User Reviews

There are no reviews for the Xbox release of this game. You can use the links below to write your own review or read reviews for the other platforms of this game.

Our Users Say

Category Description User Score
AI How smart (or dumb) you perceive the game's artificial intelligence to be 2.6
Gameplay How well the game mechanics work (player controls, game action, interface, etc.) 2.3
Graphics The quality of the art, or the quality/speed of the drawing routines 3.3
Personal Slant How much you personally like the game, regardless of other attributes 2.6
Sound / Music The quality of the sound effects and/or music composition 3.4
Story / Presentation The main creative ideas in the game and how well they're executed 2.7
Overall User Score (7 votes) 2.8

Critic Reviews

MobyRanks are listed below. You can read here for more information about MobyRank.
PGNx Media (Nov 13, 2002)
Inevitably, there probably is no real way to recreate the novel that has stunned millions of eager readers for generations. First came the movie, which turned out to be epic I think. Unfortunately, not everyone thought the same way. Even though there were a number of scenes left out to shorten the tale to a suitable film size, I think Peter Jackson did a fantastic job at bringing a book to life's fullest potential. The game though, with all its truth to story details still doesn't match up to what long time Tolkien fans there are, are looking for in a book to technology conversion. And that is why it may be better left undone -- for the whole that sometimes it's impossible to better an original masterpiece.
GameZone (Oct 08, 2002)
For Tolkien fans, linear is good. What happened in the novels will always happen, time and again. For gameplayers, linear is not good. Though a game sports a variety of puzzles, they should change up a bit for the sake of diversity, something that this game doesn’t appear able to do. The enemy AI is suspect. In spite of all that, it is the very faithfulness to the story, as well as the graphics and sound, which should make this a delightful time for any LOTR fan.
games xtreme (Dec 17, 2002)
Not the best game in its genre, but not the worst game either. The Xbox version seems to have the edge over the others as well and there are differences.
Power Unlimited (Dec, 2002)
The Fellowship Of The Ring weet de sfeer van Middle Earth goed te treffen, maar kent qua gameplay enkele storende missers. Toch moeten Tolkien fans deze game op zijn minst een keertje huren.
GameSpy (Oct 20, 2002)
Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring suffers from the same problem that hampered another Vivendi Games title. Both Fellowship and Ronin Entertainment's Bruce Lee: Quest of the Dragon stay so close and true to their source material that the actual gameplay takes a backseat. The die-hard Tolkien will get a kick out of slugging and spell-casting their way through the first book of the Rings trilogy, but the casual gamer will only be disappointed by an otherwise generic action / adventure title.
IGN (Sep 27, 2002)
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring had lots of potential, not to mention a lot to live up to. That is the curse of the double-edged sword known as the Lord of the Rings license. The possibilities are endless, yet what is required, and almost expected can prove to be too much. The book itself is very non-linear in format and can be very hard to translate into an effective game without leaving some of the detail out. But to reduce to the story to almost childish levels is not what I had in mind. Didn’t we learn that from 1978’s Lord of the Rings animated movie? Did I have high expectations for the game? Sure, but even if you were to strip the license away, the games lack of focus, sub-par AI, and unbalanced gameplay make the game mediocre at best. It seems the developers had great intentions for the game but may have set their ambitions a little too high.
65 (Nov 05, 2002)
Comme il est dit plus haut, enlevez Tolkien et tout s'effondre. Un titre à réserver aux fans uniquement. La Communauté de l'Anneau risque d'avoir bien du mal à tenir le choc contre Les Deux Tours. Et Vivendi qui se vantait d'avoir les droits d'un livre plus vendu que la Bible, ben la prochaine fois, faites-nous un FPS avec Jesus.
62 (Jan 12, 2003)
