Mirror's Edge Reboot(This is getting ridicolous)...Faith Restored

[turbojet]

Linky

Link

...

FUCK!

Fuck you, DICE. I hope Battlefied 3 aka Call of Duty rip-off fails. I hope it does so fucking horribly that it is a laughing stock like it truly should be. And the hell with you EA! You never deserved to have the rights to a game that had so much damn potential. Go on your way and be the next Activision. I hope you guys fucking rot.

I am sick and I mean sick of these blatant ass rip-offs and generic ass games. And when a game with little innovation finally comes around the corner and is presented as a test game, it doesn't get a chance to show its potential. I hate the gaming industry and their petty bullshit. Mirror's Edge sold more than enough to get a sequel. I am so angry right now...DAMMIT!

 

Edit

 

MIRROR's EDGE 2 MOTHERFUCKERS

Edited June 11, 2013 by turbojet

[Silencer226]

Linky

Link

...

FUCK!

Fuck you, DICE. I hope Battlefied 3 aka Call of Duty rip-off fails. I hope it does so fucking horribly that it is a laughing stock like it truly should be. And the hell with you EA! You never deserved to have the rights to a game that had so much damn potential. Go on your way and be the next Activision. I hope you guys fucking rot.

I am sick and I mean sick of these blatant ass rip-offs and generic ass games. And when a game with little innovation finally comes around the corner and is presented as a test game, it doesn't get a chance to show its potential. I hate the gaming industry and their petty bullshit. Mirror's Edge sold more than enough to get a sequel. I am so angry right now...DAMMIT!

[Ferno]

I liked Mirror's Edge man.

;-;

;_;

;3;

...I need a moment.

[Silencer226]

...I need a moment.

Edited February 17, 2011 by Silencer226

[JezMM]

Damn that's too bad. ME was kinda... annoying, but I really felt a sequel that paid attention to the issues it had would have been awesome. That and the plot wasn't 100% resolved of course. I am a little dissapointed to hear this but can't say I'll lose sleep over it.

[Detective Shadzter]

Saw this news the others day and find it very sad, as I really enjoyed the first game, even if it was annoying and difficult in places. A sequel with some improvements could have been amazing. I'd have loved to find out what happens next in the story, too.

[azoo]

And you thought EA couldn't get any worse with how they just raped SSX. Now they destroy Mirror's Edge to have DICE work on more CoD-cashins.

EA and Activision need to go dig themselves nice little holes so they curl up and die or something. Them and Microsoft's destruction of Rare is absolutely disgusting, and is an awful start for 2011.

[TheGerkuman]

The OP shouldn't be blaming DICE for this, it's not their fault that their work was rejected by EA for monetary reasons.

[Candescence]

'Tis a shame, but the OP and other shouldn't be blaming DICE.

Also, calling Battlefield a CoD rip-off will get you shot by Battlefield fans so very quickly. Hell, a good number of people reckon that the newer Battlefield games are better than Modern Warfare. Modern Warfare doesn't have 64-player multiplayer on PC, for starters.

Edited February 17, 2011 by Masaru Daimon

[Tornado]

I'm not sure I understand the outrage. I played the first game, and it was decent enough, but I wasn't blown away by it. There were a lot of nifty ideas in it, but not all of them were particularly well executed. And I'm pretty sure that EA said from the day the original came out that chances of a sequel rested squarely on sales of the original game, and it didn't exactly destroy sales charts based on what EA expected to get out of it (2 million copies is decent, but I'm guessing that the original game wasn't cheap to make in the first place if EA's required sales expectations were so high); so I'm not getting why EA and/or DICE should be murdered for not giving the go ahead for the sequel to a game that already failed to meet expectations for sales.

