People who say that Halo *isn't* just another FPS have clearly never played any other FPS in the past 5 years

Harry Potter: She made a fantastic series that got kids into reading and adults back into it. Of course, it has spawned more slash fiction than Wolverine, so, take the good with the bad. And hey, she needed money, and now she can buy painite rings and mansions made of gold. Maybe a couple rocket cars.

Lord of the Rings: An ancient well written fantasy series, and fairly epic at that. But more backstory than any other fantasy series? Bullshit. You can't say that one with a straight face, or without saying you have only read The Hobbit. Better than them, certainly, more backstory? Hell no.

Halo 3: A good fps. Legendary in that it showed that consoles can play FPS too! (Ignoring the N64 Era of course) It is, just another FPS. Just happens to be the best console one.

There are Colas, and then there is coke. Coke is a brand name for a type of Cola, and most people would say it's good, but it's still a fucking Cola!

Also, KopBoi, this isn't texting. For the love of God, please try to finish words. That extra keystroke will give you carpal tunnel and arthritis, but... Jesus.

Lord of the Rings created and defined an entire genre. Many of the fantasy ideas we hold as truths (elves vs. dwarves, elves being an ancient race, etc.) stem from Tolkien's LoTR series. For crying out loud, he actually created several languages in his books and wrote back stories that went back thousands of years in Middle-Earth just to flesh out his universe.

Harry Potter is a wildly popular line of children's books. Comparing the two is a slap in the face to the legendary status of LoTR.

The same applies to Halo. It's a good FPS with a good story. Nothing legendary there other than its sales.

Tolkien wrote backstory in the Middle-Earth universe that goes back thousands of years before the LoTR series. They were never even meant to be published (they were published by his son after he passed), he just wrote them to flesh out his universe. All said, his notes for the backstory come in at several hundred pages.

I don't know of another author who dedicated that kind of time and effort just to make his published novels seem more realistic and in-depth.

Hey Rocket, I think you ignored the ancient.

Yes, some people can speak or write in Tolkien's runes. But how many years has he been around? In 50 years, who knows, maybe kids will be chanting whatever the fuck it is that Harry Potter chants. Havn't read a single book.

Tolkien popularized many concepts, but did not define them. And how many of his concepts truly were accepted compared to how many were simply passed?

Yeah, there's in over 10 (sorry I didn't read all of them cause I simply don't have time) novels that fill in the backstory of LotR, furthermore, if you just check out the appendix on the novel series of LotR, there's over or nearly 100 pages of information, providing backstory (and elvish + other languages). Almost all fantasy today is more or less based on middle earth (or at least relate in someway)

So... wait, your argument is that he had a backstory (Which many fantasy authors do), and he based his works on this history (Which, when writing a story, you don't ignore the history most often) and were never published, until his son cleaned them up, and decided the movies were a good time to release them?

The only difference I can see is A) His notes were 300 pages instead of 50 pages of notes and B) His Son either wanted more money (Likely) or wanted his Father's works remembered better by publishing the base history that he imagined to guide his work. Rather than by some generally fantastic movies.

Forgive the cynicism in me, but I don't see that as an enormous credit to his works. His works stand alone without this lovely BS he wrote notes like every other author so he's great.

I don't think his extensive notes help/hinder the greatness of the books that much, but they are impressive. It just amazes me how much work he put into the story before he even penned a word of the LoTR book.

What Rocketpig said. Also see Silmarillion. The Lord of the Rings has a backstory comparable to the New Testament.

It's true that Lord of the rings is more then just the 4 (books/movies (including The hobbit)). When comparing Lord of the Rings and not taking into consideration what LotR actually encompasses then people jump to mis-intended conclusions and compare Art with scrap booking.?

Harry Potter greater then LotR??? WTH???? -It may be greater in a child's mind, or one who truely does not understand the work of Tolkin but for the love of God there's Art and then theres simpleton stories.

The underlying story to Harry potter has absolutely nothing. All they are is some great stories.

LotR on the other hand is Art. The amount of information JUST in relation to these also great stories is like a fricken encyclopedia Britannica.

Almost anyone with an imagination and dedication can flesh out a Harry Potter esque story in 3 - 6 months.

LotR took a lifetime to perfect. These books where not written in less then a year Like Harry Potter books where (Which some of the stories are pretty rubbish if you take the time to look into them), They took Decades of Dedication to make the World of Middle Earth so real that sometimes you can loose yourself in it.

If all your comparing is the Lord of the Rings books or movies then you obviously do not understand The Lord of the Rings for what it was written as.