http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/927/927781p2.html

"Mirror’s Edge is a classic example of some awesome ideas that just didn’t pan out the way that was originally intended. The list of moves could be more expansive -- maybe by adding a fourth button to the mix -- and the world feels entirely too constricting for what could be a huge open city. Couple those gripes with some unappealing combat and a sometimes buggy design and Mirror’s Edge falls short of my expectations. The ideas are there for a very cool experience, and I truly hope that a sequel is spawned, but this first attempt falls just a bit short.

"PS3 version looks just a bit better than 360."

PS3 version looks a bit better? Wait...what?

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/928/928890p2.html

"For these misgivings, there’s no doubting that Mirror’s Edge is a special game. More than just unique, it’s a thrilling and stylish venture to untapped territory that’s assured in its firstperson take on platforming. Though an inane plot and limp combat see it falter briefly, the strong visual design and dynamic mechanic ensure it still emerges as a game to be celebrated."

Thoughts? Rental for me

It seems that when you're running around and jumping all over the place the game is uber fun...but the combat = lamesauce.

Interesting to note, IGN gave it a 5/10 for Lasting Appeal and IGN UK gave it a 7.5/10 for Lasting Appeal. Both said it was short,(6 hours) but only the latter found value in time trials/racing.

I don't care much about ign but metacritic has 81 for 360 and 82 for ps3

i remeber when 360 versions looked a bit better than ps3 version ign would mark down the score, but thankfully they have become a bit more sane.

it may be the case that ps3 version looks slightly better due to it being lead developed on, but at the end of the day both games are same, i mean u will get the same enjoyment out of both.

ive stopped making threads re: 1 is slightly better than other in grafix because theres simply no point, if there the same game and nothing is game breaking.

1up gave it an A. I enjoyed the demo, but not enough to pay full price for it.

i feel exactly the same way. i'd be thrilled if somebody got for me for christmas, but it's not something i would pay for. they should have made it a downloadable title.

Heck I'll buy it just because the developer is trying something new. I loved the demo but what came through was having combat in place actually felt wrong alongside the free running, etc. I know they probably felt 'action' was required but I felt from demo that if they'd dropped guns (for you) from the mix totally and polished the unarmed combat more that would have worked better with the free running elements.

I love the design look and the actual FPR elements (Fist Person Running anyone) were awesome in the demo. I actually spent more time just playing with how good that was vs the combat elements.

Mind you Assassin's Creed has all the same flaws really - great ideas, graphics, etc. and had a poor story/content... and that still sold well enough.

I wish developers would realize sometimes you don't need guns in every game to sell. Puzzles, running and pure melee would have been far more welcome here.

The demo was awesome but I have the feeling that there are too few moves in the game and that this really is a trial-and-error proces venturing into the unknown of gameplay!... Maybe a sequel that does it just a tad better and more expansive... Me = not buying @ 60$!!! Maybe 40...

I'll probably buy it, but it's not going to be this year. For a 6 hour game that still manages to feel repetitive I'll wait for the bargain bin.

Why be surprised at PS3 version looking better than 360 one? it was lead developed on the PS3, after all.

I'll try and rent it first... or borrow.. or something. From what I saw, it's a cool game.