Mirror's Edge Official Discussion Thread

Mirror's Edge has everything that made Portal great - distinctive visual style, analog control (it's not simply "pass / fail" actions can be accomplished with st yle and grace ), challenging gameplay, excellent sound, and a unique overall experience. Just like the Portal early level showcase, this too has "helpers" (the red objects ) that will not be there in the later levels.

This is, in every way, a continuation of what Portal was, however because it is far more speed driven, it will be more challenging. There is no room to pause and consider, on the Mirror's Edge.

subrosian

Its missing the humor, heat and personality of the game, or a the antagonist and plot (and of course the Old Man Murray styled script)

We wont know until the game is released, but its extremely different to Portal in many ways, and yes there are some similarities.

The visual style seems both similar, however its strikingly different - the DICE have used colour far more to compliment game design and keep fluid gameplay, Valve allowed the player to experiment as part of the puzzle solving pace, not throtling the player forwards, helping the player make reactive decisions on the fly.

It looks like a good game, and plays well - its very promising, but its NOT comparable to portal in so many ways.

A continuation? Heck no.

It's not about just that skrat, Mirror's Edge picks up on the spirit of excellent design that made Portal great. As a designer, I look at Portal and Mirror's Edge as kindred spirits. Such superficial things as whether or not Mirror's Edge will take a humerous tone are just that - superficial.

It is, absolutely, a continuation of the spirit of clean, effective, game-driven design that made Portal work. It's not about whether they use the same colors, it's about whether they provide the same analog, challenging, gamer-oriented play experience. And yes, they do.

-

Also Mirror's Edge has far more to it than you think (it goes beyond what is shown in the demo ). It is a strong contender for game of the year, however, much like Portal, I'm not sure many people will understand why. Portal isn't a great game because "the cake is a lie", Portal is a great game because of what they did in terms of gameplay.

It's not about just that skrat, Mirror's Edge picks up on the spirit of excellent design that made Portal great. As a designer, I look at Portal and Mirror's Edge as kindred spirits. Such superficial things as whether or not Mirror's Edge will take a humerous tone are just that - superficial.

It is, absolutely, a continuation of the spirit of clean, effective, game-driven design that made Portal work. It's not about whether they use the same colors, it's about whether they provide the same analog, challenging, gamer-oriented play experience. And yes, they do.

-

Also Mirror's Edge has far more to it than you think (it goes beyond what is shown in the demo ). It is a strong contender for game of the year, however, much like Portal, I'm not sure many people will understand why. Portal isn't a great game because "the cake is a lie", Portal is a great game because of what they did in terms of gameplay.

subrosian

However portal had very different things going for it, that complimented in making it such a well known game, a running meme and such critical praise (and attention) that being the use of setting, characters, plot and humor. Mirrors edge just seems to have core design similarities, but it lacks alot of what made portal so memorable. Without these portal would have been a simply puzzle game without nearly as much personality it has...

Without it (and saying that Portal was only great because of the gameplay) would be essentially much more comparable to its predacessor... Narbacular Drop... Which is a perfect example of an interesting concept and decent gameplay, however it lacks everything else - making it not even half the experience portal is.

However this does not mean ME's wont have its own unique quirks and personality, to create a extremely cohesive experience, and who knows it might cause a storm like portal....

However for every similarity the two seem to share, there are core differences that seperate the two just as much.

I'd say music of Mirror's Edge is going to give a lot of personality points. ;)Mordred19

It goes way beyond that. I feel as though Skrat is only looking at Portal's humor, and saying "oh yeah, Mirror's Edge doesn't have that, it doesn't have that personality". Only it does, in spades. The art design, the music, the story, the characters - everything was intentional, everything contributes to one atmosphere, to an overall experience and, yes, personality.

It's not the same "funny" personality as Portal, but I have not seen a game successful pull off such a consistent atmosphere since Portal - everything in the game focuses on that atmosphere.

Judging this game from what I've seen, I'd say it has a lot of potential/AAA-material:

- interesting graphics - art design (this is an automatical win for me)

- totalitarism/rebellion ala Aeon Flux plot (more win)

- female non-sexualized main character (that's not very common since Lara Croft)

- potentially great gamepay:

First person shooters are cool, but when games try to enance the first person experience, the results can be incredible (Metroid Prime, Obivion, Bioshock, Fallout 3).

This game looks like it brings the first person perspective to a new level of gameplay. If it delivers, this could be one of the most unique adventures this gen.