I also reject the implication that EA and/or DICE canceled this game so they could focus on "Call of Duty ripoffs," because I find the implication itself and the labeling of the Battlefield games as such to be total bullshit. We don't even know why it wasn't picked up. It was a developer's personal pet project on backburner development for the past 2 years, and I don't recall a particularly large number of those types of games being amazing enough successes to justify the buckets of cash that are typically sunk into them. Or maybe Soderlund wanted to do something that EA couldn't get behind, and he simply wouldn't budge on the issue.

Reports of my return have been greatly exaggerated.

Edited February 17, 2011 by Tornado

[Glenn]

The original Mirror's Edge, well... it tried. I had a blast playing it on a friend's Xbox360, but only seeing it being sold dirt-cheap (brand new copy on Amazon was £4.99 last January) had me tempted to own it myself on PlayStation3, and even then I ultimately didn't bother. What I recognise, however, is that it was an original videogame that was brave to try something new (basically, being a platformer in first person) and it was very nicely made. Indeed, a sequel would have probably made me pick up the original and get involved in the ongoing franchise.

The tragedy of this story, therefore, is that another original videogame idea is being destroyed in favour of modern trends. In all honesty, it has been so long that I naturally assumed there would be no sequel. Unfortunately, that probably means that a lot of people's hard work is going to be ruined. That's tragic, no matter how you view it.

[SuperStingray]

I was heartbroken when I read the subject line. Mirror's Edge is probably in my top 20 and I was really looking forward to seeing the series continue. I don't care if Battlefield is better or worse than CoD- there are enough war shooters out there to outweigh a tank, but I'd be hard pressed to find gameplay or environments like in Mirror's Edge anywhere else.

...I guess I'm finding Solace in that they specifically said it's "stopped" rather than "cancelled" but that's clearly just false hope. I hope there's at least a spiritual successor at some point.

Edited February 17, 2011 by SuperStingray

[Carbo]

I like your implication that Battlefield is a Call of Duty ripoff when the Battlefield series holds its roots way earlier than the first CoD.

Really, reasoning out why this happening is sort of pointless, and I'm surprised it wasn't canned earlier considering sales of the game only really went up after the prices plummeted down. I loved the concept of it, the environments, graphics and music were pretty immersive, but with buggy detection, uninspired story, claustrophobic setting, linear pathways and inconsistency which would boil it down to trial and error at worst killed that and I just found it an incredibly run-of-the-mill title in the end.

The sequel isn't cancelled though, it's only "stopped" so it might be picked up again. I would support a sequel if it'd improve over it's glaring flaws, but going by with what I had played it's not something I can particularly hype myself up about. I was probably as excited as anyone else for the first game and I'll give it mad props for being original and trying something new, but I found myself incredibly disappointed with the end product. It would have almost been better as a downloadable title due to its length, cause I sure as hell wouldn't pay full price for it.

Edited February 17, 2011 by Carbo

[turbojet]

The OP shouldn't be blaming DICE for this, it's not their fault that their work was rejected by EA for monetary reasons.

Oh yes, they get it too. DICE put a small team on the Mirror's Edge 2 IP prototype showing that they themselves didn't put much effort on the game. You don't put a small team on a damned sequel. Portal had a small team. Portal 2 has all of Valve working their asses off. You don't half ass a sequel that is supposed to expand and fix all of the bugs in the first one.

EA has no concept of selling. If I recall, no first game is absolutely perfect and a huge seller. Assassin's Creed sold alot and if I recall was up against Mirror's Edge at the time, but I want you to sit there with a straight face and say that Assassin's Creed was not ass and damn near unbearable. Did Ubisoft quit on the Prince of Persia when it didn't sell alot? No. Why? Because Ubisoft takes pride in trying to be innovative.

And I may be a little too ticked off, but this is the one game that I wanted to see and play, and EA basically says that it is not worth the effort? Shit, Parkour is a cult phenomenon. You can't go turn on your TV set, watch a movie, or even walk around an university without seeing someone practice it. EA is a bunch of asshats. Mirror's Edge is the first game that actually captures the tenents and purpose of Parkour properly. If they can't see the marketing value in that, then EA can go screw.

