Mirror's Edge 2 listed on Amazon Germany

#1 Edited by Aegon (5496 posts) -

Right over here. Does this usually mean anything? A free-running game done right would be awesome.

#2 Edited by Benny (1951 posts) -

Looks like one or two smaller websites picked it up so we'll see if EA denies anything soon I guess.

#3 Posted by oldenglishC (945 posts) -

If it wasn't for the fact that I've convinced myself that this will be some terrible Kinect/PSmove game, this would be awesome news.

#4 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

It means EA is again fishing for sympathy. Hopefully they'll stick to their guns this time, rather than instantly buckling to shareholder value interests like last time. Well - easier said than done, if it's your career on the line.

#5 Posted by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@benny said:

Looks like one or two smaller websites picked it up so we'll see if EA denies anything soon I guess.

DICE doesn't do gimmick controls.

#6 Edited by McTangle (157 posts) -

Hot damn! A reference to this came up on LinkedIn some time back, so I'm holding out for a sequel.

#7 Posted by Nictel (2412 posts) -

That would be awesome

#8 Posted by Beaudacious (927 posts) -

Yes! Please new Mirrors Edge game!

#9 Posted by Lego_My_Eggo (1029 posts) -

It is not %100 confirmation, but some games have been revealed early by stores posting things like this, and i don't imagine someone just randomly putting that info in there database. Newegg put up Gran Turismo 6 for PS3 before Sony even revealed it, let alone for PS3. So EA will probably say its not real for now, and at E3 confirm it is coming, or if there is no news then it was probably some big mix up.

#10 Edited by AssInAss (2619 posts) -

NOPE NOPE NOPE

Won't believe it. Don't do this to my weak heart.

#11 Posted by Chibithor (574 posts) -

@seppli said:

DICE doesn't do gimmick controls.

That's why Rare is bringing back this historic (and now Rare's) franchise! Woo!

#12 Edited by JouselDelka (967 posts) -

@seppli said:

It means EA is again fishing for sympathy. Hopefully they'll stick to their guns this time, rather than instantly buckling to shareholder value interests like last time. Well - easier said than done, if it's your career on the line.

I have no idea what you just said

edit: but that does happen with most of your posts, so I'm not surprised.

#13 Posted by JacDG (2119 posts) -

@assinass said:

NOPE NOPE NOPE

Won't believe it. Don't do this to my weak heart.

They can only do it so many times, I'm not excited the least this time around... nope, it isn't happening..... not hoping anything over here.... still not.... damn, it happened again.

#14 Edited by Snail (8595 posts) -

I'd like for that Steven Spielberg parkour game to happen, but that obviously doesn't seem likely. I'd also really like Mirror's Edge 2 to finally happen of course.

Online
#15 Edited by Funkydupe (3311 posts) -

I liked Mirror's Edge more for the concept and setting. The big sterile Big Brother type futurism set the mood nicely, and running from A to B made sense when the government had every other option under control. The gameplay was buggy, AI was stupid, characters you're supposed to care about are poorly fleshed out and the voice actors were amateurs, the paths you could take were linear, the fighting system was terribad and it just wasn't fun to trial/error in this game, some games actually make that aspect fun.

I'm excited for a sequel because of everything that can be possible in a game like this, with the original Mirror's Edge as a reference of what to do and not to do they should be able to make it a better experience.

#16 Edited by Animasta (14673 posts) -

@seppli said:

DICE doesn't do gimmick controls.

That's why Rare is bringing back this historic (and now Rare's) franchise! Woo!

considering EA owns the property, why would they give it to a microsoft owned studio?

#17 Edited by Chibithor (574 posts) -

@animasta said:

@chibithor said:

@seppli said:

DICE doesn't do gimmick controls.

That's why Rare is bringing back this historic (and now Rare's) franchise! Woo!

considering EA owns the property, why would they give it to a microsoft owned studio?

I don't know. It doesn't actually have to be owned by Rare, but I don't have answers for any questions regarding Rare making Mirror's Edge 2, especially if they start with 'why'.

#18 Posted by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -

@animasta said:

@chibithor said:

@seppli said:

DICE doesn't do gimmick controls.

That's why Rare is bringing back this historic (and now Rare's) franchise! Woo!

considering EA owns the property, why would they give it to a microsoft owned studio?

I don't know. It doesn't actually have to be owned by Rare, but I don't have answers for any questions regarding Rare making Mirror's Edge 2, especially if they start with 'why'.