Besides, recently EA has been doing a great work with new franchises - Dead Space is awesome -.

It goes way beyond that. I feel as though Skrat is only looking at Portal's humor, and saying "oh yeah, Mirror's Edge doesn't have that, it doesn't have that personality". Only it does, in spades. The art design, the music, the story, the characters - everything was intentional, everything contributes to one atmosphere, to an overall experience and, yes, personality.

It's not the same "funny" personality as Portal, but I have not seen a game successful pull off such a consistent atmosphere since Portal - everything in the game focuses on that atmosphere.

subrosian

*sigh*

I never said it didnt what I am saying it doesnt have the similar personality quirks that made portal resonate with people.

As I said its got far more to do with humor and gameplay

*SIGH*

The game is very different in a many ways, and how you suggest its similar to portal in ways of being 'great' simply isnt correct, as it ignores many of portals traits and quirks. Jeeesh I have gone over this before .

If you think im only looking at the games flaming humor then I highly recommend you read my previous post again.

Its as if you have read my post, and sidelined it as 'rambling about humor'.

How very System Wars of you.

[QUOTE="subrosian"]

It goes way beyond that. I feel as though Skrat is only looking at Portal's humor, and saying "oh yeah, Mirror's Edge doesn't have that, it doesn't have that personality". Only it does, in spades. The art design, the music, the story, the characters - everything was intentional, everything contributes to one atmosphere, to an overall experience and, yes, personality.

It's not the same "funny" personality as Portal, but I have not seen a game successful pull off such a consistent atmosphere since Portal - everything in the game focuses on that atmosphere.

skrat_01

*sigh*

I never said it didnt what I am saying it doesnt have the similar personality quirks that made portal resonate with people.

As I said its got far more to do with humor and gameplay

*SIGH*

The game is very different in a many ways, and how you suggest its similar to portal in ways of being 'great' simply isnt correct, as it ignores many of portals traits and quirks. Jeeesh I have gone over this before .

If you think im only looking at the games flaming humor then I highly recommend you read my previous post again.

Its as if you have read my post, and sidelined it as 'rambling about humor'.

How very System Wars of you.

But sub did not just say that. He felt that was your direction.

I don't think you have outlined those quirks you mentioned. So maybe you could elaborate, and then everything will be on the table.

The thing is, I didn't see a system wars thing happen, I just don't think I saw a full communication of your points, that's all.

But sub did not just say that. He felt that was your direction.

I don't think you have outlined those quirks you mentioned. So maybe you could elaborate, and then everything will be on the table.

The thing is, I didn't see a system wars thing happen, I just don't think I saw a full communication of your points, that's all.

Mordred19

Portal had an extremely distinctive personality and character. You had the memorable setting - in which its the main antagonist and you. The antagonist has extremely distinctive characteristics and a both interesting personality, and essentially defines the setting. The way the story unfolds by using the setting and environment, and the way the game flows (and evolution of game play mechanics) with the story and antagonist's evolving character is essentially perfect. It becomes a far more personal and involving experience. Of course the games humor works appropriately and cohesively with the games design, story and characters. the game play mechanic is unique, however it also is the players direct connection to the main antagonist - and a relationship develops between the antagonist and player - as I said, the player become very involved.

Mirrors edge carries some traits. Its very cohesive in visual **** mixed with game design, however it lacks the personality and involvement with the character(s), story telling, (yes) humor / quirkiness / personality and whatnot. From the demo it does not feel nearly as much of a personal experience as Portal, nor is there a character I can relate to, connect to or a an antagonist who involves the player directly (come to think of it the antagonist seems to be 'the government' - all very indirect, more faceless goons).

Though I am exited for the game, I just dont see it being much like portal in as many respects as it is like portal. It lacks qualities that made portal great, however it has its own unique qualities.

though yeah i was a bit frustrated / peeved my point was not getting across. Sure I don't elaborate much in my previous post, but my direction was far more than just humor. That annoyed me. :P

I'm exited about Mirrors Edge; I was exited about its game design since I first read about it. However I just think its very different to portal in many respects, and calling it 'the next portal' just doesn't sit well with me. It just does not seem to fit the game and comparison well.

I think Mirrors Edge is something different entirely.

The way things are done is very different in many respects to develop and atmospheric and cohesive experience, as is the way the games involve the player.

