-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Mirrors Edge is a masterpiece. Mirrors Edge Catalyst? Not so much.
- Thread starter Acquiescence
- Start date
Mass_Pincup
Banned
In terms of pure parkour gameplay I don't see any game matching it.
For this to make any sense there would have to be games that have remotely tried to do the same thing (there are first-person platformers since, but they're mostly designed to be much simpler with the platforming as a transition between other things rather than the central mechanic). Never mind that a lot of people who love Mirror's Edge have played through it many times since release.
That's crazy talk. Mirror's Edge is a game people play and enjoy to this day.
Yeah the gameplay is fine but the combat and counters are trash. Not to mention some sequence in mirrors edge where it is unclear what you're supposed be doing.
To Far Away Times
Member
Great game then, great game now.
It's not flawless, but it is so good at it's core gameplay, and the audio/visual presentation is world class.
As someone who rarely replays games, I make sure it gets a play through every year.
Acquiescence
Member
It's kinda the opposite isn't it? A game that received a fair amount of stick when it came out, but over time has seen its reputation improve and its cultdom grow. I believe this is a significant reason as to why it got a sequel in the first place.
That's my point. The criticisms were mostly correct, will add some additional about this when I'm back at a computer and can just type it out.
Dropping in the content:
Games can try to do something different and not be a masterpiece. I'm not sure what that even means. And I love a lot of games that aren't masterpieces so I don't think that holds any water either. I love, love, love the hell out of Gladiator Begins but I realize that doesn't make it a masterpiece. I think it has the most engaging and interesting crafting and fighting mechanics I've seen in a game ever but that it excels in some ways doesn't mean the overall experience is worthy of being called a masterpiece.
Well, this is the really big flaw with the game. It SHOULD have been pure parkour gameplay (and I agree, it's unmatched there). However, they can't just let that gameplay be so they added a bunch of stuff to try to slow that down such as the gunplay, the ledge dangles and forced combat that really detract from the experience rather than being something interesting to break it up.
I know the OP mentioned this but he really undersold how distracting the combat is and how much it detracts from the game. It's a pretty short game in the first place and it's a pretty much omnipresent annoyance to have to deal with the police dudes and the forced moments are just not good.
I think it's a good game but calling it a masterpiece is overblowing it pretty hard.
Muppet of a Man
Member
Another example of why open world games are lazy game design: most people don't actually want open world (non-directed) gameplay; they actually want either well-crafted linear branching experiences or well-designed explorable "mazes" (a.k.a. Metroidvania) in terms of level design.
Games like The Last of Us and the first Mirror's Edge exemplify the first and games like Bloodborne exemplify the second, respectively.
Everything open world outside of the GTA series is absolute garbage.
Games like The Last of Us and the first Mirror's Edge exemplify the first and games like Bloodborne exemplify the second, respectively.
Everything open world outside of the GTA series is absolute garbage.
Admiral Snackbar
Member
I loved Catalyst, personally. The level designed suffered from not having the laser focus of the original but once it got moving it really did more than I thought it would have with the setting.
The music is pristine, Still Alive is always tops but goddamn the ambient tracks for the various zones in Catalyst are expressive. The end credits song, "Catalyst", in particular.
I liked the change to the world, the story was absurd but the right kind of absurd, the set pieces were stellar (especially at the end), the characters were more likable (Plastic, for sure) and the vibe maintained. It's not perfect, the combat is atrocious but it's such a small piece of the game. I respect the 7/10 reviews that it got but it doesn't sit there with me.
It's just fun to run. It's all I wanted.
The music is pristine, Still Alive is always tops but goddamn the ambient tracks for the various zones in Catalyst are expressive. The end credits song, "Catalyst", in particular.
I liked the change to the world, the story was absurd but the right kind of absurd, the set pieces were stellar (especially at the end), the characters were more likable (Plastic, for sure) and the vibe maintained. It's not perfect, the combat is atrocious but it's such a small piece of the game. I respect the 7/10 reviews that it got but it doesn't sit there with me.