Trotz liebevoller Präsentation und vorbildlicher Lokalisierung schlägt die anfangs durchaus positive Stimmung in Die Gefährten schnell in Ärger und Abneigung um. Dafür verantwortlich ist in erster Linie der lineare und monotone Spielverlauf, der Euch kaum Freiheiten lässt und die meiste Zeit zu öden Gewaltmärschen und Fließbandkämpfen verurteilt, während die eigentlich spannende Story unter unpassenden Aufsätzen und künstlichen Streckungen leidet. Durch die meist recht hübschen Levels bewegt Ihr Euch daher wie auf Schienen, begegnet Unmengen strohdummer Gegner, erfüllt unspektakuläre Aufgaben und geht während der Ladepausen gemütlich Kaffee trinken. Dass auch Steuerung, Kamera und Technik teils alles andere als ausgereift wirken, ist schon fast zweitrangig. Dank hochkarätiger Lizenz und Aufmachung sowie erst spät kompletten Heldentrios schlagen sich Tolkien-Fans zwar dennoch tapfer bis zu den Fluten des Anduin durch, aber der Spielspaß kocht dabei durchwegs auf Sparflamme.
X-Power (Nov 19, 2002)
Stoor je je totaal niet aan de bovenvernoemde minpunten dan is dit spel zeker voor jou de moeite waard. Als echte LOTR Fan heb ik me op het game gestort en moet zeggen dat het me toch aangenaam verraste. Zo is er de mogelijkheid om te spelen als Frodo, Strider en Gandalf. Je ontdekt Middle earth op je eigen houtje en ontmoet tal van wezens die je het leven (on)aangenaam maken. Qua sound en graphics heb ik echter geen minpunten al mocht er wel meer tijd besteed zijn aan de controls omdat ik deze echt wel ongepast vond. Al bij al zul je je tocht naar Mordor vrij merkwaardig vinden en het is zeker een verrijking op je kijk van het hele LOTR gebeuren.
Game Over Online (Dec 02, 2002)
There is an initial rush and glimpse of Tolkien's novel in the early going. The ensuing action lacks punch and never arcs to a point to make any of the combat substantial. That's why I believe Fellowship is a hand of cards played wrong. Adventure should have taken precedence over action and not the other way around.
GamePro (US) (Nov 08, 2002)
While Fellowship of the Ring?s intentions are noble, it fails to delivery compelling gameplay. Diehard fans will want to play to meet Tom Bombadil and fight the Barrow-wights?who are cut from all other Rings adaptations. But for most, this Ring may not need to be found.
Netjak (Sep 30, 2002)
You gotta give it to WXP and Black Label Games, for they got balls. Anyone who tries to tackle a juggernaut like LotR has got to have balls the size of a grapefruit. When you produce a game with the following of a LotR, you already start off with pessimistic fans. Even with my biases aside, the game is just your average title with no real hook or spectacular aspect. To add insult to injury, the game can easily be completed within 10 hours. If it wasn't for spinning in circles from lack of radar, I could have breezed through this in a whopping eight hours. The game is still worthy enough for a weekend rental, but a full fledged purchase would be ludicrous, for once it's over... it's over.
GameSpot (Oct 23, 2002)
Though the setup sounds promising--a wildly popular fantasy license and the approval of the author's estate--The Fellowship of the Ring is ultimately an average game at its best and a frustrating and boring one at its worst. It's also exceedingly short, and good players will finish everything, including the optional objectives, in perhaps eight or 10 hours. That makes the game a fairly entertaining rental, but those who pay full price will likely end up feeling burned. As a whole, The Fellowship of the Ring is just passable--it can't stand on the strength of its lackluster gameplay or its sometimes ill-used license, but add both of these components together and you may have a somewhat enjoyable weekend with it.
The Next Level (Oct 18, 2002)
For casual fans or others looking for a new adventure game, there are much better titles out there for your system (Morrowind) and this one is particularly short (10-15 hours) with very little value to replaying it. As such, this Lord is but a knave.
40 (UK) (Dec 18, 2002)
If you can live with all the problems, irritations and lack of inspiring gameplay, there's actually a reasonably big game locked away. Real, hardcore Tolkien nuts, who live and breath the man's work, may get something out of this, but for everyone else, this has "licensed toss" written all over it, and yet another reason why licensed games are inherently evil in the wrong hands - rather like the ring Frodo and co. are trying so hard to get rid of. The goal was "to create the most authentic 'Lord of the Rings' game experience possible". Quite honestly, Melbourne House's 1985 text adventure had more going for it.
The Video Game Critic (Jan 05, 2012)
Fellowship has its share of stealth gameplay, especially when the ominous black riders show up. The difficulty is fair and you can save at any time. So what's the problem? Well, the camera sucks and the user interface is clumsy. Mazelike stages lead to aimless wandering through murky surroundings (a map would have been nice). It's slow going and the deliberate pacing made it hard for me to stay engaged. Fellowship of the Ring may be worthwhile for fans of the book, but I felt more like an outsider looking in. A very bored outsider.