EA rejects Mirror's Edge 2 pitch.

  • 89 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by BulletproofMonk (2721 posts) -

So yeah, I guess Mirror's Edge 2 isn't happening anymore. At least for now. Here's a copy of the news article from Eurogamer: 
 

Development of Mirror's Edge 2 has been "stopped" by EA.

A team at DICE showed EA a prototype that was "declined", according to a Eurogamer Sweden translation of a Press 2 Play TV report.

"Patrick [Soderlund - EA driving and shooting game boss] acknowledges that Mirror's Edge didn't match up to their expectations regarding sales, and that has stopped the sequel that has been in development," declared the report, published originally in December.

"EA was shown a prototype, but declined with askance. The project has been stopped - involved parties at DICE are working on something else now. Patrick himself seems to have Mirror's Edge near his heart, but they are not in the business of charity."

Presumably the extra development is going into Battlefield 3 - EA's well publicised attempt at wrestling shooter supremacy from the Call of Duty series.

Patrick Soderlund confirmed last summer that "a small team" at DICE was 'on' a new Mirror's Edge game. Eurogamer pressed him on that point last November.

"Mirror's Edge is an IP that's close to my heart and EA's as well. It was a bold move from us. I'm proud we made it. It obviously didn't reach the commercial success we wanted, even though it wasn't bad at all," he said.

"I still think as a company we're going to talk about it when we're going to talk about it. What I can say is, we haven't buried it. We're absolutely continuing to support Mirror's Edge as an IP. When we're ready to talk about it, we'll talk about it."

EA Games boss Frank Gibeau went on record a few weeks later to say that the execution of Mirror's Edge "fell short". "There were issues with the learning curve, the difficulty, the narrative, and then there was no multiplayer either," he said.

Mirror's Edge, a Parkour-inspired first-person action game, was released late 2009 on PC, PS3 and Xbox 360. Despite an 8/10 recommendation from Eurogamer, the eye-catching title failed to, well, catch punters' eyes - entering the UK all-formats chart at 20.

Eurogamer has requested comment from EA.

   
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-02-14-report-ea-rejects-mirrors-edge-2-pitch     
 
Kind of a bummer. Mirror's Edge had some great potential. Some improvements with the combat and it would've been fantastic. Oh well, at least they're not completely abandoning it, which gives some hope. 
 
Also, couldn't come up with a better title. Lazy.
#2 Posted by TheDoubleJ (204 posts) -
@BulletproofMonk:
yeah i'll stay hopeful mirror's edge had problems but there are no games like it 
#3 Posted by JacDG (2126 posts) -

Aw man, this makes me sad, problems and all, Mirror's Edge is one of my favorite games this generation I absolutely love the style, the music, art design, nearly everything about it actually. Are there any change another publisher could pick it up? Or are DICE owned by EA?

#4 Edited by mordukai (7153 posts) -

Well you know...If DICE had put the game through proper QA then a lot of issues would have been resolved. Mirror's Edge was a nice refreshing new IP that had charm but was plagued with some really odd design choices. As far as I'm concern EA is in the right.  
 
And again EA seems to think that MP=Longevity. That's ok Dead Space 2 is going to teach them a harsh lesson why MP  doesn't need to be in every freaking game. 

#5 Posted by bigsmoke77 (789 posts) -

I bet EA would give the game a go ahead if the plan was to put perks and killstreaks in it.

#6 Posted by Three0neFive (2293 posts) -

I know everyone likes to shit on EA's vision of every game having multiplayer (and rightfully so, usually), but I think Mirror's Edge multiplayer would actually be pretty awesome. Sure, you'd probably have some shitty deathmatch mode or something tacked on, but imagine a cops and robbers style mode, or even a terrorist hunt style mode.

#7 Posted by nick_verissimo (1386 posts) -

It's pretty unfortunate, but ultimately it does come down to a company's bottom line when you want to go on and make a sequel.  Mirror's Edge had a lot of interesting things going on in that game and, even though it's not dead, it seems like were never going to know where the potential of that series could go.  It's just sort of annoying that new styles of games aren't allowed to grow when they don't earn enough money the first time around.  Oh well, I'm hopeful that the game eventually gets a sequel or at least another company does the first-person parkour thing.

#8 Edited by X19 (2306 posts) -

I wonder how many years EA will carry on with thinking a game is pointless without mp. Mirrors Edge showed that  parkour and a feeling of movement could work in a FPS. Even if a second game doesn't get made I'm glad that other devs have seen this and our implementing it in to their games.