It's just fun to run. It's all I wanted.
Crash55118
Member
Catalyst was a better playing game.
That said, it has maybe the worst narrative I've ever played. Literally every part of it had me rolling my eyes.
That said, it has maybe the worst narrative I've ever played. Literally every part of it had me rolling my eyes.
Damn Silly
Member
I love the first Mirror's Edge, but I also love Catalyst. I just love running around in both games.
Oh, and Plastic's one of my favourite characters this year.
Oh, and Plastic's one of my favourite characters this year.
Oh look this stupid argument again. If I can go and play it right now and its good, its not nostalgia. And spoiler alert
I did and its a good game
Ennosuke
Member
Well, the game was my most anticipated gamem and the beta on my xbox one completely killed that love. I still bought it for PC and this was a game changer. Because on ultra it looks absolutely gorgeous and despite the more futuristic look, I still feel "at home". In addition we have the OST which is as well amazing.
Too much hyperbole in the discussion, the game does a few things differently, but it still has the same qualities. We still have the linear levels, but now you can also run around and explore the world. Why is running in a game about running so bad?
It offered me more or less the same as the original game and I was huge fan. There are things we can discuss, but as I said too much hyperbole.
Too much hyperbole in the discussion, the game does a few things differently, but it still has the same qualities. We still have the linear levels, but now you can also run around and explore the world. Why is running in a game about running so bad?
It offered me more or less the same as the original game and I was huge fan. There are things we can discuss, but as I said too much hyperbole.
You're not wrong about the "running away" thing; the sections where you're being chased by choppers and can run in literally any direction to escape were great. Probably the best use of the open-world that the game provided.
As for not expecting the game "to be something it's not", you immediately address that in your edit; the game parades around proclaiming itself an open-world game, despite barely using that aspect of itself, and even actively fighting players who try to do so themselves. You can definitely ignore it and follow that red line like a good player (which I ultimately ended up doing most of the time), but it's a bummer when the game could've either A) just done what the first game did, or B) actually used the open world in a way that made sense.
I don't want to be fast travelling in a Mirror's Edge game. It's a game that focuses almost entirely on the joy of movement, and I'm supposed to exchange that for clicking a point on a map?
I'm the sort of player who switches objectives constantly; I'll do a main mission here, a side mission there, a challenge or time trial somewhere else, and I want to be able to run from one side of the map to the other, because this is a game about running places.
The trials and side missions had the right idea, but when your "open world" is broken up into ten pieces we're not expected to run between, how is that different from just picking one of ten levels to play from a menu?
I mean, to me, this is akin to getting mad at the warp stars in Super Mario Galaxy because *this game is about jumping, and I want to jump to planet to planet*. Traversal is the mechanic, not getting to a place. If you need to get to a place easily, and traversal isn't a great way to do it, you fast travel, and traverse when traversing is fun.
I admit, it mildly "breaks the illusion", a little bit, but if riding a horse with a sense of adventure is part of a game, then any fast travel would kill it, right? RDR, Witcher, whatever, all losing something.
If it's ten little mini open worlds, what's wrong with that? Each is still plenty large enough for exploration and route discovery in spades. (It's more like six, though.)
Wowfunhappy
Member
But if you're following the red path, the game is doing exactly what the first game did. Except with better set pieces.
I'm not the one who said it's a masterpiece (and I agree it's too flawed as a whole to classify for that, although it's certainly top-tier in few areas). That wasn't the argument you made.
It was actually. "It's not that good" meant not good enough to call a masterpiece not that it's just a bad game.
Im still looking for the specific source. However in the polygon feature a fair way in there is a quote from Patric Soderlund about how EA is going in an open world direction and that Catalyst will be a great learning experience for DICE.
