Mirror's Edge Catalyst: Level Design v.s Art Direction
polycounter lvl 9
Interesting article:
http://www.mirrorsedge.com/news/runners-vision-in-mirrors-edge-catalyst?utm_campaign=medgc_hd_ww_ic_soco_fb_mec-fb-runners-vision-mar-22&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&cid=3842&ts=1458759603960&sf45199287=1
Though, both me and my friends are enthusiast about the next installement, he felt a bit of disapointment in their choice to go Open World, stating '' the balance between level design and the art won't be as consistent as in the first game.''
He said: In the first game, every props and assets felt natural in their place and blended naturally with the rest. You didn't feel they were ''placed'' or put there by someone to fit gameplay mechanics, they were there and were visually cohesive with the rest''. The game felt more immersive according to him.
Based on what he saw from the second game, he said that they shoudn't have gone open world because: ''I feel they're going to put alot of pipes going nowhere and floating platforms there just to fill the world and fit gameplay, it won't be as controlled and consistent as the first game aesthetically. It will feel like a playground, not a natural breathing city.''
Here's a pic from the second game
What do you think?
http://www.mirrorsedge.com/news/runners-vision-in-mirrors-edge-catalyst?utm_campaign=medgc_hd_ww_ic_soco_fb_mec-fb-runners-vision-mar-22&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&cid=3842&ts=1458759603960&sf45199287=1
Though, both me and my friends are enthusiast about the next installement, he felt a bit of disapointment in their choice to go Open World, stating '' the balance between level design and the art won't be as consistent as in the first game.''
He said: In the first game, every props and assets felt natural in their place and blended naturally with the rest. You didn't feel they were ''placed'' or put there by someone to fit gameplay mechanics, they were there and were visually cohesive with the rest''. The game felt more immersive according to him.
Based on what he saw from the second game, he said that they shoudn't have gone open world because: ''I feel they're going to put alot of pipes going nowhere and floating platforms there just to fill the world and fit gameplay, it won't be as controlled and consistent as the first game aesthetically. It will feel like a playground, not a natural breathing city.''
Here's a pic from the second game
What do you think?
Replies
If ME is going to be open world, I'd be much happier with a map that provides great play and emergent experiences than with a map that compromised itself for believability. I never really bought the game's setting in the first place though. The draw's always been purely mechanical.
In any case I hope that these "bread crumbs" can be turned off (the red line, not the colored objects). Whenever there's this guiding line in a game you just follow it like a zombie and rush through the game world missing what should be part of the fun: exploring, running through the world and finding clever solutions to overcome obstacles. Especially in a game like that.
Reading through the article I feel like he's more concerned about players finding a way fast than making this the core mechanic that's fun as well. But we'll see.
It looks even whiter than the first one though. I hope they don't go too light on the colours.
What I'm more concerned with is Faith' personality, the backstory and how much combat there will be in the game - hopefully not too much.
From all the media I saw, I get the impression that the game feels a bit too much like an intentionally more grim or gritty sequel. I hope the lighthearted feeling is still in there somewhere.
The runner vision looks a bit extreme, but I guess it'll be optional like in the first game.
Edit: There will also be no Merc, obviously. I enjoyed his radio messages.