That's the problem when you're just making jokes on the internet and someone comes along all serious and grown-up about the whole situation.
You never really know what to say to someone who takes a joke seriously because you're flabbergasted.

#19 Posted by Animasta (14673 posts) -

@chibithor said:

@animasta said:

@chibithor said:

@seppli said:

DICE doesn't do gimmick controls.

That's why Rare is bringing back this historic (and now Rare's) franchise! Woo!

considering EA owns the property, why would they give it to a microsoft owned studio?

I don't know. It doesn't actually have to be owned by Rare, but I don't have answers for any questions regarding Rare making Mirror's Edge 2, especially if they start with 'why'.

That's the problem when you're just making jokes on the internet and someone comes along all serious and grown-up about the whole situation.

You never really know what to say to someone who takes a joke seriously because you're flabbergasted.

oh no I knew it was a joke but it was a dumb joke that could've been done much better.

#20 Posted by StarvingGamer (8150 posts) -

I'll try not to be too excited.

#21 Edited by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -

@animasta said:

@zeforgotten said:

@chibithor said:

@animasta said:

@chibithor said:

@seppli said:

DICE doesn't do gimmick controls.

That's why Rare is bringing back this historic (and now Rare's) franchise! Woo!

considering EA owns the property, why would they give it to a microsoft owned studio?

I don't know. It doesn't actually have to be owned by Rare, but I don't have answers for any questions regarding Rare making Mirror's Edge 2, especially if they start with 'why'.

That's the problem when you're just making jokes on the internet and someone comes along all serious and grown-up about the whole situation.

You never really know what to say to someone who takes a joke seriously because you're flabbergasted.

oh no I knew it was a joke but it was a dumb joke that could've been done much better.

No, it was a good joke because you could've added to it.

Think about it, New Mirros Edge, still starring our suddenly beloved and very awesome female lead Faith Connors(seriously, all of a sudden she gets recognized in the year 2013 because nobody gave a shit about her in the past as a character) And she wears a fancy little backpack and in there is Kazooie!

#22 Posted by Chibithor (574 posts) -

@animasta said:

@zeforgotten said:

@chibithor said:

@animasta said:

considering EA owns the property, why would they give it to a microsoft owned studio?

I don't know. It doesn't actually have to be owned by Rare, but I don't have answers for any questions regarding Rare making Mirror's Edge 2, especially if they start with 'why'.

That's the problem when you're just making jokes on the internet and someone comes along all serious and grown-up about the whole situation.

You never really know what to say to someone who takes a joke seriously because you're flabbergasted.

oh no I knew it was a joke but it was a dumb joke that could've been done much better.

No, it was a good joke because you could've added to it.

Think about it, New Mirros Edge, still starring our suddenly beloved and every awesome female lead Faith Connors(seriously, all of a sudden she gets recognized in the year 2013 because nobody gave a shit about her in the past as a character) And she wears a fancy little backpack and in there is Kazooie!

Posting it I thought it would be a terrible thing to happen, but I think you're onto something now.

#23 Posted by jakob187 (21665 posts) -

I get this feeling that many people look back on the original game as this...well...original IP that was doing some different stuff at the time, had a striking art style, and generally forgot how rough it really was to actually play it half of the time because the first-person perspective didn't do a lot to help with these immense jumps.

Granted, the game was cool, but I remember there being a lot of negative talk about the game aside from originality and art direction.

#24 Edited by Demoskinos (14769 posts) -

Still after all of these years I don't get people's fascination for Mirror's Edge. I found it dreadfully boring and not because you're not shooting dudes. Its just boring.

#25 Posted by Hunter5024 (5617 posts) -

Oculus Rift support.

#26 Edited by EuanDewar (4893 posts) -

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE

#27 Posted by Blu3V3nom07 (4202 posts) -

Fool me. Why not.

Online
#28 Edited by Brendan (7768 posts) -

@jakob187: The game had plenty of issues and in practice was not fantastic, but the internet has rose-tinted it into oblivion. Jeff's review is a great resource if you want to know what that game actually was.

Online
#29 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@jouseldelka said:

@seppli said:

It means EA is again fishing for sympathy. Hopefully they'll stick to their guns this time, rather than instantly buckling to shareholder value interests like last time. Well - easier said than done, if it's your career on the line.

I have no idea what you just said

edit: but that does happen with most of your posts, so I'm not surprised.