So thats definitely circumstantial evidence that coroborates that statement. Towards the end in a section titled The Future.
http://www.polygon.com/2016/5/25/11758974/designing-mirrors-edge-the-making-of-a-franchise
Edit. Cant post the actual quote because im on mobile. But its there
Edit: while not the original source i was looking for this GAF thread hilighting quotes from the polygon article essentially supports this
http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1223770
Particularly paragraphs 4 and 5 of the first polygon quote
Mass_Pincup
Banned
The thing is, the reliance on gunplay and combat in the game is pretty much completely tied with the way the player choose to play. From what I recall, most instance of combat and gunplay are optional.
It's not that I don't want there to be the option of fast travel, I just don't want to have to use it. This is a game that's set in a single area of one city, about runners who deliver messages within that single area of that one city. In a game where finding your own route is so key to the fun, it should be totally viable for me to do that without having to follow a single, very specific path.
There's nothing wrong with it in isolation, but an open world it isn't. I think hub world is the going term for that sort of thing.
Like I said initially, I actually did have some fun with Catalyst. I don't even think it's a bad game. I've got a food analogy for this one, bear with me.
Imagine you go to a restaurant to order your favourite food, which is like a burger or something. You've had this burger before, and it was amazing, and you want to try it again.
The waiter then tells you that now it actually comes with a side of chips, which is great, because you really like chips too. The plate comes out and it looks amazing; the burger and the chips go great together.
But when you try the chips, they taste like nothing. There's no flavour at all. The burger is still great, but now half the plate is taken up by this thing that looked so good initially, but actually contributes nothing of substance.
Sure, you can ignore the chips and just eat the burger, but you can't help be disappointed that something that seemed like the perfect companion to your burger turned out to be a waste of time at best, and even a little deceptive at worst.
Langdon Alger
Banned
Whoa.
Played through it yesterday.
There are 6 non optional combat encounters
1. The tutorial
2. A single button press QTE at the end of
Ropeburn
4. A boss fight
5. In
the server room
6. The final moment/cutscene of the game.
Aside from that there are 2 areas where using the melee combat feels mandatory. Once on the boat, and once mid game where 3 swat enemies zipline down. Although that is possible to avoid
What about the parking garage?
Also, I think you should consider what people will experience within a first play through vs what some speed runner that's played the game for 300 hours experiences. Technically feasible doesn't mean you aren't going to experience a mostly combat free Mirror's Edge as your every day player.
In the final chapter?
Its all avoidable. You just run towards the elevator, break the glass and get in. (While dodging gunfire)
The speedrun time for that chapter requires you to be done with that part of the level in under 2 minutes. Thats impossible if you fight people
Saw your edit.
Id agree with you. However the "Mirrors Edge is a masterpiece" sentiment comes from people with multiple playthroughs. Who have learned the mechanics enough to be able to go fast.
I think my first playthrough was 8-10 hours and i got incredibly lost. But i enjoyed the mechanics enough that i tried some of the time trial sections. Then when i went back to the game i beat it in sub 5 hours.
Then i started trying to do some of the chapter speedruns. And eventually got to the point where my combined chapter split times are all within a minute or two of the recomended times
except the boat. Which i suck at
i dont think its fair to mark down a game due to it being hard
No one would criticise a masterpiece by a classical composer like bach or beethoven because a novice muscian couldnt play one of their compositions.
Yet obviously this scenario grestly effected mirrors edge in its review scores
You say that like Sleeping Dogs isn't better than any GTA game
stn
Member
Huge fan of the first, just beat Catalyst. The running remains great but the combat in this one was AWFUL. Wow, just awful. Music still good as ever, love the futuristic look and everything else. The first got a 9/10 from me, this one more of a 7/10. Its pretty decent and I'm glad I beat it, but they really butchered the combat hard.
It had to have come out and actually be a classic to be considered in the vein of nostalgia. It doesn't feel like that long ago to me. The flaws that were present in the original game were still flaws regardless of how much i liked the art direction or the music, and this game apparently has its own set of flaws.
