Support NeoGAF

[chrominance]

I'm playing through the original for the first time right now and the combat sections are terrible. The sequel is really worse?

They're terrible in very different ways. In the original, combat is often used as a roadblock, and you never feel particularly capable of holding your own. Even the act of picking up and firing a gun feels mechanically awkward, possibly intentionally so. A lot of times, combat feels like a delayed game over screen, especially later in the game.

In Catalyst, combat is improved in the sense that you're much more capable as a fighter, and guns are less of an issue in that you don't use them at all and it's not an automatic win button for enemies. But it's still used a lot as a roadblock, and the new system is clunky in its own peculiar way. It's still not particularly fun to engage with, either.

 

[Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew]

Such a disaster. It's probably completely killed the series.

I'm not too surprised they bollocksed up the design, but the visuals should have been an easy win. Why did they make it so visually cluttered?

It's a great example of a sequel where all they needed to do was remedy some of the glaring shortcomings of the original, but instead they went in an entirely different and far less interesting direction.

The same game again with the rough bits smoothed out was exactly what we needed, but we got an utter mess of a game instead.

It's as if they looked at why we wanted the series, looked at what is making EA money these days, and try to blend them both, hoping the game turns out okay...

They definitely killed the series, and it sucks because it was already a dead series being revived. Fell off my radar faster than I can say the name.

 

[jrush64]

The game just felt soulless. Completely missed what made the original great.

 

[RSB]

Yep, I enjoyed Catalyst quite a bit, but it's definitely not as good as the masterpiece that is the original Mirror's Edge.

I've replayed the original Mirror's Edge dozens of times, and I'll still replay it many more times in the future. I can't really see myself doing the same with Catalyst, unfortunately.

 

[Fractal]

I'm playing through the original for the first time right now and the combat sections are terrible. The sequel is really worse?

The decision to go open world introduces a new share of problems, but no, it's definitely not worse, especially if you're worried about combat. While the combat is still pretty bad, there's very little of it this time around and it's fast, easy and forgiving. There's nothing even remotely bad and frustrating like the later sections of the original.

 

[kiguel182]

Catalyst, you insist to pull me down.

Best post of this thread.

 

[ZombiePlatypus]

Massive shame they had to dampen it's appeal with shoehorning open world into it.

 

[Robert at Zeboyd Games]

ME was great and i really mean great game but masterpiece? Sorry but no, with that story, combat, length and few other things.

Story & combat, I'll give you (but don't matter much in the long run), but length? Nah. Yeah, the story mode only takes about 5-8 hours, but the real fun is in the post-story content where the game turns into the coolest non-traditional arcade racing game ever.

Mirror's Edge + Open-World actually makes a lot of sense - ditch the story entirely and just make it into Crazy Taxi but with parkour.

 

[Senoculum]

That's a big write-up, so I'll likely read it later when I get home...

However, I personally liked Catalyst, and I think it's a bargain if you can get a good price. It's a 7/10 game, and I think it's a shame that this generation tries very hard to suppress these kinds of titles that are an excellent way to spend a week.

There's a good presentation to witness here, and the set designs are "awe-inspiring" if a little lacking with oomph. And what I mean by that is the story is sorely trying to impress, but I didn't realise I was entering the final level until I reached the final boss. There definitely was something missing, and it all boils down to storytelling. They never quite sell the importance of what you're accomplishing, even though everything is gorgeous. I don't think it was "cluttered" at all. The level designs are nice and polished, to be honest... There's just not a lot of game aside from doing stunts and running. I think DICE proved that they're the masters at control and sound design, and ME: Catalyst is a very nice addition to their resume.

In my mind, for a third one, they better make you get down and explore the street level with interactive crowds, and they should bring back guns... seriously.

 

[squall23]

Does Catalyst have the same style of music as the original? The music was one of my favourite things about the game.