@Carbo, those "glaring flaws," as you so eloquently put it, aren't so bad that the game was un-the-fuck-playable and could be easily reprimanded. I agree that it wasn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but I remember that it was literally a test game being made from a developer known FPS. As for the comment regarding Battlefield, I stand by it. Battlefied: Bad Company was originally supposed to be a Haha at the very serious Call of Duty games. With each game, it strays away from that and is becoming more and more like Call of Duty. And since Battlefied 3 will be another squad based shooter, it just makes the burn just so damn personal.

@Tornado, good points. Very good points. I am not going to criticize a business for being a business, but what the hell happened to creativity? Mario looks like a damn LSD made dream of man that had one too many shrooms. By all means, selling may be the main initaiative but where is the fun? Why must I feel like I have to turn myself in at the Geneva conference for multiple war crimes? And if you say that the Runners were potential terrorists, I swear I will...nevermind. Not the point. Anyways, where is the art and the iniative of trying to be different anymore in anything? I just really hate the "Lets take the music industry and apply it to video game industry," mindset.

Edited February 17, 2011 by turbojet

[Adamis]

There's still a chance. They've rejected this prototype, but remember that EA likes Faith and wants to see her again.

I'm sure they'll pitch another prototype

[Tornado]

Oh yes, they get it too. DICE put a small team on the Mirror's Edge 2 IP prototype showing that they themselves didn't put much effort on the game. You don't put a small team on a damned sequel. Portal had a small team. Portal 2 has all of Valve working their asses off. You don't half ass a sequel that is supposed to expand and fix all of the bugs in the first one.

You do do all of those things when you don't actually have the official go ahead from the people that pay the bills to do so. You can't throw an entire development house at a game before it is a sure thing that it will even be approved.

Did Ubisoft quit on the Prince of Persia when it didn't sell alot? No. Why? Because Ubisoft takes pride in trying to be innovative.

This is a curious example to use. Ubisoft did give PoP a second chance. And they did so by pulling off one of the most blatant, laughable and downright stupid shifts into "darker and edgier" territory that the industry has ever seen. So much so that the only reason it is even brought up these days is to laugh at it. So much so that even though the game objectively plays far better than the original does, it is almost always treated as a considerably worse game. Would you rather EA had approved the sequel that way?

They also approved a continuation of the reboot series from a couple of years ago. That was a download only title that they basically dumped with little to no fanfare. Would you rather EA had approved the sequel that way?

Reports of my return have been greatly exaggerated.

Edited February 17, 2011 by Tornado

[sjmaster92]

So instead of a sequel to an original and innotative game, were getting another generic FPS? SMH @ EA.

[JezMM]

Did Ubisoft quit on the Prince of Persia when it didn't sell alot? No. Why? Because Ubisoft takes pride in trying to be innovative.

I also find this an interesting example to use considering they chose Prince Of Persia over Beyond Good and Evil, an equally original and highly acclaimed game because the former sold better. I keep meaning to try the original PoP because I hear nothing but praise for it, but goddamn I'm bitter about it being the reason BG&E has been in such cockteasing limbo for half the last decade.

Edited February 17, 2011 by JezMM

[turbojet]

You do do all of those things when you don't actually have the official go ahead from the people that pay the bills to do so. You can't throw an entire development house at a game before it is a sure thing that it will even be approved.

[SuperStingray]

Okay, since it's not really canceled but just put on hiatus for the time being, then I retract everything I said. If they want to concentrate all possible effort on Battlefield 3 to make it the best game it can be, more power to them. My concern was that EA ONLY wants to focus on those games. I was kind of nervous that they were inspired by Activision's "throw out everything except your flagship series" approach and can everything that isn't guaranteed to sell like hotcakes that give you orgasms. But considering EA and DICE's interest in the game, I have little doubt that the IP will resurface in one way or another.