A shame that they waited for so long and the reasoning apparently was they really wanted to get it right to bring back the IP and give it a second chance, but they ended up not really improving anything and dooming the franchise for certain.
matrix-cat
Member
I love Mirror's Edge, it was my first ever Platinum Trophy. Played it for a solid month to 3 star every time trial and beat every speed run, tearing my hair out when I'd miss by fractions of a second but loving every minute of it. But it is absolutely not a masterpiece. It has frustratingly unclear level design that leads to you getting killed in chase sequences because you had no idea where the game expected you to go. Some levels (like the Atrium) are absolute bliss, while others (like the Ship) are tedious ordeals full of first-person ledge shimmying where you just stare at a steel ledge from three inches away hoping Faith isn't just not going to grab the next ledge when you jump like did has the last three times. It was a fantastic concept, and for the most part it was executed brilliantly, but by no means whatsoever was it perfect. When you go back and play it today, skipping the awful cutscenes and having basically memorised the quickest routes through all the levels so you no longer experience those initial frustrations, yeah, you have a great time, but think about how clunky that game can be for a first-timer.
Catalyst is also no masterpiece. For everything it does right (and it does a lot right), it seems to take a step backwards, too. The parkour feels incredible, taking the first game's system to dizzying new heights and feeling amazing. Being able to springboard off any waist-high object is an absolute game changer, one I struggled to give up when I went back to replay the first game. Being able to combo more moves together wtihout landing, like stringing springboards into wallruns into second wallruns, is an absolute joy. The climbing speed upgrade was a great idea, as was the ever so slight magnetism they added so that you'll no longer miss grabbing onto pipes because you were a hair off target. There's a noticeable downgrade in the first person animations (Old Faith felt like an actual person, whereas Nu Faith feels like a floating camera), but gameplay-wise Catalyst is just sublime.
I think Catalyst's combat system is actually great, too, but it's held back by the inane decision to lock all the most useful moves away in the XP skill tree. You need all those damage buffs and the Switch Places move to enjoy fighting guys, but you aren't allowed to have them until you've got enough XP, which is just stupid. Catalyst absolutely did not need any of that rubbish; it's to the game's direct detriment. Once you're fully upgraded, with your Focus Shield solving the first game's problem of being shot while you're just trying to run, and all your new fighting abilities making combat on the run an actual possibility, there's a lot of fun to be had.
The open world comes into its own in the Dashes, where a simple point-A-to-point-B objective becomes a matter of finding the best route through the city and then executing on it. At any other time, though, the open world just feels like "Well, AAA games are open world these days so we did one, too". That shotgun spatter of useless collectibles, the shoehorned XP system, the abundance of side content that (apart from the excellent Grid Leaks) are all just variations on racing; it's a total waste.
And the story is terrible. I think Mirror's Edge's story is one of the most forgettable, laughably uninteresting video game stories I've ever experienced, so imagine my horror when Catalyst's turned out to be worse. It doesn't even manage to end on a high note again. In the first game you kick a motherfucker out of a helicopter and have a first person hug with your sister; it's fucking rad. In Catalyst you watch Faith fight two final bosses in a cutscene while you sit there twiddling your thumbs, and then the ending is basically "Yeah, nothing I did meant anything, but buy the sequel that we hope EA will let us make and maybe something will happen next time".
Anyway, long story short, I love elements of both games, but I don't believe either one really nails what it set out to do. I can totally appreciate people being more disappointed with Catalyst, because the expectations for a sequel coming out eight years later are naturally higher, but I think it's nuts to act like there's such a huge gulf in quality between the two games. I think there is a masterpiece to be made by combining bits and pieces of both games, though. Maybe in another eight years Mirror's Edge 3 will finally hit the jackpot.
Catalyst is also no masterpiece. For everything it does right (and it does a lot right), it seems to take a step backwards, too. The parkour feels incredible, taking the first game's system to dizzying new heights and feeling amazing. Being able to springboard off any waist-high object is an absolute game changer, one I struggled to give up when I went back to replay the first game. Being able to combo more moves together wtihout landing, like stringing springboards into wallruns into second wallruns, is an absolute joy. The climbing speed upgrade was a great idea, as was the ever so slight magnetism they added so that you'll no longer miss grabbing onto pipes because you were a hair off target. There's a noticeable downgrade in the first person animations (Old Faith felt like an actual person, whereas Nu Faith feels like a floating camera), but gameplay-wise Catalyst is just sublime.