The biggest similarity of the two games is both challenge your perception of the surrounding environment, and force you to learn it, and how to navigate it with your abilities at your disposal

Something I have been really into lately game design wise. This semesters UT04 Uni mod project I came up with a very similar design ethic, which worked pretty well in the end, and was fun. Just not nearly as slick or well designed and executed (design wise rather than production values) than our teams mod. Made me realise how difficult it is to execute a design, level design around your core design, and Q&A it so its easily playable - absolute bastard that was.

360 or PS3, I ain't getting this game. The parkour is neat, but the fact that it's a 3D platformer where one slip up constantly causes you to fall to your death is enough for me. That and the combat (while not the focus of the game) is utterly lackluster and terribly animated.SemiMaster

It feels so awkward and jumpy compared to the flow of the running, it really kills the pace. Same with the shooting mechanics, and the way it has been done.

There (indeed) needs to be more motion during combat, and much better use of the first person POV.

For instance when Faith is holding a pistol her arm should be out towards the center of the screen, and move correctly while in motion - having it almost static in the corner looks way too odd.

Combat needs to be more fluid than stopping and waiting for a guy to swing at your to disarm - or waiting to time a kick. There should be more focus on movement in combat, and disarming on the fly - running from your enemies, and using weapons to fire back rather than aggressively attack or fire fowards.

Kind of like in John Woo movies - lets say hard boiled - how the characters always move during combat, leaping over things ect. However when they move with weapons they always fire them defensiveley blind firing as they move, roll, jump ect.

Im not sure how you could do this game design wise, but it would suit ME well.

Having some sort of ability for the character to perceive where she is being fired at from, and blind fire with the push of a button / trigger (causing the a.i. to slow down the chase, and possibly be forced to cover), while the player figures out an escape route.

If you have combat it needs to be much more mobile and fluid like the rest of the game - however it needs more of an element of risk (attacking with weapons, firing back ect.) than scaling / leaping across the environment.

Think it was the darkness, but in it you could use how it did handing dual weapons as an example. Both hands moved independently, and they did seem to have plenty of auto aim, however they were inaccurate it was a tradeoff for the amount of firepower too pistols could dish out, and encouraged the player to move with them, and play aggressively because of the 'special kills' you could do when you were in a close proximity of a baddie (e.g. stick a pistol in a dudes mouth).

What I am trying to say is Faiths arms need to more far more independently during combat than they do. A traditional shooter st-yled crosshair in the center (resulting in firing fowards and agressive gunplay) does not cut it, as it does not fit the flow and sty-le of the game at all tbh.

[QUOTE="SemiMaster"]360 or PS3, I ain't getting this game. The parkour is neat, but the fact that it's a 3D platformer where one slip up constantly causes you to fall to your death is enough for me. That and the combat (while not the focus of the game) is utterly lackluster and terribly animated.skrat_01

It feels so awkward and jumpy compared to the flow of the running, it really kills the pace. Same with the shooting mechanics, and the way it has been done.

There (indeed) needs to be more motion during combat, and much better use of the first person POV.

For instance when Faith is holding a pistol her arm should be out towards the center of the screen, and move correctly while in motion - having it almost static in the corner looks way too odd.

Combat needs to be more fluid than stopping and waiting for a guy to swing at your to disarm - or waiting to time a kick. There should be more focus on movement in combat, and disarming on the fly - running from your enemies, and using weapons to fire back rather than aggressively attack or fire fowards.

Kind of like in John Woo movies - lets say hard boiled - how the characters always move during combat, leaping over things ect. However when they move with weapons they always fire them defensiveley blind firing as they move, roll, jump ect.

Im not sure how you could do this game design wise, but it would suit ME well.

Having some sort of ability for the character to perceive where she is being fired at from, and blind fire with the push of a button / trigger (causing the a.i. to slow down the chase, and possibly be forced to cover), while the player figures out an escape route.

If you have combat it needs to be much more mobile and fluid like the rest of the game - however it needs more of an element of risk (attacking with weapons, firing back ect.) than scaling / leaping across the environment.

Well you went into a more detailed analysis of the situation, but I pretty much can't disagree with anything you said.

The demo was great, but i dunno how the full game will panout. I can easily see this game being a novel idea and then the game going boring fast but will have to see when the game comes out. If i had to hype it right now, I would say 8.0-8.5II_Seraphim_II

The anatognist is the totalitarian government :| The game has plenty of personality, take a look at the story boards and story videos sometime Skrat, or go talk to the developer about it. It doesn't have to be a "dualistic" conflict to ring true to the heart of what drove Portal. Portal wasn't about "good vs evil" or even "conflict" - looking at Portal as just a cat-and-mouse game would be a mark of inexperience.