 

[Mush]

I just ordered Catalyst last night

Ah well, the original was one of my favourite games of last gen and I enjoyed the limited amount I played in the beta (the running aspects, not the collectathon bits).

 

[Angry Fork]

The first Mirror's Edge felt like a glorified tech demo for an idea that should've been a smaller aspect in a bigger/different game. The weird hindsight praise makes zero sense to me as I recall many people basically feeling the same way about the 1st game. Any sequel to this game would've had problems because of the gameplay rules established in the 1st.

The original Prey 2 demo is an example of a game that could've used the kind of gameplay Mirror's Edge offered, but rather than that being the entire aspect to the game it's a smaller part of a larger RPG-based type game.

 

[mishakoz]

I'll weigh in.

I loved Mirrors edge 1. The sister sister plot was great, I even liked the weird 2d cutscene. When Catylst was announced I literally exploded with joy.

But I haven't really gone thru Catalyst at all. I don't think the open world served the gameplay style, I don't think the writing is great and there are some super stupid decisions. The art style still shines but there is a lot of reuse.

It just isn't the same game I imagined when I imagine Mirrors edge 2. I think I'll go home and play some more tonight but I'm just not excited to continue.

 

[The Illiterati]

I am in complete agreement with the OP. I loved the first game. Couldn't finish the second, I hated the gameplay so much. Mainly due to the combat. I beat the first game without firing a shot, on my first run. This game, my momentum is constantly slowed and stopped by these stupid melee combat battles.

 

[sonicmj1]

I feel like half of the people complaining about open world in this thread didn't even play it.

The main missions and some of the major side missions feature the traditional focused linear design, and they're fantastic. Between those missions, running around the open world is fun, and completely in line with the concept and ethos of freerunning.

The game had some problems, but I personally had a great time with it.

That's basically my takeaway from playing the game as well.

The open world messes up the tight pacing of the original, and the combat is pretty much one step forwards and one step back. But it feels as good to run as it ever has, the main missions (and gridNodes) are as good as anything in the first game, and I honestly like having a huge open area to mess around with. It's nice to have some space to breathe with the mechanics.

I'm happy to have bought it.

 

[jdstorm]

I'm playing through the original for the first time right now and the combat sections are terrible. The sequel is really worse?

In the first game the combat sections are all avoidable. Just run right past every enemy. You only have to fight maybe 5 total enemies and one is a boss fight.

The sequel isnt worse. In many ways the combat is better. The biggest issue for most who loved the first is that its a complete genre change.

Mirrors Edge is practically a first person portal/sonic hybrid.
MIRRORS Edge Catalyst is a first person brawler with Metroidvania design masquerading as an open world.

Its different. I love the first game and consider it one of the best games ever made. It had big ideas, and if the player can figure out what they are its truely unmatched as an experience.

Catalyst has similar big ideas. Unfortunately it through out most of what made the first game special and started from scratch. So you have another 7/10 game with huge ambition.

However player skill cant overcome the flaws of Catalyst. So ultimately it remains an unrealised idea.

 

[HueyFreeman]

Said it before, and I'll say it again: Catalyst should have taken the wide-linear level design approach, ala Uncharted 4.

This would have solved a number of problems: the filler tasks in the open world, the pointless travel time between destinations, focused the story by making it feel like your actions all matter, improved the graphics by removing the open world graphical dilemmas, all while still maintaining multiple approaches and solutions to problems.

I won't argue about the lacklustre music either - I honestly think that, consciously or unconsciously, this is why the general emotional response to Catalyst has been so largely negative, with words commonly being thrown about like "soulless." The music in the first game moved you; this, not so much.

That being said, I still think the game did some things well and I'm glad I supported it at launch so that maybe, just maybe, they might be able to take another crack at it. (EA recently said it actually did meet their expectations, so there's still a modicum of hope). But DICE needs to re-focus - I understand the market forces that created this open world mess, but ultimately it probably worked against the game's sales performance through a largely mixed critical reception.

