Mirror's Edge

Neurofreeze said:
I still think this game would've been better in 3rd person view. That would also solve all the motion sickness problems.
Click to expand...

Ok this begs a question. I wonder how difficult it is make a game that can use a 3rd or 1st person perspective (Fallout3 style)? I assume that you would need to ensure that you can be interactive in either perspective, but what does it take technically speaking?
 
Tried the PS3 demo...pretty "meh" IMO. Its a cool idea, and the graphics are alright. I just didn't like the controls. I also have the feeling it would get boring pretty fast, and that it has zero replay.
 
I only get motion sickness when either the FOV is below 90 and I don't realize it and can't set it to be 90 or higher

other thing that causes motion sickness for me is when a game tries to mimic a head bob while walking or running
 
CJRP said:
Tried the PS3 demo...pretty "meh" IMO. Its a cool idea, and the graphics are alright. I just didn't like the controls. I also have the feeling it would get boring pretty fast, and that it has zero replay.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say absolutely zero. By the demo, there are at least a few different ways to physically navigate a map. All it really showed was the ability to jump a fence, or take a little longer path around it though... so yeah, little reply value.

I know for some people, especially the ones that enjoy time trails / racing games, they would probably enjoy this one.
 
FunkeyPunk said:
why is 720p not considered "HD"?
Click to expand...

Because, even though it's a lot better than 720x480, 1280x720 is still a cruddy resolution, especially when you're talking about displaying it on a 40-50" display. It's alright for 17" monitors, sure, but nothing larger.
 
I played the demo on the 360 and its boring to me. Run... hit a button.. run hit a button... the game is on rails.
 
FunkeyPunk said:
why is 720p not considered "HD"?
Click to expand...

How can you call 1280x720 a HD resolution when it only amount to about 920,000 pixels?

We have gaming resolutions that exceed 4,000,000 pixels, hell even the "real" HD (1920x1080) is still only 2,000,000 pixels
 
Frostex said:
How can you call 1280x720 a HD resolution when it only amount to about 920,000 pixels?

We have gaming resolutions that exceed 4,000,000 pixels, hell even the "real" HD (1920x1080) is still only 2,000,000 pixels
Click to expand...

Just curious ... Which display are you referring to has more than 4 million pixels? The largest realistic display I know of is the Dell 3008WFP Ultrasharp at 2160 x 1600, which amounts to only 3,456,000 pixels.

Edit: Nevermind. It's 2560, not 2160, my bad. But dang, that monitor is tempting ....

Also, yes, 1920 x 1080, aka. the "real" HD still doesn't really count as HD to me, but because it's not half bad, I've given in to the crowd mentality on that one. 720p is unarguably crap though.
 
From what I've read in reviews, it is only a couple hours long. It also has no multi-player. Definitely something to pickup when it's cheaper.
 
hdawg06 said:
From what I've read in reviews, it is only a couple hours long. It also has no multi-player. Definitely something to pickup when it's cheaper.
Click to expand...

yea games with out MP = fail.. imagine how cool co-op could be or even fighting/chasing ppl on rooftops, then kicking them so they fall off the edge ha.. oh well.. as you said, will wait till its cheap
 
I loved the demo. Unlike most I get motion sickness WITH 3RD person but not in 1st person (as long as the FOV is high enough, around 80-90+)

3rd person cameras make me ill and naseous.
 
Bought the game for the 360. . . Loved the demo, not really liking the game itself. I am really disliking the level design more then anything. It's very linear and very trial n' error based, which is fine, reminds me of something like the classic pitfall games, just a matter of skill and timing. But perpetually being shot at by the Blue's is really annoying. The games got a "portal" like feel with sense of trying to figure out how to get where you need to go, but then you keep getting pressured which just ends up killing the immersion as my games are now down to casually strolling around getting shot up while looking at the options, then after dying several times, actually attempt a plan.

I was really expecting the game to be more like the Demo where you could avoid combat, especially because I find the combat incredibly clunky, but you're forced into it. There's several sections where you *have* to take out some cops so that you can climb up somewhere without getting gunned down. Every tie I get to one of these sections, I just end up putting the game away for a while and picking it up later. Something about it just feels like a "grind" that I can only do for so long before wanting to do something more fun.

And yeah, no real multi-player and definitely no replay-ability. After making it through level the first time, subsequent runs are just a major case of Deja-vu, especially since there's not any real variance in the predefined path through the level. After knowing the paths and tricks of a level, what originally took half hour or more to do gets completed in a matter of minutes.

I still hope the game does well enough though. I *really* like the concept, I enjoy the running around *a lot*, the whole free-running game style just needs a little loving to get an amazing experience out of.
 
Parkour game? Yes. Just pure awesome.

Unfortunately not for me, because not many games cause me motion sickness, but good lord does this one. Actually, come to think of it, I've only gotten motion sickness from XBOX games. I understand that this is indicative of nothing, especially given that this is a multiplatform game, but I tried it on the 360 so I'm sticking with it!
 
i thought the demo was alot of fun, doubt i'll be picking it up though since i just picked up a g25 and have been getting my money's worth out of that steady.
 
I love exporing in games, and I hate it when I am rushed through an area, especially when you have a timed level. I might try this on PC when it is $20, but not $50.
 
vicaphit said:
I love exporing in games, and I hate it when I am rushed through an area, especially when you have a timed level. I might try this on PC when it is $20, but not $50.
Click to expand...

QFT. With an exception to racing games I've always hated timed levels/games whether it be defusing a bomb or saving another NPC.
 
played the demo. Unless the campaign is 20+ hours, or there's multiplayer, I can't see it having any legs.
 
Technoob said:
played the demo. Unless the campaign is 20+ hours, or there's multiplayer, I can't see it having any legs.
Click to expand...

I don't possibly see how this game could have an interesting campaign for 20 hours. This game is more of the 'short and sweet' type.

The reviews have been quite luke warm. I'll have to demo the pc version before I even consider it. It does look cool though.
 
Main pitfall is that it´s "to hard"... Really if that is a negative or positive is hard to say. I mean mirrors edge is a bit like a racing title meet super mario :). Racing games are not fun unless it challenges you. Platform titles can be fun even when they are not challenging you. But I like racing simulations more then platform games so I think it will be great. I mean you can even race against other ghosts trying to find the fastest line and get real incentive to improve your skill :). The longetivety of the title is how well they succeed with this. Mentioned that in the future versions they are thinking of including a tool where you can make your own tracks :)

Another negative is lousy combat but since I would only use guns to cheat if it gets to difficult I am really fine with that... It´s not say Crysis or any other fps which would fall flat if they don´t have proper gun play :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top