section)

- Reducing the Create-a-Hero section (never tried it, so not sure how it works)

UPDATE (28 Sep 2008): Almost deleted, greatly summarized. More info perhaps?

- Merging Original Characters section with Heroes section

UPDATE (28 Sep 2008): Deleted, Third Age characters to Heroes section.

- Reducing the Comparisons with Tolkien's Writings section

UPDATE (28 Sep 2008): Deleted, some bits merged into Plot: Setting.

- Adding Critical Reception section, with quotes from several prominent game review sites and magazines

UPDATE (02 Sep 2008): Started. Need more info and review scores.

That's all I can think of right now. Anyone agree, have anything to add, or will personally make major edits, you're welcome.

Spiritaway5177 (talk) 00:06, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

A little help - WikiProject Video games Guidelines Spiritaway5177 (talk) 05:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Hope you're still here. And I'm glad someone has taken a good look at the article. We should worl together. Contact me please I want to get started quickly. Lord of Moria Talk Contribs 00:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, just edit as you see fit and discuss ideas with everyone here! Spiritaway5177 (talk) 02:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Someone just deleted the whole 'un-encyclopedic' info in this article. This article needs serious work, but I don't think simply cutting off sections is gonna work all that well.. I restored most of it for now, and I'm merging some useful pieces from the to-be-deleted sections into other parts of the article. Point is, let's take it slowly.. Also, some updates to the above list. Edit and Add more ideas. Spiritaway5177 (talk) 02:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I think we should cut all the cruft. It makes the article look very, very messy. I think some sections should be merged, preferably all the characters and a new section created on factions. Lord of Moria Talk Contribs 11:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I've fixed most of the cruft and added tags to sections that need work. Also to save informationI've mergerd a few unnecessary sections. It looks like a template for GA to the eye slightly, but still the prose could do with some work and expressions. Lord of Moria Talk Contribs 12:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Minor detail corrected.[edit]

It stated that Haldir was son of Halmir. This is incorrect and is probably the result of confusion with the man in the first age of the same name. I corrected it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.177.124.143 (talk) 21:09, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup v.2?[edit]

The article went through some significant changes, so let's make a new list!

  • 'Characters' section looks sort of "out of place," since this is not particularly story-driven or character-focused. It mostly talks about units and heroes, so merge to 'Gameplay' in its own subsection?
'Characters' into 'Factions.' Unit mechanism fits better in 'Gameplay.' Spiritaway5177 (talk) 04:35, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Some more general info about each factions and heroes would be nice. Not too game-guide style, though.
Faction characteristics added to 'Factions.' Good factions started. Too Game-guide-ish? Spiritaway5177 (talk) 04:35, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
  • 'Features' section looks too short. What should we put in here anyway??
  • 'Plot' section looks crowded. I think its content is summarized enough, but would suggest subheadings for 'Good' and 'Evil'.
  • A new 'Development' section, for some real-world history of the game, as well as techincal stuff. Necessary for GA.
  • Add more suggestions and/or edits!

Some role-model RTS pages: StarCraft (Featured article), Age of Empires III (Good article) Spiritaway5177 (talk) 19:10, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Please lets stick to the main body of of WP:MoS and avoid adding subsections that go into unecessary pedantic detail. The article should look concise otherwise we'll go back to what it originally was -- and we do not need another clean up. I reccommend that we should continue to add in as much detail as possible on the reception and gameplay areas rather than factions (in fact this should be brief [per faction]). We could add maps of some of the settings in the settings area and we need to expand the receptions area as this is where it will mostly be judged on. (I advise a table should be made of reviewers and scores both in a two column table). An example is given below on how to tackle such a section as reception. サラは、私を、私の青覚えている。 Talk Contribs 16:38, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


Reviewer Rating/Score Given
PC Review Magazine 90%
Gamers.com 9/10

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

All righty then. I have experience reading video game articles, and I'm a big fan of Tolkien's works, so I thought reviewing this would be fun. Overall it was a well written article. It's definitely been polished. There are just a few things keeping me from passing. Here's my list of things to be fixed:

  • My biggie is where you mention the expansion pack in the lead, and then never mention it again. I think it at least warrants a larger explanation somewhere in the text; maybe a paragraph in the gameplay section, or a separate section with {{mainarticle}} on the top.
  • In the lead: "Bonus material and a documentary featuring the game's development was released in a Collector's Edition." When was the collector's edition released?
  • In the second paragraph, I'm not sure "Good" and "Evil" have to be capitalized.
  • Gameplay: "Units can be classified into infantry, ranged, pikemen, cavalry, and siege." Grammatically incorrect. A better rendering would probably be "Units may be classified as infantry, ranged, pikemen, cavalry, or siege." The ending "siege" seems a little awkward to me as well; it's not typically a noun.
  • The last paragraph introduces the factions rather haphazardly. For example, when Ents are mentioned, it's rather unclear what faction they are in. Your sentence mentioning dwarves does not need the word "being" in it either.
  • I also thought that the Gameplay paragraph skimped on really mentioning hero units.
  • Development: "As the first Electronic Arts video game to be given free reign on material from The Lord of the Rings universe, several lands, characters, and creatures from the books appear for the first time visually in the game's cut scenes." Should be "appear visually for the first time."
  • In the development section, "Cinematic Director" does not need to be capitalized.
  • It was mentioned that the Xbox 360 version would provide a "unique and intuitive control scheme." Did any reviews mention this?
  • For refs #23 and 24, you need to mention the publisher (PC Gamer) to avoid undue confusion. For a second I thought you had cited the game or the manual!

Overall, a good article. Just fix these things up, and it should be fine. I don't really see a need to actually put it on hold; it's nothing that can't be resolved quickly. bibliomaniac15 04:41, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Okay should be all done. Gary King (talk) 18:49, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Looks good. Just another copyedit, and it should be ready for FAC. bibliomaniac15 19:08, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to thank everybody for their contributions the article. Well done! LOTRrules Talk Contribs 21:45, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

WOW!! A Featured Article!! Kudos to all contributors, especially Gary King who found the time, resources, and boldness for almost completely chopping it up and rewriting it! Spiritaway5177 (talk) 04:45, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Images[edit]

How come there is only one image of the game in the article of actual gameplay? The picture even looks a bit strange... How about if someone adds to the article? KeeperOfTheKeys (talk) 22:13, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

A second expansion pack[edit]

they should make one, complete the semi-baked Arnor faction, and to add some more units to angmar, one to the single and last place available in the Thrall masters summon bar.

a second expansion that will seal this fine game forever (Til the next LOTR rts game).

peace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.177.71.152 (talk) 00:18, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Facebook Classification[edit]

This page is linked to Facebook as an 'Interest' rather than as a 'Game'. I prepose that the latter would be more accurate, and in line with BFMEI. I don't know how this would be changed, but would one of you? 95.145.200.119 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:23, 5 April 2011 (UTC).

Music section[edit]

Should there not be a section of the music from the game? The soundtrack was composed by Jamie Christopherson and features 16 songs. For more information read:

  • I don't think there's enough information for an entire section (the links you provide only back up its existence) but it should at least be mentioned. --Laser brain (talk) 12:56, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Sure, probably a simple one or two sentence mention in the "Development" section should be enough, considering the minimal amount of information available. Gary (talk · scripts) 17:02, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Perfect! English is not my native tongue so I am not feeling comfortable enough to do the editing myself but I can mention that the soundtrack was nominated in two categories during the GANG (Game Audio Network Guild) Awards 2007 as seen here: http://www.audiogang.org/awards/2007-awards/. --Kigsz (talk) 20:08, 19 December 2014 (UTC)