The beards on female humans is a symbolic update that heralds huge changes

[xusia]

Talking about 'lore purity' and 'purists' isn't really in good faith. There are no such purists here: LOTRO would be anathema to a real purist, and was from day one. As for the rest, that's a thought-terminating cliché: just because it's a commercial product doesn't put the changes it makes beyond critique, and it's not as if breaking one bit of lore (especially one that was demonstrably necessary for commercial reasons right from the start, like playable hoobits) means that everything else is therefore up for grabs or that being bothered by anything that gets changed makes you a purist. Especially when they start changing things in the game itself that have been that way for more than a decade and a half.

Ah the nit picking fun of an internet forum debate. The endless whataboutery. The immense effort channelled into an argument that will change nothing.

LOTRO now has beards for women. Feel free to write a multi-paragraph rebuttal. But the beards will still be there tomorrow.

[Mund]

Can't imagine spending more than about 3 seconds being upset about this.

[DoRonRon]

Who are these humans you speak of? The Race of Man? They sound like a Man Huorn crossbreed. yikes.

[Radhruin_EU]

Ah the nit picking fun of an internet forum debate. The endless whataboutery. The immense effort channelled into an argument that will change nothing.

LOTRO now has beards for women. Feel free to write a multi-paragraph rebuttal. But the beards will still be there tomorrow.

And it's still a sixteen year old game with creaky server infrastructure, but now women can have beards! Wow, such relevant, much modern.

[Frisco]

LOTRO: Giving angry people something to be angry about since 2007.

They could give every single player everything they ever wanted and there would still be people complaining on the forums that it took too long and it's not fair new players don't have to suffer like they did.

[Heyesey]

The addition of female beards is the reason I haven't been able to bring myself to log in lately; scrolled through the barber's new options once and that was it.

This was an amazing game, largely in line with Tolkien's lore with a few questionable decisions here and there, but at least before I knew I could log in and be immersed in Middle Earth without the slightest reference to hotly debated political topics Tolkien never would have dreamed of, but that appears to be over now. The devs trying to shoehorn their modern politics into LotRO is the final nail in the coffin for me.

Will keep an eye on it to see if it gets changed, but since they didn't even give us an opt-out for the horrendous GPS-style new maps I doubt we'll get any such thing here.

about eighty per cent of this game breaks Tolkien lore and prevents you from being immersed in Middle-Earth as it was described by him.

If nothing else broke the game for you now but females with beards is doing so, your problem is not with lore. Your problem is you're a bigot.

[Chaltier]

about eighty per cent of this game breaks Tolkien lore and prevents you from being immersed in Middle-Earth as it was described by him.

If nothing else broke the game for you now but females with beards is doing so, your problem is not with lore. Your problem is you're a bigot.

If "you-" statements and ad hominem are all defenders of this change have, I'm glad not to be on their side in a debate, especially when they make up fake numbers like 80% not based in any observable reality.

The vast majority of the things which challenged immersion before are common limitations and systems many PC games share, which are simply something we have to put up with to have any means of immersing in an interactive Middle Earth at all. What's out of place is any attempt to thrust hotly-contested modern politics into a world to whose author those ideas would have been completely foreign.

If they have to push someone's values, stick to Tolkien's and his only, and then if I or anyone else disagrees with them that's irrelevant because they belong in his world regardless. The developers, however, have now decided to push their own agenda instead and it couldn't be more obvious.

[Tarbel]

If "you-" statements and ad hominem are all defenders of this change have, I'm glad not to be on their side in a debate, especially when they make up fake numbers like 80% not based in any observable reality.

The vast majority of the things which challenged immersion before are common limitations and systems many PC games share, which are simply something we have to put up with to have any means of immersing in an interactive Middle Earth at all. What's out of place is any attempt to thrust hotly-contested modern politics into a world to whose author those ideas would have been completely foreign.

If they have to push someone's values, stick to Tolkien's and his only, and then if I or anyone else disagrees with them that's irrelevant because they belong in his world regardless. The developers, however, have now decided to push their own agenda instead and it couldn't be more obvious.

