Jump to content
N-Europe

Recommended Posts

Posted

Playr gave it a 4/10 basicly they said it was a glorified tech demo with no real on-line elements. They also complained about dying too often and wanted more FPS elements in the game.

  • Replies 357
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Sounds like they expected some kind of death match free-running and free-gunning hybrid game. (Wait, that sounds AWESOME!). Sequel please!!

 

Back to reality - this title really is a breath of fresh air for the FPS genre and I for one can't wait to get it. (At a later date). The length seems great to me too as I'll actually have a chance of getting through the title instead of, say something like Fallout3 which would consume all of my time. Maybe I'm becoming...casual!

Posted

well, as much as id not ponsider playr's opinion as valid as say edge's, i must say from their review i got the impression that the game forces you into several fights, which kinda justifies the complaint that combat was poor. as for the eurogamer complaint that its not a sand box game, thats kinda unfair, i dont see it working as much outher then a linear game, but this does bring me concern as to how good time trial can be, running the same route over and over would be kinda dull after a while.

 

i still plan to pick it up, but being unemployed, £40 for what is essentialy a linear game with pretty limited replay value would be foolish.

Posted
just watched a review on player, bravo's game program, which usualy has ok reviews. gave the game a 6/10. combat was said to be a huge let down, and the overall length of just 5 hours has put me off getting it till a price drop. i dont mind games not being long, hell, i loved portal, but at like £40, thats £8 an hour. no thanks.

 

From the demo i'd agree, melee combat was fiddly and the guns felt weak. Been thinking about this game actually, i might not pick it up on Friday after all. It all hangs on what price i can get it for from work, i'm not paying more than i paid for Gears.

 

I'm sure it'll be fun, but in a 'play it for a few hours, get bored, stick it on the shelf' kind of way.

Posted

I think the majority of the criticisms levelled at this seem like misconceptions from reviewers who aren't very good at their jobs, frankly.

 

'nto enough fps combat'? -fuck off. it's a platformer.

 

'not open world'- fuck off. This was never billed as anything other than exactly what it is. the only reason this is coming up is from ill informed forum threads- what sort of critic puts that in to consideration?

 

This game kicks ass

 

that said...I'm waiting. Sorry, DICE. You picked a godawful week to put this out.

Posted

the idea of it being a more open world would have been great though, multiple routs, just dickign aound iff you want, which would be fun in such a seting. that said, assassins creed did just that and it was a snore fest.

 

from what ive seen of the shooting criticism, its on the grounds of wanting more, rathewr its on the grounds that bits you have to do are unnecciarily difficult due to fiddly controles.

 

i suppose you could argue it was deliberate to show that your a runner not a fighter, but still, why have such an increadable looking freerunning experience tied to a poor shooting one?

 

i will reserve my actualy judgment till ive played, but as im having to look after the pennies, it might not be for a while.

Posted
the idea of it being a more open world would have been great though, multiple routs, just dickign aound iff you want, which would be fun in such a seting. that said, assassins creed did just that and it was a snore fest.

 

from what ive seen of the shooting criticism, its on the grounds of wanting more, rathewr its on the grounds that bits you have to do are unnecciarily difficult due to fiddly controles.

 

i suppose you could argue it was deliberate to show that your a runner not a fighter, but still, why have such an increadable looking freerunning experience tied to a poor shooting one?

 

i will reserve my actualy judgment till ive played, but as im having to look after the pennies, it might not be for a while.

 

dude. Demo is out. We've all played it :heh:

Posted

argh........ stop casting doubt on this! You're making me think about leaving it till a later date and picking up GoW2 instead. But I shan't. Need to support new ideas. Gah.... but I want GoW2. What to do? :confused:

Posted
didnt say you hadent, i said id recive my judgment till i played it, i havent bothered with the demo yet so i cant judge it.

 

I meant you should get round to it yourself. It's quality.

Posted

IGN's review is up. 7.3. Not bad. Although they seem to miss the point at some points in the review. They go on about how they wish the game wasn't so linear and more a huge open city and again the whole guns thing comes up again, although they did put it in a positive light saying they shouldn't really be in there.

Posted

I agree. I wish there was a little more openness in the game, a way to choose your own paths to take as such. It just doesn't seem as free as I'd hoped.

Posted
IGN's review is up. 7.3. Not bad. Although they seem to miss the point at some points in the review. They go on about how they wish the game wasn't so linear and more a huge open city and again the whole guns thing comes up again, although they did put it in a positive light saying they shouldn't really be in there.

 

It's not 'missing the point', it's noticing how much potential there actually was in the game. If it does some things badly and could have done others better then it's a reviewer's job to point that out.

Posted

gotta say, the review seemed pretty fair to me. reviews dont fit every ones tastes, some mags or sites i find hit it on the head most of the time, outher i think the exact opposite of.

 

the body of the review is what i tend to look in, in general. i take what they view as faults in mind, as well as what they say are good bits. i know, for instance that right now, short games arnt a valid option. i know linear isnt much of a problem to me, at least not if the games good in general. i know that story is important to me, and the taking gameing in a new direction is important.

 

im not following the crowd when i say the reviews have put me off the game, it could have scored 9-10 in most places but the 5-8 hour play times would still have prevented me spending £40 on a game id finnish in a weekend.

 

 

mirrors edge will have to wait, unless game still do there 10 day return polocy....

 

 

edit. just want to make it clear, i can see exactly why people would love this game. i love that its unconvetional, and that its trying somthing new. the art style (cut scenes asside) looks great. just not a good option right now.

Posted

ArsTechnica gives this a RENT verdict. I usually tend to agree with them.

 

The good

 

* Beautiful graphics, strong art style

* The sense of speed and momentum is breath-taking

* Complex, interesting characters

* It feels like something new

 

The bad

 

* It's over way too quickly

* The running is merely a repetition of the same few concepts and moves

* Graphics quickly begin to look the same

* Loading times kill your sense of momentum

* The elevators are intrusive and go against the entire feel of the game

* Story needed to go deeper into the world

* Some scenes seemed to force gun play on you

 

The Ugly

 

* Turn off the dot in the middle of the screen under options. This is what you focus on, and it helps to keep you from getting motion-sick. Without it I was green and spinny in about thirty seconds

 

Verdict: Rent

 

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/games/mirrors-edge-review.ars

Posted
You havent even played the demo.

 

so? dosent mean im not alowed to give an opinion. if i choose to make a decision based on reviews, all of whom seem to find the same faults, it's a fair bet i'd find the same faults. to me, the faults mentioned are critical given my situation financialy. the length is short, im not usualy won over by speed runs, so 40 quid for a weekend game is too much. the demo could be better then any game i've played, it won't change the fact that for a gamer on a budget, 40pounds is an unreasonadle price for 5-8 hours.


×
×
  • Create New...