 

[Menitta]

I enjoyed Catalyst just fine. I loved running around the open world, and there were a lot of really fun moments. But yeah, Mirrors Edge 1 was better overall. Adding open world didn't add too much to the game.

I hate this thought because I know it won't happen, but I bet they'd nail it with the sequel.

 

[RoaringMdog]

I really really enjoyed Catalyst. It had its flaws, but the gameplay made up for them. Running around the city was just so much fun to me once i mastered all the systems. But then again, i also loved the first game from the second i started playing it. And i remember people shitting on it hard back then, but so many people came around on it later..wonder if the same thing will happen here.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

I'm honestly still surprised EA greenlit a sequel to freakin' Mirror's Edge

I wonder if a bunch of DICE higher-ups threatened to leave the company if they couldn't make the game. It just seems so counter to everything EA stands for these days.

 

[jdstorm]

Said it before, and I'll say it again: Catalyst should have taken the wide-linear level design approach, ala Uncharted 4.

This would have solved a number of problems: the filler tasks in the open world, the pointless travel time between destinations, focused the story by making it feel like your actions all matter, improved the graphics by removing the open world graphical dilemmas, all while still maintaining multiple approaches and solutions to problems.

I won't argue about the lacklustre music either - I honestly think that, consciously or unconsciously, this is why the general emotional response to Catalyst has been so largely negative, with words commonly being thrown about like "soulless." The music in the first game moved you; this, not so much.

That being said, I still think the game did some things well and I'm glad I supported it at launch so that maybe, just maybe, they might be able to take another crack at it. (EA recently said it actually did meet their expectations, so there's still a modicum of hope). But DICE needs to re-focus - I understand the market forces that created this open world mess, but ultimately it probably worked against the game's sales performance through a largely mixed critical reception.

Resisting the urge to shitpost about uncharted 4. But no Mirrors Edge shouldnt copy its bloated version of linear level design.

What Mirrors Edge Catslyst needs/wants to be is Assasins Creed Unity. In a city with Skyscrspers. Ultimately its held back by the power limitations of current devices.

If Mirrors Edge was a game ahead of its time in many ways. Catalyst is a game before its time and limited by hardware that isnt ready for it

I'm honestly still surprised EA greenlit a sequel to freakin' Mirror's Edge

I wonder if a bunch of DICE higher-ups threatened to leave the company if they couldn't make the game. It just seems so counter to everything EA stands for these days.

It was greenlit as a tech demo to practise making open world games, and to add new features to Frostbyte. EA just threw the ME branding on it so it could be sold and make them more money.

Plus DICE really wanted to make the game, and young adult stories with female leads were all the rage (hunger games, divergent ect) when it was greenlit

 

[HMD]

The first one had better platforming believe it or not, watch a side by side speed run for both games and the first one just has much better momentum and movement, catalyst is a lot more floaty.

The futuristic setting in catalyst was pretty but boring as hell. The platforming was way too easy and way too simple. The grapple hook is trash. The open world was a horrible idea.

First game is a masterpiece and if the same game was a Valve game (it certainly felt like one) it would've gotten a lot more praise.

 

[Kumubou]

I think the biggest issue with Catalyst is that the worst parts of the game are at the very beginning -- I think the beta gave people a really bad impression of the game. Both the layout of the world and how well it looks do improve as you get later in the game (the world design also gets more linear in the later parts of the game, which probably explains a fair bit of that). Some of the story and side missions are also the fixed linear layouts similar to the first game and work about as well (with the side missions where you have to work your way through the networking nodes in particular being really well designed).

The story is stupid and badly executed, but I'm not really inclined to ding the game for that because most stories in videogames stink. The combat is OK when you are able to just take goons out in motion but all of the forced combat sections are just awful and I don't really get why they're there.

I'm not down on the game as much as most people here are, but I do wish it was better as I really don't think DICE is going to get another shot at it. :\

 

[Sean]

I only played the beta / demo and wasn't too impressed. Felt like all the changes just made the game worse.