Totally agree. And if anyone claims that this last update reflects Tolkien's values... well, I'll just use this quote from someone else in this thread: "Tell me you read Tolkien, without ever understanding a word he wrote".

[mr_underfoot]

stick to Tolkien

if anyone claims that this last update reflects Tolkien's values...

no one is claiming that having bearded women in middle-earth follows tolkien lore. but we do try to point out the hypocrisy of people only complaining about lotro's lorebreaking when it doesn't suit their personal values.

as for tolkien's values? tolkien would be unhappy about this game (and the movies) existing at all. so it's pointless to debate his "values in the game," even if you were somehow able to speak on his behalf. the *only* place to go for unadulterated tolkien is the books.

[TesalionLortus]

but we do try to point out the hypocrisy of people only complaining about lotro's lorebreaking when it doesn't suit their personal values.

What about you then? Only coming to these threads to repeat the same tired argument, "whatever goes" "doesn't hurt" "people try to inject politics, they're bigots!" (and it's actually you and a few others who constantly bring it up, you didn't get an infraction yet? how come?). How is that not hypocrisy? If it hurts you some people offer some critical thoughts about it or don't perceive it as "no problem at all" you can just ignore them, no need to constantly make fun of people and not all of them are just being whiney to begin with. Be tolerant of different opinions maybe?

Personally, beard option does not bother me and hopefully there are not many players interested in such an appearance or trolling others - so it won't turn the overworld into circus feel - but why was that allowed in the first place? What does it improve about the game? Who is going to seriously use it and who asked for that? (I don't remember anyone ever asking for that). Is that even worth it for SSG? When hardly ANY product on the market offers a nonsensical "whatever goes!" customization like that? These are all good questions

[Chaltier]

no one is claiming that having bearded women in middle-earth follows tolkien lore. but we do try to point out the hypocrisy of people only complaining about lotro's lorebreaking when it doesn't suit their personal values.

as for tolkien's values? tolkien would be unhappy about this game (and the movies) existing at all. so it's pointless to debate his "values in the game," even if you were somehow able to speak on his behalf. the *only* place to go for unadulterated tolkien is the books.

Well, I'm certainly impressed by how brazen one has to be to quote one tiny fraction of a sentence out of context and then claim a mission to "combat hypocrisy".

It's true that he opposed his work being turned into a popular franchise because he knew what would happen - it would be twisted and altered beyond recognition. Reading his critique of a proposed film adaptation in the 1950s, Tolkien was most definitely the first "Tolkien lore purist", and rightly so. Even though he would oppose even the idea of a video game, far from being a license to do whatever they want since they already crossed one line, on the contrary it gives the developers an even higher obligation to be true to his work and do it justice wherever possible, with a mindset of wanting ideally to make an adaptation about which his fears would be unfounded.

One thing is certain from the aforementioned critique: Tolkien would be far more critical of all the ways in which this game deviates from the books than I or anyone else on this forum. Nonetheless, the removal of very real biological differences which noone even dreamed of trying to erase even 50 years ago represents a paradigm shift from the previous artistic and/or necessary (for gameplay reasons) deviations into active politicking, an escalation we can criticize without diminishing any of the game's previous errors.

[Hoppendi]

The game is changing alot starting maybe like early 2020 and in the same breath most casual lore breakers were added.
Just think back to all the ups and downs that have happened, some of them in no order:

- Pandemic free "VIP"-like months
- super Coupon to get free Lotro
- War of Three Peaks worst pricing ever
- Free Premium Wallet, Trait Trees, most content <95 perma free
- mega 15th celebration with free valar + everyone gets a boar to ride around + cosmetics some people paid like 50$ themselves
- breaking down Bree homesteads
- releasing brawler as the weakest class
- discovering Lotro in fact had something like pvp and trying to modernize it
- (a random rock in bree or a random chicken escape from ettenmoors)
- the huge LI 3.0 revamp
- the huge LI 3.0 fiasco (literally letting people left behind without a clue how to start to new system and so much more)
- the carry-all madness with no intent to resolve its countless issues/flaws
- opening class race combos
- class overhauls over and over + trait point resetting
- removing reputation bonus for skirmish currency to make it fully obsolete or adjusting yule festival deed rewards so every character gets 250 coins less (that means doing 63 MORE of the same quests just to get what others gotten for free!)
- disabling pets in instance without any options to let them stay
- alot of plans promised...
- ...
- and now: giving more race of men options while force deleting established, well-known avatar looks from the playerbase while practicing more drastical lore breaking and making randomized characters a full grown freak show.


