I confess that I needlessly short-changed The Battle for Middle Earth last year, as it was simply one more real time strategy title during a period where anything less than an immediately gripping concept wouldn’t warrant a second look. After numerous recommendations I decided to give the game a chance, despite its prevalent ties to another diluted movie license. I was surprised to find that in trying hard to shake its movie license stigma, The Battle for Middle Earth managed to emerge as a satisfying entry in the genre.

The Battle for Middle Earth was built by the team that did Command and Conquer: Generals, and uses the same engine. What sets it apart from the typical Real Time Strategy game is the “Living Map” – a stunningly detailed 3D view of the topography of Middle Earth, similar to the regional map in the Total War series. Each region in Middle Earth has an associated bonus that is gained after conquering, such as additional resources or command points to increase the overall size of your army. The arbitrary mining of resources is therefore eliminated; command points and the generic “resource” are collected to build and sustain all units in your army.

Of course, it wouldn’t be much of a movie adaptation without the lead characters, which are represented as heroes that can be used in battle. Unfortunately, only a few of them are actually useful (such as Gandalf, Aragorn and Legolas) while others are only thrown into the fray because, well, we saw them in that battle in the movie. The Hobbits are generally useless, but must be kept alive – no easy task when being attacked from all sides.

Every unit in your army gains experience points, and can actually level up to become more powerful, and are therefore an asset to keep around. They are also carried between missions in the campaign. This reduces the building frenzy that often ends up being the winning strategy in most real time strategy games. As long as you can keep your veteran units alive to act as the backbone of your army, they’ll do a lot more damage than a throng of inexperienced ones.

Though for me it was mainly the small details that made the game charming: the refreshingly minimalist interface, the excellent voice acting (including the talents of Ian McKellen and Christopher Lee), the small scenes from the films that would play out when hovering over regions on the Living Map, and Howard Shore’s absolutely beautiful score providing the undercurrent for the entire experience.

While I could appreciate the game’s efforts to create an epic context for the battles that took place in the films, the concept only felt half-realized. I got the distinct impression that EA was holding back with the Battle for Middle Earth. And they were, in a way, because EA did not have the Lord of the Rings literary license until now, and was therefore forced to stay close to the films. As a result, the good and evil campaigns were on paths that coincided with the conflicts that were on the big screen. There was little room for grand strategy on the Living Map. Even the key battles in the campaigns lacked an epic quality in the game – both Helm’s Deep and Minas Tirith in the Good campaign were kind of weak in terms of presentation. Helm’s Deep wasn’t just some outpost with a small garrison located next to a mountain – it was a god damned fortress.

In The Battle for Middle Earth II, most of the original game’s underlying system remains. Thankfully it more openly adopts conventions of real time strategy, in a bid to detach itself from the movie license. A key addition is the Risk-style Conquest mode that allows you to take over the map of Middle Earth, something the first game frustratingly lacked by insisting on leading you by the nose through a campaign entwined with the films. Introducting factions based on the lore available in the books, the Battle for Middle Earth II aims to cover the battles that are “unwritten” instead of following the prescribed path of the first game. Specifically, the game will be covering the War in the North in the single player campaigns.

Immediately noticable are the available options for base building, opening up an entirely new strategy for defense. The Battle for Middle Earth was severely hamstrung by the static, pre-made bases with a limited number of upgradable “build pads”. It encouraged a focus on the actual fighting, but it also made the action feel limited to a particular area. There is a uniqueness to the base building in Battle for Middle Earth II that’s representative of each faction. They are suitably majestic once complete, giving a real sense of accomplishment instead of the utilitarian bases of the first game.

I was also pleased at the potential for more massive battles, as the number of units produced per build has increased. A phalanx of pikemen now actually looks like one. The easiest comparison to make is a highly simplified version of Total War, without the overwhelmingly large battlefield. Battle for Middle Earth II also expands the conflict to the high seas: naval battles are now part of the game.

Based on what I’ve read, The Battle for Middle Earth II has gone out of its way to improve on its predecessor in every respect, and hopes to evolve into the quintessential Middle-Earth real time strategy game – not simply a genre title riding on a movie license. I can’t conclusively affirm that The Battle for Middle Earth II will actually succeed in this regard, because frankly the demo is not very convincing to someone unfamiliar with the series. A base building and combat tutorial does a poor job of conveying what is really being offered. Though as a player of the first installment of the series, the noticable improvements in combat within this small portion was enough to make me wish I could play the entire game. There’s something immediately appealing about the revisionist fantasy of conquering the whole of Middle Earth as I see fit. If that’s any consolation.