I was looking through my games collection the other day, seeing which one would strike my fancy, when my hand drew back from the copy of
Mirror’s Edge sitting next to my cabinet. It wasn’t a dramatic gesture—it was more of a slight, backward motion, as if my fingers balked at the idea of touching the case. I own plenty of games that I don’t give the time of day most of the time (sorry,
Dead Space, I’m just not that into you). But DICE’s latest brings out that faint sense of revulsion that comes from leaving something organic in the back of the car for a few months.
I’m hesitant to label my feelings as “dislike” and be done with it. When I was playing
Mirror’s Edge, I felt two alternating emotions, both of which I felt intensely. The first was the sensation of pure momentum heightened by the game’s ability to make me feel clever. Every mission had a section or two that I flew through without interruption. Each mission also had several sections that demanded either an obtuse sequence of movements discernable after brutal trial-and-error; exact timing that I am not sure I could ever replicate again; or a gauntlet of soldiers who, unlike most first-person games, can shoot accurately. The schizophrenic result was enough to make me reach for the lithium.
Maybe I’m just feeling some sort of Stockholm syndrome to cover the painful psychic scars. I sunk $60 and ten hours into the dream of EA releasing a good, new IP, and in return, I received a hand-job followed by a kick in the balls. That had better been a good handy.
Another part of me wants to believe that I’ve become a better person after forcing myself to finish
Mirror’s Edge. Too many narrative-based games like
Mass Effect and
Fable II have made me soft. Those games want me to finish them, want me to soak in their honeyed plots and praise them for their storytelling prowess.
Mirror’s Edge doesn’t care if I’m invested in the plot or not. It never reveals exactly what turned the country into the glaring, inorganic monstrosity as it appears in the game; we must content ourselves with Faith’s sparse background information, which says that the government wanted to control everything, and although some people fought it for awhile, eventually they quit and accepted the tyrannical yoke. Overall, I would have preferred something akin to the Metal Gear
VR Missions game—no real story motivates the player, only a desire to complete the scenarios.
Come to think of it,
Mirror’s Edge almost seems like it doesn’t care if I’m enjoying the game at all. The squint-inducing color palette, the sickening crunch at the end of a fall, the frustrating accuracy of soldiers, the capricious “Runner Vision”—all of the elements conspire to evoke antipathy and rage. So I suffered through a vanilla story and questionable level design, and instead of returning the game after the first hour, I persevered. I gritted my teeth, took my lumps, and threw Faith off buildings until I got it right. This must be how those arcade junkies feel after topping the high score in
Frogger. Or perhaps it’s more akin to an old-time Puritan’s self-flagellation, paying for my sins by indulging in a little masochism. Either way, I’m afraid I’m stuck with
Mirror’s Edge until I die. It’s not so bad—it lets me wear the gimp mask.
I enjoyed it with no problems really and I would go back to it if I did have an assignment to finish. It was thoroughly enjoyable.
It could have been longer and perhaps had more parts where I felt like I was really moving, as it dd those so well. But it was too few and far between.
The rumour that no sequel is planned due to poor sales is a sad one for me. I think it could turn out fantastic. Add one or two driving sequences or, better still, some cycling and we'd be laughing.
I didn't hear that rumour about the sequels being canned, but if true that's really unfortunate since it was planned as a trilogy.
“Many times with a new intellectual property, the first edition doesn’t generate the units that subsequent editions could generate,” Riccitiello continued, “Mirror’s Edge is one that was very strongly reviewed, that one’s going to go forward. We’re probably going to look into some issues around the design to make sure strong IP is married with strong business.”
So gladly it looks like at least one sequel will go ahead as planned.
You know, I hadn't really thought too much about it, but that's something I think I really liked about this game. Not the realism of it, but the fact that enemies were really a threat. Going through the story mode, I enjoyed that challenge of being gimpy against capable opponents and having to figure out a safe method of dividing and conquering.
See, I'm gonna have to play through that game again soon . . .
The game's fun as hell. I love doing the first official stage, because its a great run. Also, that near-last level, where you have to puzzle climb your way up and then survive (or crazy evade) your way down an office tower: I thought that sequence was pretty clever/satisfying.
Yet I can FULLY understand why so many dislike it. To each their own I guess.
the way it highlighted different paths in the levels by assigning different objectives. The design of each stage seems godly when you realize that, without changing anything in the layout, there are so many ways navigate across a level.
though ultimately, without the spectre of danger, its not *quite* as interesting as the main game somtimes . . .
As I was playing I thought there were only three things I would change: 1) Too many checkpoints made the game too easy. I would have preferred more memorization to add to the length. It already felt like a modern 2d platformer. That would have made it perfect. 2) A level creator. I wanted to build my own levels and play ones that others had made. 3) Those flash-animated cutscenes looked like ass. Why not use the in-game engine?
I payed full price and didn't regret it a bit. It's an amazing game.
I've pretty much got the best timetrial times I can get.
I can get why they didn't do a fully connected open world: the game flow is all about set pieces. The final mission takes place at night, the wrestler fight takes place at washed out sunset and that's what they were going for. But having it all connect and having Faith need to travel back to home base would have been pretty effective from a narrative/connective standpoint. The last homebase cutscene woudl have been way more meaningful if you had to travel there for yourself.
Also, did anyone else really appreciate that they didn't explain what was in any of these packages, or who any of the clients were? I like that the respect of privacy and professionalism was underwritten that way.
I got this game as a Christmas present but I'd never shell out 60 boners for it. It has it's moments as far as gameplay is concerned but the story is worthless in my opinion.
I have yet to beat Mirror's Edge, but have, through fierce frustration of certain levels, throughly enjoyed this game.
Yee!
Oh, and the DLC could be one of the most game-enhancing additions to reach a console game.
Mirror's Edge was one of EA's new IPs that didn't even make me take a second look.
I agree completely with Bulletmagnet - the game is what it is and that's the end of it. Some people will love it and some will hate it, and some won't even take a look at it (like me). Big props to EA for taking a risk - it is a risk like this that made me stick with playing PC games only for a long time. On a PC, any knowledgeable individual or group can create a game and push it online for download, bypassing any need to find a publisher's approval to sink money into distributing the game. Because of this, a lot of people were able to make what they wanted, free of filters, and yes, a lot of games sank, but a lot of quirky but very well done games came out of the mix.
Interesting points, though I beg to differ about the semicolon.