Mirror's Edge demo now includes Time Trial Mode
by Alan Tsang 
{ Dec 17th 2008 at 4:00PM }
Tme Trial Mode "challenges players to find the fastest routes throughout the city." You can even upload your best times to the scoreboards and compare it against your friends. We doubt any of this will cause a sudden spike in Mirror's Edge sales, but hey, it's free!
[Via press release]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Tru-blu @ Dec 17th 2008 4:11PM
Time trial? Yes!!
Darkage @ Dec 17th 2008 4:22PM
The game's just far too short. Personally, I rented it as I knew it was a short game. If it had a longer game span, I would have bought it forever.
Chainblast @ Dec 17th 2008 11:53PM
I agree. Makes one wonder if it was priced at $40 how much better it would have sold. As soon as that sucker is $40 or less I'll gladly buy.
Rocks @ Dec 17th 2008 4:23PM
G WHIZ! not only am i going to download the demo again... i'm going to rush out and buy it!
dabamf @ Dec 17th 2008 4:25PM
Maybe the full game should be offered as a demo?
Game_playa @ Dec 17th 2008 5:06PM
Yeah, I don't think it warrants the full $60
dabamf @ Dec 17th 2008 5:09PM
Yeah, the game's more like a gimmick. There's a lot of potential there, but for now there's no reason to be too excited. Now, a multiplayer add-on...that would be the shiz.
JAH75157 @ Dec 17th 2008 4:42PM
crap i just deleted this
devilmaker @ Dec 17th 2008 4:40PM
I only got the game last sunday but I'm loving it.
I've completed the story twice so far, and I'm now going through all the speed runs and hard mode at the same time. Thats effectively a total of four play-throughs when they are all done, then I have all the time trials.
I think this game has a LOAD of replay-value in it, the main reason why people didn't want to get it was because they saw it as being too short. They should have looked at the wider picture.
AltCtrlPwn @ Dec 17th 2008 5:09PM
"I think this game has a LOAD of replay-value in it, the main reason why people didn't want to get it was because they saw it as being too short."
Aside from time trials, is there any reason to play through the story mode multiple times? I don't mind short games, as long as they have enough replay value. MGS4 comes to mind; I beat that game three times and I still want to play it (just that there's a ton of new games I'm currently playing).
dabamf @ Dec 17th 2008 5:21PM
Where is this elsewhere that you speak of? And exactly how many copies of Mirror's Edge have been sold in the land of Elsewhere?
slycooper_rocker (lorddshadow the amazing) [anti-panda death squadron force five] @ Dec 17th 2008 5:27PM
Europe.
macserv @ Dec 17th 2008 5:38PM
I love a lot about the game (I especially like the art style used... the clean color palette and smooth lines are refreshing in an era of dirt brown, sepia, and gray tones), and I think that the concept could probably be very successful... gamers like platformers, gamers like next-gen concepts and design.
But M.E. violates a cardinal rule: You don't mix heavy platforming with first-person gaming. In a game that involves precision jumping, landing, and grabbing, you need to be able to see the player's legs and arms at all times. Otherwise it becomes impossible to gauge, in one or two attempts, the timing of a jump, or when to grab, or if you're lifting your legs at the right time to clear an obstacle. This problem plagues M.E. almost as much as its brevity... it's way too short.
Make it longer. Make it 3rd-person. Give it a much richer, more detailed story. Then you've got a seller on your hands.
Battles @ Dec 17th 2008 5:57PM
Can you see your legs and arms at all time IRL? I really can't get into third person games. Gears being an exception just because of the graphics, maps and overall presentation.
It really unsuspends reality for me to control someone by seeing their entire body. It's like having a remote controlled person. I want to feel like I am in the game not controlling the person in the game.
Honestly, I would have gotten more into the game if it had more gunplay and multiplayer. That doesn't make me trailer trash because I enjoy FPS games. Nice stereotyping.
RasenganFury @ Dec 17th 2008 6:03PM
I think that the first person view works for the story but not modes that need extreme precision and accuracy like time trial and speed run. I hated those and ultimately gave up on them since they were so frustrating. As for the length of the game, if you play through a second time on hard for the gold trophy it doubles the playtime to about 13 hours. I think mirrors edge is a good concept and even though it was short, it was still a lot of fun.
macserv @ Dec 17th 2008 10:50PM
Battles, I agree that first person play can add realism and make a game more immersive, but it just doesn't work for a hardcore platforming game. Take any first person adventure — Metroid Prime for example. There's a lot of jumping, but most of it doesn't involve any precision, or you have a grappling hook to help you.