 

[Wanderer5]

Honestly as much as I adore Mirror's Edge, I not sure if I would call the first a masterpiece. It had some really strong and memorable points in design and presention, it still had some kind of serious flaws going at it, one of which is combat, which isn't great in either of games.

Catalyst might have sadly escalated some of these flaws a bit (feels like there were more forced combat sections and I feel the story was a little better when it was kind of more simple in the original), but the parkour was still as strong as ever, tacked on skill tree aside, and I like the addition of the MAG rope.

I didn't mind the open world much either. Most of the story missions were still more linear like, and while the open world aspect has its lows, there were still quite a bit of neat stuff to go through. I think a lot of the side stuff were pretty good, and nicely ranged from races and deliveries to grind node puzzle rooms and getting to those billboards.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

It was greenlit as a tech demo to practise making open world games, and to add new features to Frostbyte. EA just threw the ME branding on it so it could be sold and make them more money.

Plus DICE really wanted to make the game, and young adult stories with female leads were all the rage (hunger games, divergent ect) when it was greenlit

Well, that makes a lot of sense then. Thanks for the info.

 

[Off-Kilter]

Catalyst, you insist to pull me down.

Ugh.

 

[King Gilga]

I loved mirrors edge but as soon as I saw I had to unlock basic shit like rolling or swinging in catalyst I was like fuck this game I'm out.

Never touched it, and until maybe I can pick it up for £4 on an origin sale I never well.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

I love Mirror's Edge so much. It's one of those games were I fully see all of it's many, many, many flaws but still love it so much because of the atmosphere, the style, the music and the fluidity of the movement.
While I didn't hate Catalyst (not at all) it felt like a much blander Mirror's Edge and I don't really know why. The art style seems a bit blander, the music doesn't feel as special, all the "characters" are assholes (not that the original ME had some amazing characters). Nothing feels quite right but I can't really tell you what it is excatly.

Also yes, Still Alive IS the best video game song ever.
The original first trailer for Mirror's Edge is still one of my favourite trailers ever made

 

[Codiox]

I liked Catalyst more than the first one tbh

+1

Catalyst is my GOTY so far.

 

[PaulloDEC]

I found some enjoyment in Catalyst, but it isn't a game I'll be coming back to. Mirror's Edge on the other hand is one of those games that I'll replay on a whim and love every minute of, even if it's only been months since my last replay. Like the OP, I tend to think of it as kind of a classic.

Most of the goofs in Catalyst have already been covered, but if I had to list them briefly, I'd say a needless and flow-hampering open world, a melodramatic story that turns Faith into a moody teenager stereotype and yes, mandatory combat sequences.

We'll always have the original though I suppose, and thanks to the PC it looks better now than ever.

 

[The Baron Count]

I certainly don't believe Mirror's Edge is some amazing game but I definitely really liked it and felt it was an incredibly cool thing to have in the AAA space at that time. Especially given the types of games that Dice have always made.

I have zero interest in the sequel for the simple fact that open world bloat is the bane of my existence. It's the reason I have played very few games this gen so far. Almost all of the big ones seem to be these big, stupid, open world time wasters. I don't have time to deal with that crap anymore.

It's really a shame. Something like Mirror's Edge existing is actually far more important now than it was in 2008 I think.

 

[Lonely1]

Just finished Catalyst this week. One thing I really missed where the PhysX effects. Teally gave the game an extra punch.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

I have posted this on neogaf before in more words, but suffice to say I continually don't understand what everyone's problems are with this game. I absolutely loved every minute of it, aside from the final boss which was a complete POC.

The open world is completely ignorable. I just turned on the runner's vision and followed the pathway through the story. It felt very tight and well designed. Running is a dream. Just ignore the collectables.

The combat was very good too (aside, again, from that disgrace of a final boss). You had to use your environment to pick up speed, and then unleash it on enemies at just the right moment. Yeah, I guess if you just button mash it would get annoying, but the game's tutorials heavily encourage you not to do that.