Facing this i think the thread title is right. Lotro is changing, probably a forced change of directions. What does it mean for long-term players? Well LTA does not matter much for the future because they already spent their biggest amount. Some 5+ years players will like some of the changes, maybe enough to stick around. Newer players wont be much found by this update - i even expect FEWER new players. The Intros are clunky and especially stout-axe intro is designed with veteran players in mind. A new player trying this could find multiple problems. But most important i would declare this game trash if I just started now, clicked randomize on humans and witness the first 10 results - this is what i would expect to find throughout the game and probably would leave Lotro before creating a character.

Personally i think this 35.1 "Update" Shift is due to internal and modernized beliefs within SSG and ruthless cutting the roots from the games origin itself favoring politics and multicultural represantation of the real world over Lotros own basis of existence as a themed MMORPG

One step to accelerate this is by killing the legacy and flushing in the new. That's precisely what happened to Avatar looks. And to all critiques and all kinds of uproar there is still the most proved way to deal with: typcial and way to common attitude of silence and waiting until other discussions rise. Personally i am also sad for Tolkien and his legacy - it saddens me if someones legacy gets distorted for commerce or because someone wants to print their own beliefs over the work they claimed to represent; disregarding the original work. Saddens me more when i am involved just like now with Lotro as an extension of Tolkiens Legacy.

The avatar update even got rushed - one trivial short round of beta testing and full release with all it's flaws so everyone can have something to be upset about - and THEN fix the things that should have been fixed in Beta so discussions will shift to other topics leaving the rest of legacy fans, nostalgia players and true lore admirers behind - as usual.

Everyone belonging to these groups has a reason the fear the Lotro future (and not even because of lagg or outdated engine), but everyone within these groups probably already knows that the majority wont care - neither does SSG. Maybe they still do care for the money of proven cash-cows - but there wont be much risk involved since they hardly leave as long as the displeasure towards an update is small enough.

In my 10+ years here an avatar update didn't even cross my mind to have fear about. Especially since they did one in 2017 and it was fine for all nostalgia players (and people that just like the legacy looks way better!). Now the game feels ruined for some - i heard in the SSG stream the officials said something like they are trying hard to bring everyone fun. I dont believe them that's a plain lie. You can update skills, rework trait trees, change events - whatever. But the character is literally the personal reflection for some players (who enjoy this part of RPG and do care alot). This alone makes this the worst update. They lorebreaking perspective is another hit towards immersive RPG players.

And NO! A player who thought he/she settled in Middle Earth (Online) aka Lotro can not just look away or ignore it when doing a humble farm work in the shire seeing a black woman, claiming being raised in Bree-Town and with a beard that puts Gandalfs to shame; being a fully blind champion fighting every evil of Middle Earth while wearing an elegant evening dress and hitting with a pretzel in the right hand and a mug in the left; riding on a boar towards the party tree slapping other hobbits with a giant fish while having a literal hobbit as a pet occasionally switching to a kite with a snowman on it she exchanged all her Mithril for!

Some lore-breakers could be seen as fine or part of a greater purpose for individualized fun (you can run around having 100 axes or draigoch statues in your inventory and so on)... while others are so drastic that they hurt the Lord of the Rings Identity.
Since the game wanted to be about Lord of the Rings I really do see the future problem of LOTRO not deserving its own name anymore.