I feel like you're letting your ego, and personal sentiments towards Portal, get in the way of open thinking. There is a deeper design mentality that made Portal work, and that mentality is behind Mirror's Edge. The specifics are unimportant, they are kindred spirits, even if you're not personally comfortable with the idea. It's not about whether it's another "you vs the machine" game - it's about the core values that underlie the thought processes that drove those design choices.

-

Also Skrat, the combat is fluid, if you control it correctly. Take some times and practice with using combat moves in-sequence with jump, land, roll, et cetera, and you'll find you can take down people without breaking stride. There is no need to be lose momentum to take out the guards, nor are you *supposed* to take out every guard. When you can gain momentum during a takedown, then you understand the game.

Have you only played the demo? It sounds like you haven't played anything beyond the demo :| That's just a tutorial, you don't have nearly the opportunities you have later in the game, and of course "fluidity" is completely on the player - the game gives you the tools to make it happen, but whether you can depends on your own intellect, skill, inate abilities, and practice.

The anatognist is the totalitarian government :| The game has plenty of personality, take a look at the story boards and story videos sometime Skrat, or go talk to the developer about it. It doesn't have to be a "dualistic" conflict to ring true to the heart of what drove Portal. Portal wasn't about "good vs evil" or even "conflict" - looking at Portal as just a cat-and-mouse game would be a mark of inexperience.

1. Never said portal was simply a battle against good and evil. 2. I never said Portal was simply a cat and mouse game. 4. Yes ME does not have a dualistic conflict however I dont beleive ME's totalitarian government itself has nearly as much personality. What screams personality to me in ME is the environment, which shows the governments influence and social attitude towards the acceptance of it. As I said it seems like a setting or antagonist that is not as personal or involving. Before you make assumptions I said SEEMs, ill wait until the game is released before I make my final judgment.

I feel like you're letting your ego, and personal sentiments towards Portal, get in the way of open thinking. There is a deeper design mentality that made Portal work, and that mentality is behind Mirror's Edge. The specifics are unimportant, they are kindred spirits, even if you're not personally comfortable with the idea. It's not about whether it's another "you vs the machine" game - it's about the core values that underlie the thought processes that drove those design choices.

*sigh* Uh huh. Yes there is an extremely deep design complexity in portal, I have been talking about everything but the game play and core game play design that gives it such an appeal - in an extremely limited space. I have read more than enough on the game, and played through it more than enough to determine this. You don't need to spell it out for me. There is plenty of complexity in ME, however I do believe it does things differently than Portal in many respects, as it has similarities. This is my opinion.

I'm not holding Portal on a pedestal or 'letting my ego get in the way' I simply think the two games have many different things going for it - and honestly it seems that your ego is causing you do disregard my points, and simply undermine my thoughts ( " :| " ), as if ultimately your own opinion is that, that defines the games in comparison. I respect your opinion, but essentially disregarding others, and believing they are far more simplistic simply screams arrogance.

I say the games share and have extremely different qualities, even in core design. And you refute me as being incorrect, and letting my ego + personal sentiments towards Portal getting the better of me. Perhaps you are letting your own ego and personal sentiments towards ME get the better of you? Why should I bother to keep posting if what I type isn't going to be taken in with a grain of salt. Makes what I type seem like absolutely worthless jargon.

-

Also Skrat, the combat is fluid, if you control it correctly. Take some times and practice with using combat moves in-sequence with jump, land, roll, et cetera, and you'll find you can take down people without breaking stride. There is no need to be lose momentum to take out the guards, nor are you *supposed* to take out every guard. When you can gain momentum during a takedown, then you understand the game.

Yes you aren't supposed to take out every guard. FFS I went over this already the game ha focusing on escaping and evading your combatants. Yes you can take guards down on the fly, however I stil don't believe its nearly as fluid as it should be, and I believe the inclusion of weapons makes it even less fluid, and adds an extra layer to combat that makes it awkward.

Have you only played the demo? It sounds like you haven't played anything beyond the demo :| That's just a tutorial, you don't have nearly the opportunities you have later in the game, and of course "fluidity" is completely on the player - the game gives you the tools to make it happen, but whether you can depends on your own intellect, skill, inate abilities, and practice.

