EA CEO Thinks Mirror's Edge "Deserves to Come Back"

[John Funk]

EA CEO Thinks Mirror's Edge "Deserves to Come Back"

Good news for fans of dystopian parkour simulators: EA CEO John Riccitiello thinks that despite mediocre sales, Mirror's Edge deserves to come back - but the game's design is at a bit of a crossroads right now.


Hang on to your hats, folks - it's recap time: Back in June [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/92366-Mirrors-Edge-2-in-the-Works], we learned that a sequel to 2008's Mirror's Edge was in the works, causing people who'd liked the first game to breathe a sigh of relief. After all, while Mirror's Edge was an innovative title in a sea of clones, its sales were below what publisher EA had been hoping for, and many feared that performing below expectations would harm prospects for a sequel based on the bottom line.

The good news turned to bad last month, when EA announced that it would be laying off earlier this week [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/95994-EA-Heavily-Cuts-Jobs-at-Mythic-Tiburon-Black-Box-and-Redwood].

Now, speaking with Kotaku [http://kotaku.com/5418000/ea-ceo-mirrors-edge-deserves-to-come-back-design-at-crossroads] at an interview in New York, EA big boss John Riccitiello says that he wants to see Mirror's Edge make a return: "We're still working through things like how to best deal with Mirror's Edge 2," he said. "There are some things we learned about that [first] game. It was, I think, a massively innovative product. To be honest with you, I think it's a game that deserves to come back."

That doesn't mean that Riccitiello thinks the first game was flawless, though - and development on a sequel means learning how to build on the original while correcting its mistakes. "Innovation doesn't mean it all works the first time ... If it did everyone would do it." In the case of Mirror's Edge 2, said the EA chieftain, this meant capitalizing on the game's strengths - its unique and recognizable aesthetic and original gameplay - while improving the flow and finding an identity:

[blockquote]I think Mirror's Edge was a fascinatingly original world. Fascinatingly original art direction. Music and sound design was great. I think the gameplay mechanic was a blast, but was intermittent and the levels didn't work. You found yourself scratching at walls at times, looking for what to do. Sometimes you had a roll going, downhill, slide, jump, slide, jump and then you just got stopped. It sort of got in the way of the fun.

It was like we couldn't quite decide if we were building Portal or a runner ... I've had several very lively debates with the dev team. And they are working on it. But there's a couple of different directions you could go.

You could say: This thing needs to be more traditional. It's first-person game. There's a lot of successful FPS products out there that do really well. We could move in that direction.

Or [you could say]: This was never about guns. It was about its stark originality. Maybe we can back away from some of those [older] things... and emphasize the smooth play and puzzles and move it toward, if you will, a Portal.[/blockquote]

Personally, I'd like to see a Mirror's Edge 2 that moved away from gunplay. The idea was that Faith was an athlete, able to run from the cops (who would be just normal people doing their duty, no?) or to take them down nonlethally through quick and agile disarms. Adding watered down gunfights made the game a mediocre shooter instead of focusing on the strengths of running one's way through a starkly beautiful urban setting.

So if it were up to me, Mr Riccitiello, I'd tell you to do that. But it's not, so all we can do is hope for the best - for a sequel that legitimately improves on the original.

Maybe they should ask the team that worked on Assassin's Creed II for pointers.

Permalink

 

[Amarok]

That sounds pretty cool! I gotta say I didn't think CEOs of publishers really cared about quality or innovation... Hats off to this man. And indeed, a smooth-flowing, guns free Mirror's Edge would be the shizzle.

 

[Lost In The Void]

It's looking like EA is getting better and better about qualtity control I can't wait to see how mirror's edge 2 comes out and whether there will be an exciting Edge lawsuit again

 

[Ph33nix]

god I hope they make a sequel even a prequel would be good.

 

[Kollega]

It's kind of strange how Ricitello actually cares about quality and innovation. Strange, but ultimately good. Or at least much better than Activision. If they make a sequel, i think i'll actuallly buy it.

 

[jthm]

Maybe some motivation for Faith other than "dystopia is bad". Just a thought.

 

[demoman_chaos]

I think they fail to realize innovation isn't innovation when you do it again.
I agree with Yahtzee when he says sequels are bad. All major releases these days have increasingly large numbers and are the same thing as last year with a few tweaks to make them seem interesting.
Take Madden, 20 years of the same game with a few tweaks here and there and a new game mode every few years. With any yearly sports game, you can miss 5 years and still miss really nothing.
Take the money from Mirror's Edge 2 and use it to make something new...... and good.

 

[Byers]

Get rid of the godawful cartoon cut scenes and they'd be halfway there.

 

[metalmmaniac]

this is great news for me, i loved mirrors edge. they just need to keep the gunplay but really only make it a last resort, focus on steath play and getting around every enemy at all costs.

I'll take a sequel to innovation over generic modern warshooter 85 or football game 8537290942.

 

[Truly-A-Lie]

I enjoyed the beginning of Mirror's Edge. I just didn't like getting stuck climbing things slowly, and getting stuck in cover as I waited to shoot people later on. A sequel that focuses on the rooftop running of the game's opening is something I would definitely buy.