I think Catalyst's combat system is actually great, too, but it's held back by the inane decision to lock all the most useful moves away in the XP skill tree. You need all those damage buffs and the Switch Places move to enjoy fighting guys, but you aren't allowed to have them until you've got enough XP, which is just stupid. Catalyst absolutely did not need any of that rubbish; it's to the game's direct detriment. Once you're fully upgraded, with your Focus Shield solving the first game's problem of being shot while you're just trying to run, and all your new fighting abilities making combat on the run an actual possibility, there's a lot of fun to be had.
The open world comes into its own in the Dashes, where a simple point-A-to-point-B objective becomes a matter of finding the best route through the city and then executing on it. At any other time, though, the open world just feels like "Well, AAA games are open world these days so we did one, too". That shotgun spatter of useless collectibles, the shoehorned XP system, the abundance of side content that (apart from the excellent Grid Leaks) are all just variations on racing; it's a total waste.
And the story is terrible. I think Mirror's Edge's story is one of the most forgettable, laughably uninteresting video game stories I've ever experienced, so imagine my horror when Catalyst's turned out to be worse. It doesn't even manage to end on a high note again. In the first game you kick a motherfucker out of a helicopter and have a first person hug with your sister; it's fucking rad. In Catalyst you watch Faith fight two final bosses in a cutscene while you sit there twiddling your thumbs, and then the ending is basically "Yeah, nothing I did meant anything, but buy the sequel that we hope EA will let us make and maybe something will happen next time".
Anyway, long story short, I love elements of both games, but I don't believe either one really nails what it set out to do. I can totally appreciate people being more disappointed with Catalyst, because the expectations for a sequel coming out eight years later are naturally higher, but I think it's nuts to act like there's such a huge gulf in quality between the two games. I think there is a masterpiece to be made by combining bits and pieces of both games, though. Maybe in another eight years Mirror's Edge 3 will finally hit the jackpot.
rackham
Banned
I refuse to play it. Why bother redesigning Faith? Why bother removing the gun play. Faith wasn't a marksman so of course shooting would be slightly clunky. I don't think they intended it play poorly but it worked in the sense of her world.
Mirrors edge is one of the few games that pops up every year in graphics threads
Mirrors edge is one of the few games that pops up every year in graphics threads
ElectricKaibutsu
Member
This thread is so sad to read as I loved the original so much. I guess I'll just stick to playing the original and Refunct over and over.
For me the original was fantastic. Catalyst was good, but just good.
The worst bit for me is I didn't follow the game pre-release and trying to make sense of the story as you play is super confusing.
At first I assumed it was a sequel, because a lot characters talk about your past and how good a runner you are. Also having a sequel just seems logical.
Then I thought it was a prequel because character wise it made sense.
Then things change and I realised it was a reboot. However it made the game really disorientating. Even now I still seem to see it referred to as a prequel and a reboot in different places.
The worst bit for me is I didn't follow the game pre-release and trying to make sense of the story as you play is super confusing.
At first I assumed it was a sequel, because a lot characters talk about your past and how good a runner you are. Also having a sequel just seems logical.
Then I thought it was a prequel because character wise it made sense.
Then things change and I realised it was a reboot. However it made the game really disorientating. Even now I still seem to see it referred to as a prequel and a reboot in different places.
Acquiescence
Member
That's exactly how I rate them both. I know the OP might paint a different picture, but I did like Catalyst overall. It provided many of the same thrills as its predecessor, just not nearly at the same consistent rate. A 7 out of 10 game is a lot harder to sing the praises of when the entry before it is a 9.
