Depends. Are you partial to jaggies?

What are jaggies?

They're the nasty spiky bits that show up on 3D rendered models when processed by the PS2.

Graphically, the game will probably look considerably better in-game on the GCN. However, the PS2 will probably provide clearer cutscenes due to the lack of compression.

I'm sure IGN will be along shortly with one of their insipid, ten-page-long, "Let us analyze the minutia so you can obsess over which console to buy this game for" features. The differences are rarely substantive.

Thank you, BeckysBoy!! I was looking all over the net for comparisons and what reviewers had to say. And you really helped! In my heart I knew the GC would probably deliver a better looking game but the PS2 better video. I think I'll go with my orig. plan and get it for the GC. Thanks again.

What about the X-Box Version?

Since he only asked for a comparison between PS2 and GCN, I assumed he doesn't own an X-Box.

That is correct.

Funny thing is, this game is full of video clips from the movies! Gamecube version is 2 discs which is no surprise really.

Here's my review to a friend who isn't big on RPG's:

Okay, The Third Age. First off, the graphics are incredible. The sound is nothing short of perfect. It "feels" like the previous EA LOTR games in presentation, menus, etc. There's even a "Perfect" mode. This is not Zelda. You don't have to run around talking to people to find out clues or hints. You don't have to pick up money to buy better equipment. You don't have to look under rocks for special potions or transfer them to anyone. You find all you need in treasure chests scattered throughout the land. This is pretty combat oriented and it is story driven. Ian McKellan recorded brand new narration to help you progress through the game with clips from all the movies (even the EE's). There are minor "side" quests. But nothing strenuous or taxing. The combat is turn based. Basically you give orders to your team as they come up in turn. You choose who to strike with any ability you have. You learn new abilities as you progress so that is fun to always have new moves. It started out really easy at first and Jason and I were like, this isn't fun, but then it got harder as badder enemies got into the mix. The Watcher in the Water is the first big boss that you play. The bad part is random battles. They pop up at any time delaying your progress. Last night I tried to complete the first "level" at 100% scouring the landscape to finish off the "mini" quests (example: Defeat 3 bands of Wildmen or defeat 3 packs of Wolves) but kept getting delayed into battles I didn't want to fight. There is a "retreat" option. But each individual character has to retreat and the whole team can't. So, sometimes two of your players can retreat while a 3rd has to take the brunt of an attack and then retreat. I got lost and ran around in circles too looking for these side objectives. The whole country side isn't open. They tease you with boulders blocking a particular route so you have to find another way up (when you can see good and well the path is meant to be traveled).

There's a lot of battle strategy involved regarding special moves, etc. You get up to 6 characters but only 3 can battle at a time. That is good because you can switch these characters out mid battle. Say your Gondorian is about to die, well, you can put your Rohirrim guy in there fresh to take his place. Like substitutions in basketball.

Overall, it is a good game and I look forward to getting into it deeper. It is a long game too from the looks of it (2 discs on the Gamecube). I give it 8.5 out of 10.

How did you get your hands on the GameCube version? I thought EA delayed its release until November 11th due to technical issues?

Hmm. I didn't hear anything about that. Maybe that's why EB didn't have any in stock!! The guy looked up and down the case for it but found none. However, they did have the display box on the shelf and he pulled the contents from the plastic bag they keep locked in the drawers.

Dang, I hope I don't have a faulty game.

My local EB had all three versions. I picked it up for GC. Haven't opened it yet though.

Might pick up the GCN version this week... I'm looking forward to it. Haven;t played an RPG in years and watching my little bro play FFX was enjoyable, but I fell out of the FF Universe long ago.

Is there a RTS LOTR game? Maybe EA doesn't make that one?

Damn this game is addicting. I'm halfway through now at Helms Deep with 23 hours invested. So you're looking around 40-50 hours of gameplay. Not bad.

Battle for Middle Earth?

Maybe? Any good? This game doesn't sound like my cup o tea.

I just got past the battle with the balrog. That was one of the best boss battles I've played in any RPG. I'm at 12% complete at around 6 hours. I've gotten 100% in all areas, but have not done all of the evil quests.

I agree. Worth the price of the game alone.

I am really enjoying this game and it is addictive. I just crossed the bridge of Rohan. I am very impressed with the graphics and the landscapes. They really did their research to make it feel like the sets and locations of New Zealand.

Oh, and I found a minor "glitch". When I start a battle the Hint at the top of the screen will display the last character I killed with the life meter empty. For example if I just encountered Trolls but killed an Orc in the previous battle the Hint will say "Orc Chieftan" with life meter zero even though it is the Troll that I am getting ready to fight. If I hit B it will tell me correctly "Troll". My friend Jason has the same game for PS2 and it doesn't do it on his. Any other GCN owners notice this?

Yep. Mine does that too. Noticed it right away. No big deal.

I enjoyed the Return of the King game but I'm not sure I'd like this as turn-based fighting doesn't really appeal to me. For those who played the other EA LOTR games, how does this compare?

They're completely different. You can't really compare them. Have you ever played a Final Fantasy game, specifically FFX? That's the best comparison to this game. It's a full turn-based RPG based in the LOTR world. There's no real-time fighting at all.

Thanks, noonan. I'm on the fence between this and X-Men Legends.

I've played XMen also. It's like Baulder's Gate, or the Dungeon & Dragons game that was released on XBOX. Really fun multiplayer, but it isn't too much fun by yourself.

Just started playing the X-box version and it appears to have the same glitch.

Couple of questions: Seems you can change the difficulty level anywhere in the game? Does it actually take affect immediately? It indicates in the option screen the newly changed difficulty level. I started it on easy (because I usually want to see the story unfold, not just play the same levels over and over) and switched to medium within minutes, because it seemed too easy, and still seems pretty easy.

Do the boss fights, or other fights get significantly harder as you go along? I'm slightly less than 2 hours in and the battles seem pretty easy. Wondering if I should switch to the hardest difficulty setting?

The individuals themselves don't get harder, but you'll have times when it's 6 on 3 and that will get a little rougher. I haven't come close to having all my party memebers killed yet though and I just finished crossing the bridge in Rohan, that's about 9 hours in.

This game is pretty sweet though. I've probably played this more then I have Halo 2 and just as much as GTA:SA.

There are two RTS games. EA owns the rights to make any game based on the LOTR movies. The rights to the general story are with Vivendi I think... There was a LOTR RTS game awhile back called War of the Ring, which wasn't very good, but the EA one is called Battle for Middle Earth and is supposed to be good.