deanb Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 It has a dot thing in the middle that is meant to negate motion sickness. As long as you're not glancing about while playing you should be fine. I also think the size of the screen plays a part in it too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 I never checked, can you turn that dot off? I've never gotten motion sick or dizzy from a game before, and I'd like to see if I'm completely immune or if turning the dot off might make me sick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted March 2, 2011 Report Share Posted March 2, 2011 Yeah I'm sure it's optional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SanaEquiesterer Posted March 3, 2011 Report Share Posted March 3, 2011 http://www.computerandvideogames.com/291633/news/ea-mirrors-edge-2-must-grow-franchise-audience/?cid=OTC-RSS&attr=CVG-General-RSS While I'm glad to see they're trying to surpass the original in terms of quality, their desire to make the sequel a big seller makes me a little nervous they could stray from their roots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
excel_excel Posted March 3, 2011 Report Share Posted March 3, 2011 I really enjoyed the story mode. The story itself was enjoyable for me, and I liked the cutscenes. The time trails just didn't do it for me though. You had to be perfect in those modes with the controls and everything. that's the point of the time trials. I know but it was god damn easy to fail, when jumping at a certain thing or sliding along a wall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockyRan Posted March 4, 2011 Report Share Posted March 4, 2011 http://www.computerandvideogames.com/291633/news/ea-mirrors-edge-2-must-grow-franchise-audience/?cid=OTC-RSS&attr=CVG-General-RSS While I'm glad to see they're trying to surpass the original in terms of quality, their desire to make the sequel a big seller makes me a little nervous they could stray from their roots. Yeah, I'm worried now. Every time someone says "make it sell moar", you bet your ass they're gonna just copy shit from other games to try to "appeal to a bigger market". I don't give a fuck if Mirror's Edge 2 appeals to 10 people, I want an unadulterated sequel with no corporate-meddling BS. I swear, if they shoehorn shitty multiplayer with "stunstreaks" and add copious amounts of explosions and boobs I'm gonna throw a backpack into a crowd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted March 4, 2011 Report Share Posted March 4, 2011 I swear to god... Mirror's Edge 1 already tried to sell to a mass-market audience, this is nothing new to the series. Actually, you know what? This is true for EVERY mainstream AAA game. Can we please stop being upset over mainstream games with huge budgets trying to make some money? It's nothing new and it ain't gonna change. The indie crowd is over THAT WAY. I hear Dejobaan games are making a semi-sequel to A Reckless Disregard For Gravity with music generation. It's called 1, 2, 3, Kick It! (Drop That Beat Like An Ugly Baby) and it looks incredible. If you want more projects that just try to make a really cool game instead of making a boatload of money, that's where you should look. Raging every time the mainstream industry mentions money (by the way, no other entertainment industry is nearly as open to their fans about this sort of thing as gaming. Maybe we could show some appreciation for that instead?) won't change shit and it perpetuates the stereotype of gamers as entitled little children. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockyRan Posted March 4, 2011 Report Share Posted March 4, 2011 (edited) And who the hell said anything about the indie crowd? I'm talking not selling out the the IP, which by the way was one of the best implementations of an original IP as far as mainstream games go. This isn't some stupid hunch of mine saying there are executive blowhards who don't know how to handle their IP's. We've already seen plenty of mediocre sequels to games with original premises that degenerate themselves into me-too copy cats of other, better selling IPs. The fact that you can't see it doesn't mean it's not happening. So what if Mirror's Edge 2 doesn't sell as well as Mass Effect 3? Who gives a shit? Mirror's Edge 1 wasn't a financial failure by any stretch of the imagination, so it's not like the reluctance to make the sequel lies in a loss of money, it lies in a misguided effort to make every single game attempt to have an enormous mainstream appeal, even if the IP is unconventional and inherently alienates specific crowds. Mirror's Edge was a well-funded, relatively experimental game by mainstream game standards, but there is absolutely no reason to shoehorn in "mass appeal" shit that doesn't belong in the game. Open your eyes. Edited March 4, 2011 by RockyRan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted March 5, 2011 Report Share Posted March 5, 2011 From my understanding Mirrors Edge was actually pretty cheap to make. It's not like it had heavy modelling, huge budget voice cast (or much a VA at all) And it made it's cah back and then some I imagine, since it sold over 2million copies. I'm with Rocky. Just make the game pretty much as it was first time around, fix up the controls a bit (they were laid out fine, just the contextual awareness of some of the actions wasn't up to par) and make it a tad longer. They don't need to do much at all to it. Just make another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted March 5, 2011 Report Share Posted March 5, 2011 Make the same game again? What a waste of development time! If you want Mirror's Edge, go play Mirror's Edge. I want to see where DICE can take the concept! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