It surely is no longer the game many immersive players praised as most outstanding point of Lotro, female beards alone are not the final nail in the coffin for the immense amount of Lore and Immersion given as of today. But it's a statement of direction - just as the deletion of legacy avatar composition - and that's what this thread wants to be about. As of now i start to regret comitting so much to Lotro because i stayed because of the fantastic atmosphere, but the game is taking away more and more of what i loved about it; it's adapting a mainstream style and murdering it's own uniqueness.

It's still Lotro - just everyday a bit less.

[Rinlul]

There are women who have facial hair. There are cis women with facial hair. There are trans women with facial hair.

Just because you don't like something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I'm transgender. I exist. You can whine about it, but I'm still a real person out in the world who plays LOTRO. If this is really a deal-breaker for you, then you aren't a LOTRO fan and you need to just leave so the rest of us can go on having fun on this computer game.

[Elmagor]

There are women who have facial hair. There are cis women with facial hair. There are trans women with facial hair.

Just because you don't like something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I'm transgender. I exist. You can whine about it, but I'm still a real person out in the world who plays LOTRO. If this is really a deal-breaker for you, then you aren't a LOTRO fan and you need to just leave so the rest of us can go on having fun on this computer game.

You and your character - different things. If we play dwarf, elf or hobbit we don't pretend what dwarf, elf or hobbit exists in real world, right? We all human beings and when you online we care not about look, or sex, religion or culture, we care only about your skills as MMO character and your role in game.

[Arnenna]

But the fact that one can't make a gender surgery in Middle-earth remains, that's a fairly modern thing

I've tried my best to stay out of all this, but, this one has to be addressed.

One does not have to have any form of surgery to be transgender. It's not a modern thing either, it's been around for thousands of years, way back as far as the Roman Empire.

You're barking up the wrong tree with that one.

[Arnenna]

You and your character - different things. If we play dwarf, elf or hobbit we don't pretend what dwarf, elf or hobbit exists in real world, right? We all human beings and when you online we care not about look, or sex, religion or culture, we care only about your skills as MMO character and your role in game.

From a game play point of view yes. But this update isn't for gameplay, it's about inclusion and diversity of the player base. The player base are people, not game characters.

[TesalionLortus]

One does not have to have any form of surgery to be transgender. It's not a modern thing either, it's been around for thousands of years, way back as far as the Roman Empire.

How does that have anything to do with what I said? More like you're unnecessarily barking at the wrong tree. Still, nope. You can't make hormone replacement therapy or gender surgery in Middle-earth. Does that make it any more clear? I never said you can't be transgender in Middle-earth (as in - identify as different sex). Sure, why not, but doesn't translate into what's possible today as far as actually densely bearded ladies go.

From a game play point of view yes. But this update isn't for gameplay, it's about inclusion and diversity of the player base. The player base are people, not game characters.

But the two could have been connected though (lore lore lore origins etc...), separating them is just half-assed. Still hope they add origins and actually missing styles more representative of game world characters as well

[Arnenna]

How does that have anything to do with what I said? More like you're unnecessarily barking at the wrong tree. Still, nope. You can't make hormone replacement therapy or gender surgery in Middle-earth. Does that make it any more clear? I never said you can't be transgender in Middle-earth (as in - identify as different sex). Sure, why not, but doesn't translate into what's possible today as far as actually densely bearded ladies go.

You're looking at it the wrong way around. Try it in reverse.

[TesalionLortus]

You're looking at it the wrong way around. Try it in reverse.

Just say it because that doesn't tell me anything. What reverse way?

[Chaltier]

You and your character - different things. If we play dwarf, elf or hobbit we don't pretend what dwarf, elf or hobbit exists in real world, right? We all human beings and when you online we care not about look, or sex, religion or culture, we care only about your skills as MMO character and your role in game.

Exactly this. You can be any number of things that don't exist in Middle Earth and play the game, but once you're in Middle Earth you take on an identity that belongs there.

This insistence on having "representation" of every modern lifestyle choice and cosmopolitan-style diversity in pre-modern settings is simply superimposing things that don't belong there.

[Arnenna]

Just say it because that doesn't tell me anything. What reverse way?