At least Mario doesnt have bad combat. I liked the first few acts of original Mirrors Edge, but hated it when it came down to less platforming, more combat.
Imo Dying Light is one game that came very close to parkour in first person. The only thing you can't do that you can in Mirrors Edge is wall run, you can wall climb however. But you do have a lot more stuff thst you can do that you cant in Mirror's Edge.
Dying Light also uses its open world for parkour so much better than Mirrors Edge Catalyst.
Dying Light also uses its open world for parkour so much better than Mirrors Edge Catalyst.
Fox Mulder
Member
Wut.
It was always a flawed game but loved for what it was.
If anything, I'm nostalgic for the EA of that time, who was putting out great shit like dead space, skate, mass effect, burnout paradise, and mirrors edge.
PedroLumpy
Member
When it was first announced, there was someone posting here involved in development. I asked if there was going to be XP grinding BS in Catalyst. Didn't get an answer of course, but deep down I think we all knew.
Buttonbasher
Member
There isn't XP "Grinding" though... You unlock virtually everything just by playing the campaign, unlocking new abilities as the game design needs you to (ala Metroid Prime). Seriously. It's one of the least offensive open world games I've played in a long time, in terms of needless collectibles and content bogging you down. Also Ubisoft didn't make this game.
I fully agree.
Many will disagree, but I think it just like it was with Dragon Age: Every game got something right and a other things very wrong, but my overall experience with them was almost equally good.
I think the fact that they couldn't manage to nail the open world aspect turned a lot of people off. Even if it didn't ruin the game, its mere existence (aswell as unlockable moves) was enough to write it off and that's where it stands right now.
panama chief
Member
Thanks for saving me $30 OP
PedroLumpy
Member
Oops, yeah it was EA, what the hell was I thinking.
Maybe 'grinding' is a bad choice of words. That there's any unlock system at all is real shitty.I loved how in the demo for the first Mirror's edge, I could do everything, I just needed the skill to use it effectively.
Nico_D
Member
I disagree respectfully. Having finished this just last week I think it is at least on par with the original.
I don't care about graphics but the game itself was pretty much what the original was - without the forced (yes, it was possible to do pacifist but it was nigh impossible during that one mission) gunplay.
Combat is Catalyst wasn't the best design decision but towards the end after having upgraded the enemies were pushovers so it wasn't a big deal for me. You could easily deal with closer to 10 enemies without dying. I didn't like how the game forced it on players couple of times but it is what it is.
I generally dislike open-worlds but in Catalyst it gives me opportunity to just run - which is kinda the point of the game - and have silly fun, trying to keep it flawless as long as I can without having to replay actual missions. Traversal is as fun as ever though sometimes it was slightly unaccurate like when trying to jump to a window or something. Few times I lost some races because the runner's vision wasn't working properly.
Missions were generally designed very well, there were some really great levels like the building under construction.
Story was regular stuff, nothing spectacular there but nothing as bad as people are saying. Basic story of a basic game with a twist you knew from the beginning. I didn't play this for the story.
In my opinion Catalyst improved on the original while keeping some oddities and adding some new ones. It's a entertaining game which I will keep in my collection in case I want to have some silly fun.
I don't care about graphics but the game itself was pretty much what the original was - without the forced (yes, it was possible to do pacifist but it was nigh impossible during that one mission) gunplay.
Combat is Catalyst wasn't the best design decision but towards the end after having upgraded the enemies were pushovers so it wasn't a big deal for me. You could easily deal with closer to 10 enemies without dying. I didn't like how the game forced it on players couple of times but it is what it is.
I generally dislike open-worlds but in Catalyst it gives me opportunity to just run - which is kinda the point of the game - and have silly fun, trying to keep it flawless as long as I can without having to replay actual missions. Traversal is as fun as ever though sometimes it was slightly unaccurate like when trying to jump to a window or something. Few times I lost some races because the runner's vision wasn't working properly.
Missions were generally designed very well, there were some really great levels like the building under construction.