Yes I know the Demo is the tutorial, and E3 08 play through. Yes I have downloaded and played through the demo multiple times. Yes I have read through many articles on the game. Yes I SAID what I have posted could easily change depending on the retail release.

These are my thoughts on the game, and you judge them as completely invalid or incorrect as this is judgments of the 'demo'. Wonderful attitude.

If this is how you are going to judge what I am going to type, then why even bother continuing the discussion. I have put more than enough into my posts, and to have it essentially sideswiped makes it clear that there is no point even trying to debate or discuss, especially when I'm dealing with an attitude like the one you are displaying.

subrosian

Skrat constantly sighing at someone is a form of trolling, hell it's annoying me and I'm not the one your doing it at.

Stop it!

I honestly cannot remember a demo that I have played more than this one. In a land of shooters, RPG's and action games (all of which I love), this is the most refreshing feeling game I can recall playing in quite a long time. The mechanics of the controls on the shoulder buttons just flows like liquid once you get a decent rhythm going.

I can only imagine some of the adrenaline filled levels throughout the complete game. I think the re-playability will be through the roof just for the whole "WHOA!!" factor alone that I firmly believe it will have in spades. Aside from that, it is just nice to finally see a game that tries to both innovate and provide something different and actually succeed at doing so.

Skrat, my point was that I feel Portal and Mirror's Edge are kindred spirits. You don't feel that way, and that's fine. I'm not trying to put down your opinion, I'm just trying to understand where it's coming from. I feel like we're getting into a debate about design choices ("big shadow government" vs "strong personality antagonist" , etc) rather than the thought process that went into those design choices.

When I look at games like Portal, Mirror's Edge, Mass Effect... I can't help but get the sense that the developers were thinking of me. No, not me *personally* but that some extremely skilled development team was greatly concerned with providing a tight, polished experience for their fellow gamers. And that, as a gamer, as a writer, as a business person, as - well - a fan - is all I can ever ask for from a developer.

I'm sure other dev teams sit down with those goals in mind, but for whatever reason it doesn't come together. Whatever spark drives DICE, Valve, Bioware, et cetera is special, it's why I game, it's what I look for. Mirror's Edge has that spark.

I just find it a bit odd that anyone would be uncomfortable with that comparisson. Mirror's Edge strikes me as Sonic the Hedgehog meets Portal in some magical device that spins out of all SEGA's poor design choices.

-

It's not a game I'd predict DICE would make, but now that they've made it, it feels right. Kind of an odd thing, though I wouldn't have pictured Valve as the company to make Portal, given the linearity of the Half--Life. We're entering this era were developers are beginning to break free of archaic gameplay conventions, and genuinely create worlds, not just in RPGs, but in all genres.

It's exciting, absolutely exciting.

Thank you for the Official thread. There has been so many threads about the PS3/360 Version of the demo.

I loved the demo. Can't wait to get this game :)

Thank you for the Official thread. There has been so many threads about the PS3/360 Version of the demo.

I loved the demo. Can't wait to get this game :)

ChiddaPotta

Me either :D It's going to be an exciting launch.

The PS3 vs 360 discussion is getting a *tad* old though. There aren't many people who have both systems, and for the few who do, I'm more than happy to provide coin flips.

Just finished the demo and absolutely loved it. The free-flowing gameplay, the artstyle, everything about it appealed to me. As an amateur freerunner (offshoot/variation of parkour), I've always wanted a game with this sort of flow and Mirror's Edge gets it perfectly. I also loved the animated cutscenes, great stuff, very unique and something that someone like me can appreciate in a game. I wasn't interested in it before, but after playing the demo, it'll probably be a week 1 purchase.

Now I just need to get around to beating Mirror's Edge's aesthetic opposite, Fallout 3. Man, there's such a contrast between my 2 most anticipated games of the fall season. :P

Skrat constantly sighing at someone is a form of trolling, hell it's annoying me and I'm not the one your doing it at.

Stop it!

cakeorrdeath

It is, absolutely, a continuation of the spirit of clean, effective, game-driven design that made Portal work.

subrosian

What's that subrosian?

game-driven design that made Portal work.

subrosian

Huh?

game-driven design

subrosian

O RLY?

Developers take note.