 

[drakenabarion]

I really am looking forward to another installment of Mirrors Edge. There are only so many times you can play the same levels. But still, even if I am just testing some driver updates and looking to see how they affect the game, I end up playing it longer than I intend.

For those looking for innovation, yes you are right. Innovation does not happen if its just the same thing over and over again. For me, in terms of first parson games, Mirrors Edge was a nice shiny silver/blue umbrella in a sea of plain black. Yes I would like to see more innovation in that type of game, but Mirrors Edge should have been a step in the right direction. I am hoping that it still can be.

 

[Chipperz]

I think they fail to realize innovation isn't innovation when you do it again.
I agree with Yahtzee when he says sequels are bad. All major releases these days have increasingly large numbers and are the same thing as last year with a few tweaks to make them seem interesting.
Take Madden, 20 years of the same game with a few tweaks here and there and a new game mode every few years. With any yearly sports game, you can miss 5 years and still miss really nothing.
Take the money from Mirror's Edge 2 and use it to make something new...... and good.

That doesn't mean that Riccitiello thinks the first game was flawless, though - and development on a sequel means learning how to build on the original while correcting its mistakes. "Innovation doesn't mean it all works the first time ... If it did everyone would do it." In the case of Mirror's Edge 2, said the EA chieftain, this meant capitalizing on the game's strengths - its unique and recognizable aesthetic and original gameplay - while improving the flow and finding an identity:

Just sayin', just because it's new, doesn't mean it'll be good. If they take the opportunity to genuinely improve on such a flawed masterpiece, then the money will have been better spent than spending on something just because "it's new!"

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

I'll buy it. Especially if they improve the wall running controls, which killed me on many occasions.

 

[Pingieking]

I think they fail to realize innovation isn't innovation when you do it again.
I agree with Yahtzee when he says sequels are bad. All major releases these days have increasingly large numbers and are the same thing as last year with a few tweaks to make them seem interesting.
Take Madden, 20 years of the same game with a few tweaks here and there and a new game mode every few years. With any yearly sports game, you can miss 5 years and still miss really nothing.
Take the money from Mirror's Edge 2 and use it to make something new...... and good.

I agree with you in principle. but I disagree with your point about Mirro's Edge 2.

I don't think that Mirror's Edge was a truely innovative game, simply because the actual "innovation" part of it wasn't finished. It wasn't a product that truely showcased the fundamental gameplay ideas that it was built around. I think the innovations that Mirror's Edge tried to achieve is still a work in process, so it's not actually "we finished the last experiment, so lets do it again", but more like, "we screwed up the last experiment, so lets try to fix it this time around". To me, Mirror's Edge was essentially a beta test that EA made money off of.

 

[PrimeSynergy]

I think they should pull a Rockstar move and switch characters, cities, etc entirely and, of course, improve gameplay, problems, etc.

Faith was a cool character, but I'm curious to see what other leads they can come up with. I would also REALLY like it if they took out guns completely and/or made hand to hand combat the always 'expected' way to deal with problems.

Anywho, I'm just glad a sequel is coming. For a series with such potential, I feel like not having a sequel would suck big time.

 

[chris11246]

I think they fail to realize innovation isn't innovation when you do it again.
I agree with Yahtzee when he says sequels are bad. All major releases these days have increasingly large numbers and are the same thing as last year with a few tweaks to make them seem interesting.
Take Madden, 20 years of the same game with a few tweaks here and there and a new game mode every few years. With any yearly sports game, you can miss 5 years and still miss really nothing.
Take the money from Mirror's Edge 2 and use it to make something new...... and good.

You cant always make new things thats bad business. They need titles that are pretty much guarenteed to make a good profit so that they can try to make some innovative ones. I play for story and gameplay so I don't mind a sequel with not much innovation over the last game because it goes on with the storyline and gives me more content.(eventually it does get old and I need something new tho)

OT: I havent played the first one yet although I did just download it from steam for $5 so Ill be trying it soon. It looks good so hopefully it is and the sequel is too.

 

[sooperman]

I have to agree with Chipperz on this one, because I really do think that ME2 will improve on the last game.

OT:
"or to take them down nonlethally through quick and agile disarms."

One way to improve this would be the addition of stealth disarms from behind. The first game told you about it during the tutorial, but it never worked afterwards. Walking up behind an enemy didn't even light up thier guns.

 

[orangeapples]

I think they fail to realize innovation isn't innovation when you do it again.
I agree with Yahtzee when he says sequels are bad. All major releases these days have increasingly large numbers and are the same thing as last year with a few tweaks to make them seem interesting.
Take Madden, 20 years of the same game with a few tweaks here and there and a new game mode every few years. With any yearly sports game, you can miss 5 years and still miss really nothing.
Take the money from Mirror's Edge 2 and use it to make something new...... and good.

but Yahtzee didn't hate Assassin's Creed 2.

 

[metza]

I love when the people in charge talk about sequels and I can actually agree with what they're saying instead and get excited instead of going all foetal and 'leave a good thing be'.