Story was regular stuff, nothing spectacular there but nothing as bad as people are saying. Basic story of a basic game with a twist you knew from the beginning. I didn't play this for the story.
In my opinion Catalyst improved on the original while keeping some oddities and adding some new ones. It's a entertaining game which I will keep in my collection in case I want to have some silly fun.
BlitzerRadic
Member
I think Dying Light has a pretty good open world.
This thread came at the right time for me. Big ME1 fan. Been at Catalyst for about 6 hours...
What was great about Mirror's Edge? I played it once, and it still sticks with me: satisfying, well controlled parkour gameplay in scenarios that are usually either urgent or puzzle-esque, sometimes with sometimes without enemies. But these linear crafted levels usually had some purpose and the way to go was usually fairly clear, it just came down to you using your parkour skills to get there. Hence the satisfaction. They kept it changed up enough to remain interesting.
Could faith use guns? Yes, but she wasn't a marksman, gunplay was rightfully sloppy-- but most encounters you could, by and large, avoid-- as you should. It made sense; Faith is not The Terminator, she should be running past enemies, maybe shoving them aside or at most tripping them off buildings. That the game allowed gunplay at all seems to have been a concession to certain gamers who either couldn't effectively 'run past' everything and got 'stuck' fighting, or, a concession to gamers who assume that any first person game with guns requires shooting and killing all the things. The point is, the combat was largely avoidable and, at no point did it feel like it overshadowed the good parts of the game (the satisfying platforming/parkour)
Mirror's Edge Catalyst:
The combat is BETTER in this game! Yes, it is! Now to explain:
The combat is simple, but it *makes sense* for Faith: She hits fast and light, she has a few moves involving shoving or avoiding enemies while maintaining momentum, and in some cases she can subdue an enemy by parkouring off a wall or ledge and crushing them from above. That's awesome! It's easy enough to control/execute and it makes sense that a light footed, thin athlete can only give light shoves, basic CQC, and kick around fully armed, equipped, and armored heavy infantry type opponents as she tries to run blazing past them.....
....and THAT is where the game design goes wrong!
It's not *the combat* that is bad, it's the fact that they felt the *need* to set up several scenarios where you are basically locked up in a big box with 5 some odd of these heavily armed and armored guys and are required to slowly grind them down until they're all defeated. And in some cases, they send them in several waves of ~5 of these things. WHYYY. If it were like ME1 you could use the new combat moves to shove guys aside as you blazed past, maybe occasionally wall run and crush a dude from above, or periodically knock one off a ledge.
But no... "Faith, where are you going?" >> "Back to the Lair. To take out 10 or 20 or 30 of these highly trained weapon-toting KrugerSec who literally just demolished our base of operations.. by myself... with nothing but my ninja shoes... because I can't wait until later after the KrugerSec presence has died down to disable the tower they put up there. Cus I'm angry and suicidal!"
The combat is well suited to avoidance, but they force you into these long, aggravating encounters to beat up these types until they're all gone and just GUGHGHHG I want to smash my keyboard.
The open world? Pretty bad. With ME1, you were constantly being given interesting new 'courses' of sorts, with new dangers or objectives or light puzzles to parkour your way through under different circumstances. The new Open World design here is an exercise in tedium. Because the open world mostly exists to connect story mission points or other nonsense, the platforming you conduct between them is far less interesting and thus less satisfying than the series of 'levels' or 'missions' you go through in Mirror's Edge one. It feels like by-the-numbers platforming in the game. Especially if you have to backtrack over the same areas.
The overworld is also cluttered with crap. I find the ... grid leaks(?) to be pointless diversions to try and give the mostly boring (skill-wise) overworld something to try and 'get' to keep it interesting; but the carrot for that stick seems super arbitrary. And those computer chips you find in those terminals? I feel like there's hundreds of them and since they ask you to collect them so early on, I have forgotten what they're for. At this point I couldn't care less how many of those little chips I find, it feels like a waste of time.