[Badnik Mechanic]

Can I just point something out here.

EA have done this before and gone onto release a game. Mirrors Edge 2 hasn't been cancelled, they've just rejected the prototype shown.

Now does anyone remember when Red Alert 3 was announced for PC, Xbox 360 and PS3? Does anyone remember what happened?

Shortly into it's development, EA announced that the PS3 version of RA 3 was put on indefinate hold, reason being was that they wanted the studio to focus completely on the PC/360 version and then focus all efforts onto the PS3 version.

Which is exactly what happened.

It's not like Mirrors Edge 2 is completely dead with utterly no hope. Chances are with Medal of Honor not doing too great, EA wants all focus on Battlefield 3 in order to win some love and attention from the many map backs and inevitable next Call of Duty announcement. EA is not the tyranical superpower that it once was, EA used to be in a position where it could release almost what it liked and if something failed, it didn't matter too much because there was always something else out that would make up the loss.

Now however, with Activisions dominance on music and the FPS genre, not to mention the number of sleeper games it makes, as well as capcom more or less cementing it's place with beat-em-ups in the last 4 years. EA is not the power house it once was. Yes it's still powerful, but not anywhere near as dominant as it used to be.

Theres a lot coming out this year, Killzone 3, Resistance 3 (maybe), Uncharted 3 (maybe) Gears 3, (lol all 3's!) as well as Duke and those new IPs we all seem to like.

Now considering all that... Would Mirrors Edge 2 be a very wise move for this year? Unless it was radical and clearly a good well made sequel, would it really do well in this year?

[Candescence]

Activisions dominance on music

[Badnik Mechanic]

What dominance? Guitar Hero is dead and gone.

[Detective Shadzter]

Mirror's Edge still "important" for EA

EA has refused to confirm recent reports that development of a Mirror's Edge sequel has been stopped, insisting the free-running FPS franchise is still in its thoughts.

Following news earlier this week that the publisher had allegedly declined a sequel proposal from developer DICE, an EA spokesperson told 1Up that it was still "an important franchise".

However, the spokesperson added that EA had "nothing further to announce" regarding its future plans for the series.

Mirror's Edge launched on PC, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 back in 2008 to strong reviews but middling sales.

"For those who can shrug off the contradictions and the limitations, ignore the tearing cityscape and lingering qualms about value for money, this will shove you so deeply into the experience of being in someone else's body, and taking it on a terrifying, breakneck joyride, that nothing else will matter." wrote Eurogamer's Christian Donlan in his 8/10 review.

An enjoyable 2D spin-off launched on the iPad in 2010 and last summer a "small team" at DICE was reportedly working on a full console sequel.

[eXtaticus]

Seeing as Mirror's Edge was one of the most thoroughly awful and wholly unenjoyable platformers that I've ever had the misfortune of playing through, I'm quite glad that all prospects for a sequel have been dashed. It is, quite probably, one of the least deserving non-FPS candidates for a follow-up that I've seen in the last five years, and quite simply shouldn't be given a second chance due to the sheer brokenness of the first game's concept and execution; I highly doubt that DICE could fix its horrendous problems with level viewability, shoddy combat sequences and generally rubbish game design for a sequel, especially seeing as they don't exactly have a track record for producing decent follow-ups to ANY of their long-running franchises - the shameless Call of Duty clones that are Battlefield's recent iterations, and the complete and utter failure that was Medal of Honor 2010's multiplayer are plain and honest pieces of proof to back this statement up.

Mirror's Edge, from almost the very start to its eventual finish, was a shockingly painful mess of a game to sit through, and shouldn't even be so much as considered to be anything close to sequel-worthy material - although I do agree that it probably wasn't cancelled for these reasons, (which is a shameful move on EA's part, especially so if the money that would have gone towards it went instead towards yet another monotonous Battlefield title) the fact that it was cancelled is, in itself, extremely good news for the platformer genre as a whole.