You're looking at it from the point of view that it is difficult for a woman to naturally, grow a full beard. That is correct. You can't see the woods for the trees. All you see is a bearded lady.

It isn't, however, a difficult thing for a man to do. They for most part, need no surgical or hormonal help with it.

So, a person assigned male gender at birth, but who has identified as female, is - a female. Without all that stuff that everyone is claiming isn't possible in Middle-earth - yes, they can naturally, grow a full beard if they wish to. Regardless of whoever sees them as "a man in a dress", that is not what they are. They are - female, because that is their identity. They say so, the law says so, and people should respect that.

[WhimsicalPacifist]

Looking at the character generation, there was something that you may not realize was lost. However if you go into Hobbits, Elves, Dwarves and start changing origins you'll notice that options change. Before you could guess different origins of Men by hair color options, just as if you're heavily invested in the books you probably know the descriptions of the Hobbits well.

That's completely gone with the update; there's no guessing where in Middle Earth any man originated now (ignoring the darker skin tones, that's purely racecard bait). The people of Bree, Gondor and Rohan may as well have originated from the same houses: there's no distinction between any of them any longer.

[Radhruin_EU]

From a game play point of view yes. But this update isn't for gameplay, it's about inclusion and diversity of the player base. The player base are people, not game characters.

That idea is wildly out of keeping with a game like this. Your own RL identity should only have an indirect relationship at most with the character's - they're not 'you', you and your identity don't exist in the context of the game-world, the character and their identity do. There's never been any expectation before that your RL identity should be carried over straight into the game (in this or any other RPG); the devs have gone badly awry by blurring that line because the character and their identity should reflect the world they inhabit and be a natural part of it (since they were notionally born into it and will have been moulded by their experiences within it). As soon as you start insisting on direct player representation and treat the player's identity as primary the whole thing stops making any conceptual sense and becomes an incoherent mess.

[Arnenna]

That idea is wildly out of keeping with a game like this. Your own RL identity should only have an indirect relationship at most with the character's - they're not 'you', you and your identity don't exist in the context of the game-world, the character and their identity do. There's never been any expectation before that your RL identity should be carried over straight into the game (in this or any other RPG); the devs have gone badly awry by blurring that line because the character and their identity should reflect the world they inhabit and be a natural part of it (since they were notionally born into it and will have been moulded by their experiences within it). As soon as you start insisting on direct player representation and treat the player's identity as primary the whole thing stops making any conceptual sense and becomes an incoherent mess.

Doesn't matter. They've decided to represent a much wider variety within the playerbase and applied it to Human characters, seeing as all players are human. It makes perfect sense to me. When I create a hobbit or elf, the sky is the limit, male or female, elves - blue eyes, blonde hair, black hair, auburn hair, lean, sleek, perfect. Hobbits, short, plump, rounded faces, kind eyes, big smiles, usually brown haired, male or female. All the characteristics I'd expect to see, fitting to Middle-earth, but nothing like "me." When I create a human character, they very much reflect "me." Female, brunette (my natural younger hair colour), or silver to reflect my hair under the applied dye I use nowadays. Tall, not quite as slim as I'd like to be, long hair - now with curls, green eyes, imperfections, no facial hair, to the extent of tiny eyebrows, given my complete lack of hormones nowadays.

[Elmagor]

From a game play point of view yes. But this update isn't for gameplay, it's about inclusion and diversity of the player base. The player base are people, not game characters.

If this move for inclusion and diversity of the player base where interviews about that? Where trailers about that? Where Tolkien fans what have inverviews and confirm what they care less about this game for 15 years, but NOW because of THAT move they decide give this game chance to try? Yes, some female players say that they don't have problems with beard on female characters, but they already play Lotro anyway

And ok, SSG can gain few more players with that, but how many players don't like that move? Players who play Lotro for many years, respect decisions from developers, trust them and accept their approach to game. Half-backed move without any thinking about how players respond on that and how players feel about that.

And IF they want to bring more players, they need announce that changes first, and have honest talk with veteran players about changes for whole game style and game direction