#9 Posted by FrankCanada97 (4039 posts) -
@Mordukai said:
" Well you know...If DICE had put the game through proper QA then a lot of issues would have been resolved. Mirror's Edge was a nice refreshing new IP that had charm but was plagued with some really odd design choices. As far as I'm concern EA is in the right.   And again EA seems to think that MP=Longevity. That's ok Dead Space 2 is going to teach them a harsh lesson why MP  doesn't need to be in every freaking game.  "
Why wouldn't they? Battlefield 2 was one of their best selling games and people are still playing it.
#10 Posted by jorbear (2517 posts) -

MIrror's Edge definitely wasn't a game for me, but it is still sad to see it go. At least the resources spent in this are going to Battlefield 3.

#11 Edited by ProfessorEss (7382 posts) -

I'm always torn when Mirror's Edge 2 is brought up.
On one hand it was pretty good, and pretty original.
But at the same time, it wasn't that good and I'm not convinced a sequel would be that much better.
 
It reminds me of Crackdown, in that I think we needed an Infamous more than we needed a Crackdown 2 (if you catch my drift).

#12 Posted by jozzy (2042 posts) -

Yeah, a multiplayer mode where you have to "race" eachother actually sounds like a lot of fun for this game.

#13 Posted by mordukai (7153 posts) -
@FrankCanada97 said:
" @Mordukai said:
" Well you know...If DICE had put the game through proper QA then a lot of issues would have been resolved. Mirror's Edge was a nice refreshing new IP that had charm but was plagued with some really odd design choices. As far as I'm concern EA is in the right.   And again EA seems to think that MP=Longevity. That's ok Dead Space 2 is going to teach them a harsh lesson why MP  doesn't need to be in every freaking game.  "
Why wouldn't they? Battlefield 2 was one of their best selling games and people are still playing it. "
In FPS maybe. Only good MP adds longevity. Go look at the numbers and see which MP are being played on xbl and psn. Not every game needs MP. As proven by the first game which still has a strong community with no MP.
#14 Posted by SomeJerk (3253 posts) -

The current Dice QA team was the one that worked on BC2:Vietnam QA, so if it's down to them it's no surprise.
 
And besides, it's all about taking down Call of Duty now.

#15 Posted by 234r2we232 (3181 posts) -

EA will only lke it if you can turn it into an annual franchise. Also, DLC.

#16 Posted by ___pocalypse (561 posts) -

Bummer. I like Mirror's Edge a lot, and I think a sequel could do awesome things. I think multiplayer would be interesting, either timed trials or some kind of co-op mode (which could be infuriatingly hard but still fun), but I can see how it wouldn't be a priority kind of game. I loved the narrative style and the visuals stand up pretty well even though it's several years old at this point. I'd really love to see something in the future, even if it's way far down the road.

#17 Edited by atomic_dumpling (2473 posts) -

Guess I will play through ME another five times then. As for the odd design choices, two come to mind: The jarring cutscenes and the weapons. I made it a point to play through this game not shooting dudes, because I didn't feel the tacked-on gunplay . 
 
I was looking forward to ME2 being released some day with great artstyle and another kickass soundtrack by Magnus Birgersson. Bummer.

#18 Posted by Ventilaator (1501 posts) -

I liked MIrror's Edge a lot as it was, so I would definitely be interested in a sequel developed from the point of view that there were serious issues that need to be addressed, because THAT game would be amazing.

#19 Posted by mordukai (7153 posts) -
 @JacDG: DICE is owned by EA lock stock.  If EA says Mirror's Edge is on hold then know it's on hold. 
 
@somejerk:
 I don't think the AQ team is to blame but more DICE and EA for rushing it and not giving ample time for the AQ team to do their job. There were parts in Mirror's Edge where you seriously had to question the developers.  
 
THis also might be some PR going on over there. Remember  how Jaffe flat out publicly denied he was working on a new Twisted Metal. Shiiiiit, he even went as far as telling people he will not be at E3. Not even as a visitor. 
#20 Posted by Jayzilla (2562 posts) -

good. the first game is rubbish.

#21 Posted by Psykhophear (939 posts) -

"YOU CRETINS!!!"
#22 Edited by Underachiever007 (2468 posts) -

Mirror's Edge had a lot of cool ideas going for it. It could have done well with a sequel.