Back when John Riccitiello took over the helm at EA as CEO, he started the famous *All Original IPs* and *Focus on Quality* initiatives, which brought us games such as Dead Space and Mirror's Edge. Pretty much all games between 2008 and 2010 were a result of that initial push, and they were almost all excellent. However, very few of them performed to expectations, and there was massive backlash from EA's shareholders against this direction. EA's brass vowed to go for safe bets only. Mainstreaming franchises - taking out the bold, replacing it with the old - in order to appeal to the masses. Rigidly sticking to too tight deadlines. Rushed and buggy releases. One desaster after another. All because EA's short sighted investors gelded the management for trying to build up some street cred with innovative high quality products.

There's a certain immaturity in how EA handles itself. Long term goals get tossed out at the first sign of trouble, then everything is being done to align one's products with short term shareholder value interests. This behaviour yields increasingly worse results, especially regarding quality. The brand suffers, sales suffer - until finally shareholders are yet again willing to give EA's officers the leeway to chart a new course based on valid long term strategy rather than immediate returns. Unless EA learns to stop overreacting and stick to their strategy as planned, instead of buckling to short sighted shareholder interests everytime a fiscal quarter is below expectations, history will repeat itself over and over again. Until eventually EA's finished.

Right now, it seems like EA is again willing to take some risks. Their operation is leaner and meaner, the future is uncertain. EA is the steward of its own destiny, simply because investors don't know what to expect. Fuck the shareholders I say! Consolidate EA's shares somehow, so that more reasonable minds are ultimately in charge. A majority shareholder with some integrity would be a godsend.

#30 Posted by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -

@brendan said:

@jakob187: The game had plenty of issues and in practice was not fantastic, but the internet has rose-tinted it into oblivion. Jeff's review is a great resource if you want to know what that game actually was.

Aw, isn't that cute.
Just because a lot of people actually believe it's a good game and still think it is doesn't really mean that they're wearing "rose-tinted" anything.

#31 Edited by RazielCuts (2951 posts) -

Take out the gunplay, make it for a smaller budget and release it on XBLA, PSN and Steam. Done.

#32 Posted by BeachThunder (11847 posts) -

@assinass said:

NOPE NOPE NOPE

Won't believe it. Don't do this to my weak heart.

Much better with the audio

D:

#33 Posted by Brendan (7768 posts) -

@zeforgotten: I'm not going to try and say that any one persons opinion is incorrect because that's an impossible thing to argue, it the shift in general opinion over time for that game was obvious, as was its reasoning.

When the game came out, the general consensus was that it was pretty good, but it had issues inherent in its design and that if a sequel was made then hopefully things could be improved. "At least they tried something different" was very common.

After it became generally well known that the small original IP experiment didn't work out well for EA and that they were going to trend towards doing things gamers hated again, opinion swung in very obvious way and suddenly everyone ignores the game faults because "At least it was something different".

Now that were far enough removed from the first part everyones opinion has solidified into this odd fantastic picture of a game that most agreed during their first critical impression was not faultless by a Texas mile.

Its pretty clear that the general opinion for this game has coincided with the change in opinion about EA from that brief high.

Online
#34 Edited by lucslade (10 posts) -

#35 Edited by Aegon (5496 posts) -

@lucslade said:

Oh shit. Why are they allowed to do this. Isn't anyone telling them to back off? Or maybe this is a marketing thing.

#36 Posted by McGhee (6094 posts) -

I would really love it, especially if they threw out the guns.

#37 Posted by McGhee (6094 posts) -

@brendan said:

@zeforgotten: I'm not going to try and say that any one persons opinion is incorrect because that's an impossible thing to argue, it the shift in general opinion over time for that game was obvious, as was its reasoning.

When the game came out, the general consensus was that it was pretty good, but it had issues inherent in its design and that if a sequel was made then hopefully things could be improved. "At least they tried something different" was very common.

After it became generally well known that the small original IP experiment didn't work out well for EA and that they were going to trend towards doing things gamers hated again, opinion swung in very obvious way and suddenly everyone ignores the game faults because "At least it was something different".

Now that were far enough removed from the first part everyones opinion has solidified into this odd fantastic picture of a game that most agreed during their first critical impression was not faultless by a Texas mile.

Its pretty clear that the general opinion for this game has coincided with the change in opinion about EA from that brief high.

Or maybe it's just that those of us that really liked the game are the ones actually still talking about it?

#38 Edited by lucslade (10 posts) -

@aegon: Personally I would love to see a new one. I think throughout playing that game (even though I loved it) I kept telling myself how good it could be.

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.