My GoTY, easily.

Edit: Also, everyone is forgetting just how freaking bad the combat was in Mirror's Edge 1. Masterpiece? Really?! Go replay that boat chapter again for a refresher.

 

[StrawberryJam]

I feel like half of the people complaining about open world in this thread didn't even play it.

The main missions and some of the major side missions feature the traditional focused linear design, and they're fantastic. Between those missions, running around the open world is fun, and completely in line with the concept and ethos of freerunning.

The game had some problems, but I personally had a great time with it.

If the story missions, which are the best designed part of the game, are totally separate then what is the purpose of the open world? The complaint isn't that it was open world, its that the open world had almost nothing to offer.

 

[Stall19]

As someone who just beat Mirror's Edge a month ago I have no idea how someone could consider that a masterpiece. So I can't imagine Catalyst being that much of a downgrade

 

[PaulloDEC]

I have posted this on neogaf before in more words, but suffice to say I continually don't understand what everyone's problems are with this game. I absolutely loved every minute of it, aside from the final boss which was a complete POC.

The open world is completely ignorable. I just turned on the runner's vision and followed the pathway through the story.

This right here is a big part of why I hated the open world. When you say "open world" to a fan of the original Mirror's Edge, the response might be something like "Oh wow, so I could see my destination off in the distance and just find my own path there, right? Sounds great!"

Unfortunately the reality is that you really can't do that unless you know every inch of the city like the back of your hand. The way the "islands" of the city are connected with only one or two bridges means that if you're trying to plot your own path rather than just follow the stupid red line you're going to be constantly hitting dead ends where your only way to progress is to find the nearest bridge and backtrack your way to it.

(Mark Brown explains this very nicely in Game Maker's Toolkit).

So basically you've got a few choices in the open world. You can:

A) Follow the dotted line everywhere, eliminating almost all of the freedom or creativity in your pathfinding
B) Try to find your own path and suffer the constant frustration of hitting dead ends
C) Learn the entire city map to the point where you don't need to do A or B.

None of these were attractive options for me.

 

[TGO]

Not sure what you mean, the only thing I would say didn't match the original was the soundtrack and maybe graphics.
True It didn't need to be open world but that just added filler to it, it didn't take away from it so what you are left with was gameplay and story.
gameplay remained the same with some new stuff thrown in and imo story was better....presented, nothing amazing just like the first.

 

[Sayers]

I liked Catalyst better than the original

 

[Wowfunhappy]

So basically you've got a few choices in the open world. You can:

A) Follow the dotted line everywhere, eliminating almost all of the freedom or creativity in your pathfinding
B) Try to find your own path and suffer the constant frustration of hitting dead ends
C) Learn the entire city map to the point where you don't need to do A or B.

None of these were attractive options for me.

The correct answer is A. "Correct" as in, I'm pretty sure that's how the game was designed to be played.

This follows a discussion I had in another thread: if your favorite part of the original Mirror's Edge is trying to find paths through the environment, you probably won't like Catalyst that much. There are certain sections with environmental puzzle solving, but they aren't particularly common. Turning Runner Vision off or to "Classic" solves this problem, but makes the open world overly annoying to navigate IMO.

However... this actually solved a major problem in the original game, one that probably didn't bother super dedicated players too much but was definitely an issue for more casual players. Dying because you tried to run away, but didn't know where to run too, feels unfair. If you go back and look at reviews of OG Mirror's Edge (which were decidedly mixed), you'll see that a key complaint was "trial and error gameplay." This is where the trial and error comes from.

Catalyst decided to strip that all away. It tells the player where to go so that he or she can focus on the execution. I think it worked brilliantly, and although I can understand why others might not feel the same way, I do think it's important to approach the game with the right mindset. In other words, don't expect Mirror's Edge Catalyst to be something it's not.

