MoogleViper Posted February 18, 2011 Posted February 18, 2011 It was an interesting concept, but it didn't quite do anything more than that. A sequel might have been good though. It's hard to overstate my satisfaction of that song. I'll make a note of that. Battlefield is so far superior to COD it's actually hilarious. As is Medal of Honor. I cannot work out how CoD is so popular. It offers nothing that isn't done better by other games.
jayseven Posted February 18, 2011 Posted February 18, 2011 That article requires we be cushy with that website. What's the goss, quote-style?
Jamba Posted February 18, 2011 Posted February 18, 2011 That article requires we be cushy with that website. What's the goss, quote-style? goss? I don't get what you mean...
Cube Posted February 18, 2011 Posted February 18, 2011 I'll make a note of that. I'm GLaD someone noticed.
Mundi Posted February 18, 2011 Posted February 18, 2011 That article requires we be cushy with that website. What's the goss, quote-style? How about this then: http://www.gamesradar.com/xbox360/mirrors-edge/news/ea-mirrors-edge-is-an-important-franchise-nothing-to-announce-is-a-sequel-still-possible/a-2011021611923107092/g-20070710143455874025 Basically, Mirror's Edge ain't dead, DICE are making Battlefield 3 so maybe later.
The Peeps Posted February 18, 2011 Posted February 18, 2011 I thought Mirror's Edge was a fantastic game. The running/jumping etc parts were really well done, it didn't even need the combat sections but it did add a bit of panic to the mix. I liked how you were encouraged to disarm or run away rather than fight.
Choze Posted February 18, 2011 Posted February 18, 2011 I thought Mirror's Edge was a fantastic game. The running/jumping etc parts were really well done, it didn't even need the combat sections but it did add a bit of panic to the mix. I liked how you were encouraged to disarm or run away rather than fight. I think the game was great but the trophies were horridly chosen. If you wanted trophies in less play throughs you had to play the game in an irritating way.
Shorty Posted February 19, 2011 Posted February 19, 2011 So games should be designed to give you achievements/trophies as fast as possible? :p A strange way to review a game....
The Peeps Posted February 19, 2011 Posted February 19, 2011 I wouldn't know about trophies, I played the 360 version. I don't think I bothered with any achievements other than whatever I gained just from playing normally. Achievements aren't that big a deal for me.
Shorty Posted February 19, 2011 Posted February 19, 2011 I wouldn't know about trophies, I played the 360 version.They are identical.Achievements aren't that big a deal for me.You're weird.
The Peeps Posted February 19, 2011 Posted February 19, 2011 The only game where I've actually gone out of my way to get 100% achievements is blur. I like achievements but I'm not bothered about getting 100% If I can't get it through a normal play-through then I usually won't bother going back just for an arbitrary 'award'. I do think achievements are a good thing on the whole though and I'd miss them if they weren't there
Oxigen_Waste Posted February 19, 2011 Posted February 19, 2011 I never really understood what went on when developing ME. I mean, the first couple of levels are insanely good, but by the time it's over you can't help but hate the developers for making 75% of the game in dark underground tunnels and cluttering it with way too many unnecessary combat sections.
gaggle64 Posted February 19, 2011 Posted February 19, 2011 I never really understood what went on when developing ME. I mean, the first couple of levels are insanely good, but by the time it's over you can't help but hate the developers for making 75% of the game in dark underground tunnels and cluttering it with way too many unnecessary combat sections. I rather imagine it involved a phone call between DICE and EA that featured the questions "Another Battlefield game?" and "you want it finished by when?"
Recommended Posts