-= Gametoast.com =-

Lord of The Rings: Conquest™ requires at least the following:

FOR WINDOWS XP SP2 or Windows Vista
* 2.4 GHz Core Duo processor or equivalent
* 1 GB RAM
* A 256 MB Video Card, with support for Pixel Shader 3.0 - nvidia 7800 or equivelent
* The latest version of DirectX 9.0c
* A DirectX 9.0c compatible sound card
* At least 6 GB of hard drive space for installation.

I have the requirements for everything but the 2.4 duo processor.
I have a single 2.66 processor. Can I still play it? And I intend to play Online A LOT.

Hate to break it to ya....

My comp faaar surpases those requirements, but even playing on the lowest settings, my comp lags out from the graphics.....

I used to play Conquest but then it got boring so I went back to Battlefront. But while playing Conquest, I had all my graphics on high and it didn't slow down my computer at all.

I can run it on a 3.4ghz Pentium 4, 512mb PCI-E ATI card, and 1GB of ram, but not well. Thank goodness I had a chance to borrow it before I wasted my money.

Truthfully the game isn't very good. Stick with SWBF2.

Thanks, u probably saved me 40 bucks. But should I buy it for the PS3? because battlefront is getting kinda old.

No. The game isn't worth the money. And if you're still interested be sure to rent it before you buy it.

Yeah, I was DYING to get it on the day it came out, only to discover the day before that, like you, my processor wasn't good enough. I was pretty pissed, but I saw a review on IGN, and seeing most other people's views on it, I'm glad I didn't waste 40 bucks on it. Now I can get a game (which, btw, I haven't yet seen a negative review for) I've been wanting for about as long. Empire: Total War.

Teancum wrote:No. The game isn't worth the money. And if you're still interested be sure to rent it before you buy it.

Hold your horses there, that is just an opinion (even if the majority holds it as their own). I happen to rather enjoy the game.

With my opinion as such, I heartily agree that (especially since you don't know if your comp can run it) you should rent the game. That is always excellent advice for games you have doubts about.

Ok ill rent it then. But should I rent it for PC? and try it out, or PS3.

Get the PS3 demo first from the playstation store, it's free ain't it?

yea, and I have it, but it doesnt really show me much...

Despite what Frisbeetarian and everyone else said, I almost would recommend this game, its pretty good for those "sudden LOTR obsession" moments that I get, and its not a bad game, the only reason that I don't like it is because it runs a new version of ZE, and you can still see some of battlefront in it, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I like my Battlefront in Battlefront and my LOTR in LOTR.

Is ZE zero editor?

Generally, but in this case, he's talking about Zero Engine, Pandemic's proprietary game engine that Battlefront and LOTR: Conquest both run on.

Ok, thanks a lot guys

I'm under the impression that it is a newer version of the engine, mostly because A) it lags up my comp, something that not even Crysis can do, and B) the file setup seems to be a bit different.

Wait, you can rent PC games?

Well, yeah...

DarthRogueKnight wrote:I'm under the impression that it is a newer version of the engine, mostly because A) it lags up my comp, something that not even Crysis can do, and B) the file setup seems to be a bit different.

Yes it is an updated version of the engine, and the file format is different I believe because they are now part of EA and thus use formats specified by EA (looking into the formats LOTR: Conquest uses turned up other games by EA that use the same format). Regardless, it seems we are getting a bit off topic...

I would recommend the game myself. I think it's a great game(will be even better with mod tools ). But I wish I had waited to buy it untill I had a computer that was more up to the challenge of running it.

One thing though. I wouldn't look so much at the processor requirements. A good video card will have more effect...