At least the controls and general parkour moves and mechanics are still great. They're just underutilized and made to feel repetitive due to the game design. And the forced "defeat all the thugs" missions just totally ruin the flow of everything and are aggravating and make no sense story-wise or gameplay-wise.
Super disappointed by all this.
What was great about Mirror's Edge? I played it once, and it still sticks with me: satisfying, well controlled parkour gameplay in scenarios that are usually either urgent or puzzle-esque, sometimes with sometimes without enemies. But these linear crafted levels usually had some purpose and the way to go was usually fairly clear, it just came down to you using your parkour skills to get there. Hence the satisfaction. They kept it changed up enough to remain interesting.
Could faith use guns? Yes, but she wasn't a marksman, gunplay was rightfully sloppy-- but most encounters you could, by and large, avoid-- as you should. It made sense; Faith is not The Terminator, she should be running past enemies, maybe shoving them aside or at most tripping them off buildings. That the game allowed gunplay at all seems to have been a concession to certain gamers who either couldn't effectively 'run past' everything and got 'stuck' fighting, or, a concession to gamers who assume that any first person game with guns requires shooting and killing all the things. The point is, the combat was largely avoidable and, at no point did it feel like it overshadowed the good parts of the game (the satisfying platforming/parkour)
Mirror's Edge Catalyst:
The combat is BETTER in this game! Yes, it is! Now to explain:
The combat is simple, but it *makes sense* for Faith: She hits fast and light, she has a few moves involving shoving or avoiding enemies while maintaining momentum, and in some cases she can subdue an enemy by parkouring off a wall or ledge and crushing them from above. That's awesome! It's easy enough to control/execute and it makes sense that a light footed, thin athlete can only give light shoves, basic CQC, and kick around fully armed, equipped, and armored heavy infantry type opponents as she tries to run blazing past them.....
....and THAT is where the game design goes wrong!
It's not *the combat* that is bad, it's the fact that they felt the *need* to set up several scenarios where you are basically locked up in a big box with 5 some odd of these heavily armed and armored guys and are required to slowly grind them down until they're all defeated. And in some cases, they send them in several waves of ~5 of these things. WHYYY. If it were like ME1 you could use the new combat moves to shove guys aside as you blazed past, maybe occasionally wall run and crush a dude from above, or periodically knock one off a ledge.
But no... "Faith, where are you going?" >> "Back to the Lair. To take out 10 or 20 or 30 of these highly trained weapon-toting KrugerSec who literally just demolished our base of operations.. by myself... with nothing but my ninja shoes... because I can't wait until later after the KrugerSec presence has died down to disable the tower they put up there. Cus I'm angry and suicidal!"
The combat is well suited to avoidance, but they force you into these long, aggravating encounters to beat up these types until they're all gone and just GUGHGHHG I want to smash my keyboard.
The open world? Pretty bad. With ME1, you were constantly being given interesting new 'courses' of sorts, with new dangers or objectives or light puzzles to parkour your way through under different circumstances. The new Open World design here is an exercise in tedium. Because the open world mostly exists to connect story mission points or other nonsense, the platforming you conduct between them is far less interesting and thus less satisfying than the series of 'levels' or 'missions' you go through in Mirror's Edge one. It feels like by-the-numbers platforming in the game. Especially if you have to backtrack over the same areas.
The overworld is also cluttered with crap. I find the ... grid leaks(?) to be pointless diversions to try and give the mostly boring (skill-wise) overworld something to try and 'get' to keep it interesting; but the carrot for that stick seems super arbitrary. And those computer chips you find in those terminals? I feel like there's hundreds of them and since they ask you to collect them so early on, I have forgotten what they're for. At this point I couldn't care less how many of those little chips I find, it feels like a waste of time.
At least the controls and general parkour moves and mechanics are still great. They're just underutilized and made to feel repetitive due to the game design. And the forced "defeat all the thugs" missions just totally ruin the flow of everything and are aggravating and make no sense story-wise or gameplay-wise.
Super disappointed by all this.