The best games in the world do not like to pretend they're big budget movies at its core, with big flashy effects and cutscenes with a huge cast of characters at every turn (unless you're lucky to be called Metal Gear Solid). If you have created solid, playable, video game mechanics as the centre of your development, you will succeed. Once you have nailed that gameplay aspect, you may build your fantasy world however the hell you want.

Core Design, that's why your brilliantly scripted Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness failed miserably, whereas the mediocre plot of Legend was taken in stride of a playable Tomb Raider game.

Adventure game developers, your world-c lass stories will forever get lost in video game history if you don't pull a Quantic Dream and start redefining what it is to be an adventure game developer. You're getting your asses handed to you by the plotless Penumbra anthology.

Denis Dyack..... stop being Denis Dyack.

It's why Valve succeeds that special way they do. It's why Rare succeeds the special way they do. It's why DICE succeeded with the Battlefield games; their talents culminating with their new IP Mirror's Edge.

Kind of an odd thing, though I wouldn't have pictured Valve as the company to make Portalsubrosian

Technically they did, though I fully believe the majority of the design was done by those DigiPen students under Valve's name. "Valve" acts more like a producer that feeds the development which enables a lot of polish. Same thing seemed to happen with Turtle Rock Studios. I mean, it was only until recently that it was Valve who "developed" Left 4 Dead. Before that, TRS was the title developer. Seems to be all but name, really.

Developers take note.

The best games in the world do not like to pretend they're big budget movies at its core, with big flashy effects and cutscenes with a huge cast of characters at every turn (unless you're lucky to be called Metal Gear Solid). If you have created solid, playable, video game mechanics as the centre of your development, you will succeed. Once you have nailed that gameplay aspect, you may build your fantasy world however the hell you want.

Core Design, that's why your brilliantly scripted Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness failed miserably, whereas the mediocre plot of Legend was taken in stride of a playable Tomb Raider game.

Adventure game developers, your world-c lass stories will forever get lost in video game history if you don't pull a Quantic Dream and start redefining what it is to be an adventure game developer. You're getting your asses handed to you by the plotless Penumbra anthology.

Denis Dyack..... stop being Denis Dyack.

It's why Valve succeeds that special way they do. It's why Rare succeeds the special way they do. It's why DICE succeeded with the Battlefield games; their talents culminating with their new IP Mirror's Edge.

FrozenLiquid

Win. This is the essence of what's wrong with many video games today, and what is at the basis of almost every great game there is. There are exceptions, of course. Silent Hill 2 for example.

Anway, +1.

[QUOTE="subrosian"]

It is, absolutely, a continuation of the spirit of clean, effective, game-driven design that made Portal work.

FrozenLiquid

What's that subrosian?

game-driven design that made Portal work.

subrosian

Huh?

game-driven design

subrosian

O RLY?

Developers take note.

The best games in the world do not like to pretend they're big budget movies at its core, with big flashy effects and cutscenes with a huge cast of characters at every turn (unless you're lucky to be called Metal Gear Solid). If you have created solid, playable, video game mechanics as the centre of your development, you will succeed. Once you have nailed that gameplay aspect, you may build your fantasy world however the hell you want.

Core Design, that's why your brilliantly scripted Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness failed miserably, whereas the mediocre plot of Legend was taken in stride of a playable Tomb Raider game.

Adventure game developers, your world-c lass stories will forever get lost in video game history if you don't pull a Quantic Dream and start redefining what it is to be an adventure game developer. You're getting your asses handed to you by the plotless Penumbra anthology.

Denis Dyack..... stop being Denis Dyack.

It's why Valve succeeds that special way they do. It's why Rare succeeds the special way they do. It's why DICE succeeded with the Battlefield games; their talents culminating with their new IP Mirror's Edge.

Kind of an odd thing, though I wouldn't have pictured Valve as the company to make Portalsubrosian

Technically they did, though I fully believe the majority of the design was done by those DigiPen students under Valve's name. "Valve" acts more like a producer that feeds the development which enables a lot of polish. Same thing seemed to happen with Turtle Rock Studios. I mean, it was only until recently that it was Valve who "developed" Left 4 Dead. Before that, TRS was the title developer. Seems to be all but name, really.

Interesting debate that's going on here(skrat-subrosian). I have played the demo multiple times now and I really got hooked on it, I thought I could wait for the pc version to come out but after playing the demo I immediately pre-ordered it!

