- Apr 29, 2008
I have removed my words from this site.
Hey, no fair! :'(joethekoeller said:Sorry old chap, but the position of obscure reviewer stuck in the past is taken.
Well, you've reviewed Mirror's Edge right here. And also Unreal Tournament 3 sometime earlier. And besides, Just Cause 2 is awesome yet not nearly as known as i'd like it to be. So it's all fair.(Also, you reviewed Just Cause 2).
I may consider joining it then.Anyway, if you want this to reach an agreement for mutual benefit rather than a long and bloody antagonism, there's always room for one more at the Obscure Games Group [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/members/Obscure-Games-Group].
Lucky me - I bought it for £3.24 and it's one of the best purchases I've ever made. It's worth twenty times that to me. For a fair while it was in my top five favourite games ever. I can't say the issues that bothered everyone else - pacing and combat being the most notable - bothered me. I liked the combat and the slower bits felt like a nice change of pace. It's the only game I've ever considered speedrunning. I can't think of any other game where'd I willingly perform the same task over and over again for no reward other than being able to do it slightly better. The platforming just feels that good to me.joethekoeller said:Bottom line: Mirror's Edge is a deeply flawed game, whether we're talking aggravating storyline or mechanical trifles. But it also new, very refreshing and, in it's best moments, deeply entertaining. I'll admit that this game is not worth 60 bucks, but at whatever price you can find it right now, it's worth picking up for the uniqueness of the experience alone. You will love it, or hate it. There is no in between.
The combat probably should've had more options to non-lethally take down enemies but you CAN beat the game on hard without firing a gun (I did it because I wanted to get that trophy on my hard playthrough), there's really only 2 or 3 tricky areas and that was on hard.joethekoeller said:I enjoyed the combat, but only the first couple of encounters. When the enemies were so scarce and weak you could pretty much floor them without having to stop running. You say the game isn't primarily a shooter, but that makes the choice to send us threw narrow, baddie filled sections very logical. At a certain point in the game, depending on how good you are at melee combat, picking up a gun and firing from cover is the only viable option to progress.
As for the story, I don't think that it works to well on that level either. Since your sister has been captured by the government, any consideration past the immediate goal will inevitably lead you to their role in the big picture. I'm not saying they aren't evil, just that they aren't that evil. With the position of comically evil villain notably vacant, it's a lot easier for Faith to step up and actually end up being the bigger jerk. First she knocks out a few policemen, fine no lasting damage done. Then she kills a few. Okay, it was them or her, I would probably have done the same. But before long you're looking through the scope of a sniper rifle, pondering on how you'll stop that convoy when suddenly... "Wait, wasn't I supposed to be the good guy?". Again the whole thing isn't completely off, but couldn't they at least let Faith show some form of regret or remorse for what she had to do? As in, at all? As it stands her portrayal just reminds me of what Yahtzee said about the protagonist of Prototype.
And then there's the ending. How exactly does throwing one cog in the large regime off a skyscraper end things? Sure Faith and her sister (note that I don't even remember her name) get to hug backlit against the sunrise, but then what. Will the government collapse because one plan to eliminate the runners failed. Will they stop chasing Faith? How do they get off that building? How can they expect to live on? If it's an ending, then why does it give no form of closure?