#23 Posted by ryanwho (12082 posts) -

Hey DICE, have fun attempting to key into the COD demographic with more watered down versions of Battlefield games year to year.

#24 Posted by Obsidian (346 posts) -

Mirror's Edge is still one of my favorite games to go back to.  I was really looking forward to seeing what they were going to do with the sequel.  Today is a sad day.

#25 Posted by RagingLion (1365 posts) -

*looks up at sky*   "NNnnnoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!"
 
I'm extremely disappointed about this and seriously, shut up about multiplayer.  You're chucking away so many innovative game ideas if you then force multiplayer on a world/concept where it just doesn't fit or is just ultimately pretty pointless or arbitrary if you create it.

#26 Posted by Toms115 (2316 posts) -

 "There were issues with the learning curve, the difficulty, the narrative, and then there was no multiplayer either,"   
upsets me so much that guys like this are the ones who make the big calls. if this is true and not some hokey "ooh let's reel them in" publicity stunt, then wave goodbye to the most original ip to have come along in the last ten years.

#27 Posted by Dr_VonBoogie (348 posts) -

I'm not sure I properly understand, from what I read it sounds as though they just put Mirror's Edge 2 on hold. If that's the case then I'll just have to be patient.

#28 Posted by slyspider (1234 posts) -

i loved the first game, 2015 ill be playing the second, my guess

#29 Posted by JasonR86 (9710 posts) -

This is to bad.  I liked the first game despite the fact that it wasn't that good of a game.  I thought there was a lot of potential with this idea and the mechanics they developed.  They just needed to fine tune what was good and either entirely fix or remove what was bad (ex; the fighting).  At least EA publish the first game.  They took a chance and that's more then what a lot of publishers would do.  Remember, Mirror's Edge came out right around the time Dead Space did.  Both were pretty big chances from EA's perspective.  That's cool EA did that.  I hope they keep doing it.  I was hoping they would do it with Mirror's Edge 2 but I understand why they didn't. 

#30 Edited by coaxmetal (1620 posts) -

Bummer, a sequel could have done a lot for that franchise. I mean, simply getting rid of the combat could have made that game much much better, and using better animated cutscenes would have helped too. The actual parkour-style gameplay parts of the game were fantastic, it was all the other crap that was wrapped around it that was a problem. 
 
Also, citing that the problem is difficulty and lack of MP is stupid.

#31 Posted by JCannihilates (16 posts) -

Dear EA, I don't want multiplayer in all my games. If you put all that effort into the single player instead of dividing it between the two you can create an engaging and rewarding experience people will still play over and over. Look at Vanquish for example. Or, in your own company, Mass Effect or Dragon Age. I don't see anyone still playing Bioshock 2 just because you dumped a multiplayer mode into it.

#32 Edited by Meowayne (6084 posts) -

  
Well fuck. The first one is easily one of my favorite games this generation. 
 
More explosion simulators it is, then.
 
Edit: While I think that the concept of cramming multiplayer into games that don't need it is one of the most retarded and harmful ones the industry has today, I did thoroughly miss competetive "races" in the first Mirror's Edge and wished very badly that the game had multiplayer.
#33 Posted by Hailinel (24875 posts) -
 "There were issues with the learning curve, the difficulty, the narrative, and then there was no multiplayer either," he said.
 
Yes, because the lack of multiplayer was what everyone complained about. :|
Online
#34 Posted by Little_Socrates (5677 posts) -
@JCannihilates said:
"  I don't see anyone still playing Bioshock 2 just because you dumped a multiplayer mode into it. "
That's because 2K dumped a multiplayer mode into it, not EA. And I'll agree with everyone here who thinks a Mirror's Edge multiplayer would actually be pretty cool if it emphasized the chase aspect of the game. The only games EA doesn't seem to be messing with are the BioWare titles because those are already wildly successful as things stand. Besides, EA's getting their multiplayer BioWare game with The Old Republic.
 
I doubt I would have bought a Mirror's Edge 2 if they had made it. That game was fine, but the fiction and the aesthetic didn't entice me at all. The music was pretty good, and the parkour gameplay was fun, but that's all I liked about it. One of the sequences in the finale (the large room with about 12 dudes with machine guns) was almost as ill-advised as the last circle of Hell in Dante's Inferno and severely soured my experience with the game. 
 
