Mirror's edge, looks promising. - by Fragony
gunsmoke on 19/5/2009 at 14:21
I still have yet to play anything more than the demo. I don't know, there is definitely something there, but it lacks a sort of 'magic' that most of my favorite (or standout ) games have. It is a bit sterile. Maybe EA is to blame here, who knows.
If I ever get the chance to play the full version, my opinion may change, but I am not going to buy it. I would rent it or play it at a friend's house, but at this point I can't see it being a game I would get my $'s worth. I would probably play it once, and shelve it.
poroshin on 19/5/2009 at 14:23
Quote Posted by gunsmoke
I still have yet to play anything more than the demo. I don't know, there is definitely something there, but it lacks a sort of 'magic' that most of my favorite (or standout ) games have. It is a bit sterile. Maybe EA is to blame here, who knows.
If I ever get the chance to play the full version, my opinion may change, but I am not going to buy it. I would rent it or play it at a friend's house, but at this point I can't see it being a game I would get my $'s worth. I would probably play it once, and shelve it.
I never played the demo, so I don't know what they put in it. I watched a few gameplay videos and got the game right away. Sterile is a good word to describe the look, but it's purposefully done. It's sterile and all primary colors. I think it's beautiful. And it's not a play-once kind of game. The time trials and speed runs expend this game much longer. And it's just fun to play.
Scots Taffer on 19/5/2009 at 23:54
Yeah, the aesthetic is sterile, minimalist, almost verging towards corporate bland but that's part of the point. And in that sense, they capture the steel and glass gleaming towers of monotony in a beautiful light.
Taffer36 on 20/5/2009 at 00:45
Quote Posted by gunsmoke
I still have yet to play anything more than the demo. I don't know, there is definitely something there, but it lacks a sort of 'magic' that most of my favorite (or standout ) games have. It is a bit sterile. Maybe EA is to blame here, who knows.
If I ever get the chance to play the full version, my opinion may change, but I am not going to buy it. I would rent it or play it at a friend's house, but at this point I can't see it being a game I would get my $'s worth. I would probably play it once, and shelve it.
As Scots said, the visual style was done on purpose. But aside from that, I actually didn't really care much for the demo either. This is one of those games that not only gets better as the game itself progresses, but as you get better over a few hours the experience becomes more and more amazing. And overall I think they did a pretty good job with the pacing, I never got bored in the campaign.
Scots Taffer on 20/5/2009 at 01:04
It's funny, my wife watching me playing said that she didn't like "how in your face everything is", whereas I actually think they achieve a sense of body-awareness and first-person-perspective immersion unlike I've ever experienced before and when you get into the grip of momentum and pull of some nice jumps and rooftop runs, it feels really cool.
ZylonBane on 20/5/2009 at 01:35
Over a year later, and Fragony still hasn't corrected this thread's title. :nono:
Fafhrd on 20/5/2009 at 03:59
Quote Posted by poroshin
I think, and I could be dead wrong here, the point of the game is to
run, no matter what. I never engage anyone. It's called the Test of Faith achievement. Kinda like ghosting, in a way.
But imagine trying to ghost, say, Angelwatch, without ever having played it before, and with every guard on active search and armed with a rapid fire crossbow. And you can't hide in shadows.
Angel Dust on 20/5/2009 at 10:21
I believe in one of the post-release interviews the developers expressed some regret at including the 'Test of Faith' achievement as many players saw that and tried to get it on their first run through. This was not the intended result. It was meant to be for subsequent playthroughs once you knew the 'lay of the land'.
Of course that does leave the question of why the combat was so twitchy if they really expected players to use it so often. I quite enjoyed Mirror's Edge but it was apparent while playing it that the developers didn't quite know what kind of game they wanted to make and where it's strengths where. It's the kind of stuff that could easily be addressed in the sequel and I have high hopes for it should it happen.
ZylonBane on 20/5/2009 at 14:06
Quote Posted by Angel Dust
I believe in one of the post-release interviews the developers expressed some regret at including the 'Test of Faith' achievement as many players saw that and tried to get it on their first run through.
Ha ha. Sometimes the achievement whores get what they deserve.
Jason Moyer on 20/5/2009 at 17:11
Test of Faith doesn't really sound like it would be that hard to get. If it required not using hand-to-hand combat I guess it would be different (although that's impossible to do anyway), but not firing a round isn't really a big deal when you've got slo-mo and crazy disarming skills.
I doubt they'll do it, but I almost wish the sequel would totally remove the gun-wielding stuff so that when you disarm someone you can immediately go back to hand to hand without having to drop the weapon. It would also be nice if the tutorial or manual or whatever explained the gymnastic combat moves instead of just having abstract drawings of them in the loading screens.