excel_excel Posted March 5, 2011 Report Share Posted March 5, 2011 I'm with Johnny here. While I don't want them to dilute the concept I'd love for Mirror's Edge 2 to shake up the gameplay and design. I don't want a sequel to be just the same as the first one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted March 5, 2011 Report Share Posted March 5, 2011 Make the same game again?What a waste of development time! If you want Mirror's Edge, go play Mirror's Edge. I want to see where DICE can take the concept! But I've played the first one to death, have all the levels completely memorized. I would love it for them to keep the actual gameplay exactly the same (with some tweaks to the context-sensitive stuff like dean said) and just have a new plot, new environments, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted March 5, 2011 Report Share Posted March 5, 2011 Yeah, all it needs is a new plot, new places to go, maybe spice up the city a bit. If they start messing with the gameplay then it'll end up with a bit more shooting (cos shooting games make lots of money) and everything will be mapped to a couple of buttons to do everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted March 5, 2011 Report Share Posted March 5, 2011 (edited) I disagree. For one, I think they actually need to A ) make the shooting fun in some way, perhaps by integrating it better with the running and jumping elements of the game or B ) remove it entirely. In addition, they could go ahead and revise the hand-to-hand combat quite a bit. While it was better than the shooting, it really did feel a bit stale. I think my favourite bit of the game was points at which I was being chased by an overwhelming force with no choice but to run, and no time to turn around and check how far ahead I was. Too bad it had very little of that :/ Edited March 5, 2011 by Johnny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted March 5, 2011 Report Share Posted March 5, 2011 They could stand to refine the combat a little, but I wouldn't want them to make it any more prominent than it was in the first one. Trouble is, if they refine it, then they're going to want to make it more prominent to show off their improvements. I would rather they leave the combat the same and make it something you should generally avoid than improve it and give it more prominence. I think my favourite bit of the game was points at which I was being chased by an overwhelming force with no choice but to run, and no time to turn around and check how far ahead I was. I agree with this wholeheartedly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted March 5, 2011 Report Share Posted March 5, 2011 Yeah I think the shooting in the game was nicely paced. It was the kid bears amount of combat. Just needs a slightly longer gap on taking the guns out. I liked the bits where you're chasing the guy down across the rooftops. There needs to be a bit more chasing, a pace car as such, than just plain getting from A to B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 Disagree with Johnny's option A/B. The gun mechanics should be kept as is. No reloads, no aiming reticules, just iron sights or blind firing to make the enemy stop and take cover. Faith is a free runner, not a gun slinger after all, guns should be an absolute last resort and being able to play through without firing a shot should be possible. The combat could, perhaps should be improved, in fact, they could borrow some ideas from Assassin's Creed. Some throwing daggers (the bag drops can serve as ammo points) and a knife or some other sort of blade that can be easily deployed and retracted. You could then fight as the game suggests, burst out from knowhere, do some damage and be gone before the enemy catches on. In fact, another game they could stand to borrow from is Bushido Blade. Rather than getting in to a long, drawn out fight to the death, get in, severely damage a limb and then hop over a fence knowing that your enemy is too wounded to effectively pursue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 (edited) @Thursday Next: My idea of improving the shooting isn't exactly to make it more prominent. The problem with it as it is in Mirror's Edge 1 isn't that it's optional, but that it's incredibly boring when you start shooting people. The game slows down and momentarily becomes a really bad shooter. To me, and to everyone I've talked to about it, the game was much more fun with the restriction of not shooting. If it's the case that a gameplay element that most players would instinctively make use of makes the game boring, then you need to either change it or remove it. To be perfectly honest, as it is now it really DOESN'T feel like a last resort to me. You're not really punished for using the guns in any way. There's no trade-off apart from it being boring as all hell. And it's not like most gamers recognize this and put the restraint of not shooting on themselves instinctively either. Hell, I probably wouldn't have thought of it if I didn't hear of the achievement for it before-hand. Additionally, the idea that Faith should be carrying throwing knives with the express purpose of killing people with them feels very off to me. The first game didn't exactly portray the runners as cold-blooded killers. Edited March 7, 2011 by Johnny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 Yeah, I don't like the idea of the runner having a knife either (whether it would be Faith in a sequel or somebody else). And you can accomplish the same thing without them: a strategic kick to the side of the knee to hobble them before you flee. That's something that I think the combat could benefit from: focusing not on completely incapacitating your enemy, but on rendering them incapable of following. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 @ Johnny: Just threw the knives idea in there as you seemed to be pretty keen to have some form of weapons involved and I think they make a better alternative than guns, being quiet and what not. @Ethan: For sure, I think a way of quickly hobbling or incapacitating your opponents is what Faith needed in ME1. Getting involved in fights was frustrating when all you really wanted to do was blast past someone, disorientate them as you went and move on. One of the worst parts of the game for me, was when you were in the car park and had to knock out half a dozen baddies before you could proceed. It was jarring to say the least. I think a sequel could benefit from coop/competitive modes whereby you either work together to help each other, by opening gates, providing a step up etc (though you'd need to be careful not to slow down the pace too much...) or race against each other and close gates, trip switches etc. to slow your opponent and make them take a different route. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 I think a sequel could benefit from coop/competitive modes whereby you either work together to help each other, by opening gates, providing a step up etc (though you'd need to be careful not to slow down the pace too much...) or race against each other and close gates, trip switches etc. to slow your opponent and make them take a different route. That's an awesome idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 I think a sequel could benefit from coop/competitive modes whereby you either work together to help each other, by opening gates, providing a step up etc (though you'd need to be careful not to slow down the pace too much...) or race against each other and close gates, trip switches etc. to slow your opponent and make them take a different route. That's an awesome idea. The problem been while a good idea, there's probably a slip of paper somewhere saying that it's now no longer his idea Just been able it incapacitate people is a good idea. I think the games main focus should be on having a quick flow and pace. If at any point the game purposefully (so not like "you're shit and can't make the jump" way) blocks you for more than 5 seconds then it's done something wrong. should just be able to run up, kick them in the knees or punch em on the nose, then go on your way. Too often would scrapping with one guy mean someone else sneaks up on you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 (edited) Personally I think it would be really cool to take Mirror's Edge in a more open-ended direction. I'd love to just run around and explore a city in that engine. Not that I think it will happen. Edit @Thursday Next: Well there was the part of my post where I said that if they couldn't make the shooting more fun they should just remove it. I'm honestly not sure combat is something Mirror's Edge needs at all, but if it's there I'd rather it be fun. Edited March 7, 2011 by Johnny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 Personally I think it would be really cool to take Mirror's Edge in a more open-ended direction. I'd love to just run around and explore a city in that engine. Not that I think it will happen. Edit @Thursday Next: Well there was the part of my post where I said that if they couldn't make the shooting more fun they should just remove it. I'm honestly not sure combat is something Mirror's Edge needs at all, but if it's there I'd rather it be fun. Yeah I think I read your comment a little too quickly and only took away "Make guns moar betterer." rather than the far more sensible "Fix it or scrap it." I'm definitely in favour of scrapping it. I could see a case for a tazer (not the one you fire, the one you jab into people's ribs... well not you personally, unless you do...) or flash-bang as ways of dropping people quickly without being lethal. Didn't the baddies get sort of tazers towards the end of ME? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted March 7, 2011 Report Share Posted March 7, 2011 Tazer would be cool. It lets you accomplish the same thing as a knife, but I think fits in more with the whole runner concept. You do a slide, kick out somebody's knee, roll back up into a standing position, jab the next guy in the ribs with the tazer, and then keep running, all without ever breaking the pace. Cause yeah, I totally agree with dean that the pace needs to be fast, never broken, and that if you have to stop then there's something wrong (an exception to this being the elevators, which I thought were used well in the first one). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.