I'm glad I played Mirror's Edge, but I really have no interest in playing a sequel. Rather than having those folks work on Battlefield 3, though, can't we have them work on a new IP that uses elements of Mirror's Edge in a game that's more openly palatable?
#35 Posted by benjaebe (2783 posts) -

My heart sank a little when I read this. I absolutely loved the first game.
 
I can't help but question EA's judgement. I mean....they green-lit an Army of Two sequel. Surely they can afford to put Mirror's Edge out there.

#36 Posted by Napalm (9020 posts) -
@bigsmoke77 said:
" I bet EA would give the game a go ahead if the plan was to put perks and killstreaks in it. "
Yeah this would probably the unfortunate truth. I think if they focused 100 percent on making Mirror's Edge about the parkour and traversal-based gameplay from the first-person perspective, I think these guys could have something brilliant.
#37 Edited by Venatio (4491 posts) -
@JacDG said:

" Aw man, this makes me sad, problems and all, Mirror's Edge is one of my favorite games this generation I absolutely love the style, the music, art design, nearly everything about it actually. Are there any change another publisher could pick it up? Or are DICE owned by EA? "

You said everything I was gonna say, this bums me out alot, I've been waiting for a long time for some news on this game
 
And yeah, EA owns DICE sadly, they're just focusing everything on BF3 :(
 
A sequel could be amazing
#38 Posted by EndlessObsidian (476 posts) -

Fuck. 
 
Oh well, look on the bright side, at least we will prolly be getting a new FPS with an online component which features some sort of leveling system. We haven't had one of them in a while. :-/ 

#39 Posted by babblinmule (1262 posts) -

Damn thats depressing, the 1st one was probably my game of the year for 2008!

#40 Posted by LiquidPrince (15952 posts) -

Meh.

#41 Posted by Azteck (7449 posts) -

FUCK. I really wanted this sequel. Goddammit.

#42 Posted by Finalwish (35 posts) -

EA really love putting MP into everything, I dont really see why they wouldnt make a new one, of course a new concept of gaming isnt going to top charts in a world currently ruled by CoD and Halo. 
 
Lets just hope Battlefield 3 lives up to the hype because it seems that 100% of dice are now on it after cancelling every other game they were on.

#43 Posted by iam3green (14390 posts) -

well that sucks. it was a good game i played a little bit of it. i thought it was different to play.  
 
i don't know about battlefield 3. it might be good but it not. they might put something in there that might change the game to a different game. when battlefield2  that came out on the consoles, it was totally different compared to the one on PC. 
 
EA is just thinks that everygame needs multiplayer in it. games don't really need multiplayer to be good. there are some awesome single player games that didn't have multiplayer.

#44 Posted by captain_clayman (3321 posts) -

SON OF A-- 
 
i want a second mirror's edge :(

#45 Posted by GreggD (4505 posts) -
@sofacitysweetheart said:
" EA will only lke it if you can turn it into an annual franchise. "
That's old thinking.
#46 Edited by Droop (1882 posts) -

Mirror's Edge is a great game, people just didn't know how to play it and then started calling it bad :x 
 
I'd love to see a sequel.

#47 Posted by zudthespud (3281 posts) -

I really liked Mirrors Edge, I got it in the steam sale last xmas and it was the most pleasant of surprises. It's a shame this has happened, but if it means they are putting more people on BF3 then I don't mind. 

#48 Posted by Jimbo (9815 posts) -

The first game was alright, but I don't think it did well enough for them to justify a sequel.  Dead Space was lucky enough to get one imo, let alone Mirror's Edge.

#49 Posted by Aetheldod (3586 posts) -
@Droop said:
" Mirror's Edge is a great game, people just didn't know how to play it and then started calling it bad :x  I'd love to see a sequel. "
Yeah , I fail to see what was wrong with it ..... in moments like this I still remember the crappy "evil corporate EA" of yore , so its official I wont be playing B3. Cant Dice just simple say FU EA we will publish it by ourselves?
#50 Edited by OneManX (1693 posts) -
@Aetheldod:  If DICE had to money to develop and publish/market their own boxed retail game.. they wouldn't be working for EA. 
 
Edit: i'm shocked that people get upset that companies do things to make money, that is what matters. You can take risk here and there (hell EA took 2 the same year in Dead Space and Mirror's Edge), but in gaming those risk can lead to HUGE losses, the first Mirror's Edge was okay, but nothing more than okay, I can see EA's point about not making a sequel to a game that didn't do to well, retail wise.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.