Tl;dr What are your thoughts on the Middle Earth duology? I detail some of the ways I find the game to be mean-spirited, though I’m hoping the developers were actually self-aware enough to notice how unhinged their protagonist is.
I’m about six-ish hours into Shadow of Mordor, which was recently released on the Nintendo Switch 2 in a duology package(and had a 50% discount for preordering: 35 dollars, what a steal!). As someone with an affinity for Tolkien’s works and a vague curiosity about video game adaptations of the legendarium, I was too tempted by the general public’s affection for the Nemesis system to resist snagging these games. One might say I was tempted by the power of the One Ring… I figured I’d put this in General Gaming considering it’s not a Switch 2 exclusive, per se. I’m also ascribing to the Khushrenada ethos that “not everything needs to be added to an all-encompassing general thread.”
A few things in particular stand out to me about the experience so far, which even in the span of an additional hour or so of play have developed a bit more. First things first, this game is extremely “2010s Parkour-coded,” reminding me of the slog that was
Assassin’s Creed: Black Flag (the only Assassin’s Creed game I’ve ever played, so yes, I know I am biased) in how the movement system operates. Black Flag felt a bit more restricted in the way some of its scripted missions allowed you to use parkour and how the parkour system worked with (or rather, butted-up against) nature, and the way Shadow of Mordor’s environments are structured feels a bit more free: mind you, there’s very little natural vertical structures and the game pretty much exclusively uses plateau cliff faces, but the amount of strongholds and ruins that pepper the landscape makes parkour feel like an always-accessible tool. With that said, it is somewhat surprising how freely you can move as a Ranger. Stealth and parkour really feel like integral elements that take cues from the aforementioned stealth action game and the momentum built upon the success of Warner Bros.’ other big video game adaptation of the time: the Arkham trilogy. At least, that’s what I’ve picked up from some stories from the game’s development. I need to get around to the Arkham trilogy at some point.
Second, the other aspect that echoes that 2010 game design is the combat. For a game so heavily weighted on combat, it doesn’t make a great first impression- you’re essentially mashing your attack input until you knock down an enemy and then switching to another enemy, considering the takedown mechanic and animation take a bit too long to execute in combat. This first impression is somewhat inaccurate, however, as a quick glance at the upgrade screen reveals the myriad input methods you can layer into combat. Executions reward your focus on mashing attack and reacting to parry opportunities, different forms of stuns and AoE attacks enter the fold, and finally, options for interacting with the Nemesis system reveal themselves to you. These upgrades are rewards for following the main narrative missions, so despite the game’s open world design, you are encouraged to try sticking to a main path. Given the play estimates featured on certain aggregate sites, the game doesn’t suffer too much from open-world bloat.
Which is perhaps good, because… well, outside of “hunting and gathering” side missions, combat is really the only thing this game has to offer. Sure, there’s stealth, timed, and stamina-focused side-missions that add a bit of variety to the mix, but it’s not enough variety to feel substantial, and it’s all in service of highlighting the various messed-up things you can do to Orcs and Uruks. This leads me to my main point, which is that this game is quite mean-spirited. You’re goring enemies on the regular, terrifying them with fire, mounted beasts, or “brutalize” prompts, and probing their minds for valuable intel (or branding them, a mechanic I’ve yet to unlock). The game is wont to focus on these actions, which are flashy and brutal in their design, and rewards you for engaging in such behavior. You can explode heads, for goodness sake. It makes me wonder if the developers were fully cognizant of how evil their protagonist is being portrayed. I’m assuming they do, seeing as the sequel tackles some ideas and gameplay mechanics related to power dynamics that feel like a further extension of moral corruption present here. I don’t know if I feel Tallion’s quest for vengeance justifies his wonton slaughter of Orcs, or if I’m supposed to take glee in watching him do so, but the more brutal the means of execution become, the more I feel that maybe this is a deliberate choice to signify how revenge is never truly satiated. I believe Celebrimbor himself says something similar, and this perhaps speaks to the placement of the game within the timeline of Tolkien’s legendarium.
Speaking of bad segues, this game’s most legendary element is most obviously the Nemesis system, and… yup. I get it. While I do feel this genuinely novel concept is somewhat hindered by the way encounters spawn and advance through time, I can’t help but be charmed by its execution. The first time I had an orc whose head I had cleaved come back with a gnarly battle mask and some nasty flavor text, I was smitten. I don’t know to what extent I’ll be able to push the limits of the system in this first game (as I still haven’t unlocked branding and I know the sequel has even more expansive interactions) but it’s novel enough in this smaller-scale environment that it makes coming across new nemeses continually surprising and enjoyable- even if the end result tends to feel fairly one-note.
I’m curious if others have experienced these games and what their thoughts might be. To boil it down to some specific talking points, did anyone find their experience to be similar or unlike the following…?
- Simplistic combat with many options but rarely significant outcomes
- Free, 2010s-era movement that emphasizes stealth
- Revenge… bad?
- Fun recurring Nemeses as the core conceit
Show Posts