I'd say that you and I go in two directions on this game... I'd like it to become a more pure platformer, and you'd like it to be a first-person shooter (it's not stereotyping, it's fact... if you add more gunplay and multiplayer, it would definitely switch genres to FPS).
Perhaps both tastes could be easily satisfied with some conveniently-placed options for view mode and game mode.
Laurens Holst @ Dec 18th 2008 11:27PM
@Battles: “Can you see your legs and arms at all time IRL?”
No, but I can feel them, control their precise motion so that I am aware where they are, and use other senses such as my organ of balance.
For the lack of immersive full body senses simulation technology (PS9 maybe? ;p), I’ll stick with being able to see what I’m doing in a game.
Fane @ Dec 19th 2008 5:52PM
I feel the exact opposite way. For me, I feel much more immersion when in third-person view, because I have a more realistic sense of what is going on around my character. As Laurens said, in real life, I can sense my limbs and feel when there are objects or people near me, plus I have about 270 degrees of peripheral vision horizontally and about 180 degrees vertically; the third-person view comes closer to replicating that level of awareness.
Plus, I can twist my body or "flick" my eyeballs independently of turning my head to look at something. In first-person, I have to slowly turn my entire character's facing.
I always say that a character in a FPS is like a Dalek, rolling around on wheels, with a pivoting turret-like head, a monoscopic fish-eye-lens eyestalk, and a gun and a plunger-arm sticking out of its chest.
Mirror's Edge (demo) made some improvements on this, but not enough.
kentuckyfried @ Dec 17th 2008 6:15PM
Can't wait until this title picks up a $40 price...I missed the sale at Target a week or two ago. (sold out, too lazy to check all of them).
iamkid @ Dec 17th 2008 6:35PM
yay, something small to hold me over till christmas!
iamkid @ Dec 17th 2008 6:40PM
actually stew, it was only on ps3 that it sold more in europe, according to vgchartz. it sold generally more in america on 360. your statement is contradicting.
ps: do you really have to flame in here? seriously, it was a post about a demo getting something added to it and you flame. god console wars annoy me.
Roto13 @ Dec 17th 2008 6:53PM
People are afraid of short games for some reason. Like they don't understand that certain games are more fun to play through multiple times, especially games like Mirror's Edge where your second time flows so much better than your first time because you know what you're doing.
AltCtrlPwn @ Dec 17th 2008 7:01PM
Like I asked above, though:
is there a reason to play through the story more than once?
Roto13 @ Dec 17th 2008 7:06PM
"certain games are more fun to play through multiple times, especially games like Mirror's Edge where your second time flows so much better than your first time because you know what you're doing."
AltCtrlPwn @ Dec 17th 2008 9:53PM
I'll take that as a no.
I'd need a bit more reason than that to replay a game, whether it's unlocking bonus features, getting trophies, different endings, etc.
I played through MGS4 three times IN A ROW because of the different ways you can play through the game.
" . . . your second time flows so much better than your first time because you know what you're doing."
That's great, but honestly not enough for me, and maybe most other people. Did work with some classic games, for sure (MMX . . . no idea how many times I've beaten that game) but modern games really aren't like that anymore.
Roto13 @ Dec 17th 2008 9:56PM
"I'll take that as a no."
Because it's FUN is a perfectly good reason. It's the main reason to play any game in the first place.
bonini @ Dec 17th 2008 7:58PM
This is actually one of my favorite games ever. It's the first PS3 game where I really had any desire to attempt getting a platinum trophy. I picked it up used for $40, and it was definitely worth it. I played through once on regular difficulty just doing whatever, then on easy to get some more trophies, then on hard to get that trophy. After this it was time to start speed runs and time trials which took up a lot more time. It sounds repetitive, but I enjoyed finding better, faster ways of moving through a course. This adds up to over 30 hours of gameplay for me. Though I really enjoyed the demo, I must have played through that over 20 times (I usually don't play demos more then once) so if you really enjoy the demo then go pick this up.
ocdog45 @ Dec 17th 2008 10:38PM
that game is horrible. no way i would waste my time on that. its not even worth $60 since its so short.
linebeginstoblur @ Dec 18th 2008 1:25AM
Oh yay, here we are again with the "Americans love/are trash, while only other territories can actually appreciate art."
Shut up.
linebeginstoblur @ Dec 18th 2008 1:28AM
I understand why most people say that $60 might be too steep for the game, but personally, I think it was worth all 60 of them. Yes, it's short, but I had much fun and still do. Sure, I wish it would have been less, but come on... I don't decide whether a game is good or bad based on the price, because that would just be stupid.