Edit: And yes, I realize this defeats the purpose of an open world. Catalyst isn't really an open world game, at least not for the duration of the main story. And I think that's for the better.

 

[jdstorm]

As someone who just beat Mirror's Edge a month ago I have no idea how someone could consider that a masterpiece. So I can't imagine Catalyst being that much of a downgrade

How long did it take you to beat the game? Mirrors Edge is all about going fast and typically a first run through will slow you down as you havent mastered the mechanics and you dont know where to go.

Using the chapter speedrun numbers as a guide 1 1/2 -2 hours is about how long it should take at full speed. Anything over 3 hours and you just dont get the same experience.

For instance the final chapter typically takes 20-30 minutes or longer on a first play through. The Speedrun time is 8 minutes. That level of difference in pacing changes the whole game

Getting a sub 3hour time usually involves finding different routes and executing more advanced techniques that you wont use in a typical first playthrough.

Edit.Try watching a chapter speed run video on YouTube. It will take 5-10 minutes. It will seem like a completely different experience.

 

[Evolved1]

My only real complaint with the game (and why I stopped playing) was the fuck-awful camera acceleration on the right stick.

So goddamn gross... I couldn't take it.

 

[Feep]

This right here is a big part of why I hated the open world. When you say "open world" to a fan of the original Mirror's Edge, the response might be something like "Oh wow, so I could see my destination off in the distance and just find my own path there, right? Sounds great!"

Unfortunately the reality is that you really can't do that unless you know every inch of the city like the back of your hand. The way the "islands" of the city are connected with only one or two bridges means that if you're trying to plot your own path rather than just follow the stupid red line you're going to be constantly hitting dead ends where your only way to progress is to find the nearest bridge and backtrack your way to it.



So basically you've got a few choices in the open world. You can:

A) Follow the dotted line everywhere, eliminating almost all of the freedom or creativity in your pathfinding
B) Try to find your own path and suffer the constant frustration of hitting dead ends
C) Learn the entire city map to the point where you don't need to do A or B.

None of these were attractive options for me.

The open world *very rarely* had you moving consistently between areas. Generally, you'd reach a new area, and all missions at that point would generally be contained therein. If you needed to head back to the tech girl or the main base for some reason, you fast traveled.

Within time trials and side missions, the beginning points and end points tended to be in the same region, and discovering the most efficient routes to take was absolutely a major part of success. Discovery, execution, refinement.

 

[HeisenbergWW62]

Heh. I tried Mirrors Edge but couldn't make it past 2 hours. Not for me I guess

 

[Wowfunhappy]

It was greenlit as a tech demo to practise making open world games, and to add new features to Frostbyte. EA just threw the ME branding on it so it could be sold and make them more money.

That's a pretty big claim. Do you have a source?

It's definitely not how the game's development was described in that Polygon feature.

 

[J@hranimo]

I'm still playing through Mirror's Edge Catalyst myself, really enjoying it. Running around the city is a blast to me. Sorry you feel that way OP.

edit: Gotta agree with a previous poster, ME is pretty cool but definitely not a masterpiece.

 

[JimmyRustler]

Yes I'm sure Mario doesn't count as a masterpiece either, just look at that story/combat/length.

Then go with Trial & Error. Drove me nuts.
ME was great alright, but at no point I would call it a masterpiece.

 

[Stevey]

Both games are pretty eh

 

[admiraltaftbar]

Mirror's Edge is such a weird game. It's a must experience good but not great game. It's so fundamentally flawed in so many ways. The length, story and most importantly mechanics all have pretty glaring issues that I don't understand why it's considered a near perfect game by some.

I haven't actually played Catalyst yet but I've heard good things about how the open world creates some good "find your way to the object" puzzles, which seems like a natural fit for the mechanics. One of these days I might have to actually pick it up.

 

[sheamus]

Mirror’s Edge is not that good.
Mirror’s Edge Catalyst is better then mirror's edge