I think it will be a great experience, I love the setting and the atmosphere which reminds me of the movie Equilibrium, and the gameplay is just...WOW! It gives me the same strive for perfection as the new Wipeout, I can see myself spending hours upon hours trying to shave off those 0.5 seconds by finding new routes, pefecting my timing etc.

What could be cool though(I don't know if this is in the game, don't think so) could be if they made an online challenge where you could challenge your friends in a race through a level, something like that....

[QUOTE="chikenfriedrice"][QUOTE="ONLYDOD"][QUOTE="Mkavanaugh77"]

[QUOTE="ONLYDOD"]The demo was awesome, but I think im going to wait for Christmas to get this game, I wanted to get Far Cry 2 and some new shoes more.ONLYDOD

I would skip FarCry2 imo

I just rented the game, and its very boring and slow paced, i just cant get into it at all.

I'll be the judge of that.

Farcry 2 is great btw

That's the spirit :D

wait till you play it...lol. be positive all you want. its GTA in africa, its very repetative and just slow....epic fail IMO. Graphics are insane tho. thats about it.

[QUOTE="subrosian"]

It is, absolutely, a continuation of the spirit of clean, effective, game-driven design that made Portal work.

FrozenLiquid

What's that subrosian?

game-driven design that made Portal work.

subrosian

Huh?

game-driven design

subrosian

O RLY?

Developers take note.

The best games in the world do not like to pretend they're big budget movies at its core, with big flashy effects and cutscenes with a huge cast of characters at every turn (unless you're lucky to be called Metal Gear Solid). If you have created solid, playable, video game mechanics as the centre of your development, you will succeed. Once you have nailed that gameplay aspect, you may build your fantasy world however the hell you want.

Core Design, that's why your brilliantly scripted Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness failed miserably, whereas the mediocre plot of Legend was taken in stride of a playable Tomb Raider game.

Adventure game developers, your world-c lass stories will forever get lost in video game history if you don't pull a Quantic Dream and start redefining what it is to be an adventure game developer. You're getting your asses handed to you by the plotless Penumbra anthology.

Denis Dyack..... stop being Denis Dyack.

It's why Valve succeeds that special way they do. It's why Rare succeeds the special way they do. It's why DICE succeeded with the Battlefield games; their talents culminating with their new IP Mirror's Edge.

Kind of an odd thing, though I wouldn't have pictured Valve as the company to make Portalsubrosian

Technically they did, though I fully believe the majority of the design was done by those DigiPen students under Valve's name. "Valve" acts more like a producer that feeds the development which enables a lot of polish. Same thing seemed to happen with Turtle Rock Studios. I mean, it was only until recently that it was Valve who "developed" Left 4 Dead. Before that, TRS was the title developer. Seems to be all but name, really.

It's not that story-driven games can't work, it's that developers need to look to successful TV shows, rather than movies, to understand how to pace their content. A game that is a series of 30 ~ 60 minute "stories" is going to be far more effective than one, twelve-hour long "mega-film". You can see it, when you look at games people enjoyed, where a game was a "TV serial", and where it was a movie.

A movie works under the premise that I'm watching it for two hours - a game can't assume the audience will play it straight through, and if it doesn't divide the story into manageable "episodes", with building exciement and then a story-reward within those episodes, then it punishes the player for not tackling it all at once.

Hell, Mass Effect works because it *is* Star Trek. You turn it on, grab a quest, and boom, it's Trouble With Tribbles. A quest takes 30 minutes to 2 hours, depending, and larger quests are divided into small sub-objectives each with a story-reward... so, it's quite effective design. Fallout 3 is operating under the same premise, the side-quests, and main-quests are play-session sized.

The demo was awesome, but I think im going to wait for Christmas to get this game, I wanted to get Far Cry 2 and some new shoes more.ONLYDOD

Mirrors Edge>Farcry. Trust me.

I rented Farcry and it sucks. The only thing that interests me is the map creator. The editor is so good that people actually remake famous maps from other games like COD4 and Halo and they are 95% perfect.Its amazing.

BUT!!! Gameplay sucks so bad an awesome editor cant make up for the overall crappiness of the game. After playing the mirrors edge demo I really want it. It reminds me of portal by being that new fun game featuring a female lead.

Best part of the demo is jump kicking the guys off of skyscrapers.

Rental at best!

Is Mirror's Edge using DICE's Frostbite engine?Mordred19

[QUOTE="Mordred19"]Is Mirror's Edge using DICE's Frostbite engine?musicalmac