EA Learned Lessons From Mirror's Edge Mistakes

piscian18

piscian18

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
11,020
New ideas can work, says EA Games president Frank Gibeau, but they have to be presented just right in order to do so.

Despite a lot of positive reviews, first-person parkour game Mirror's Edge suffered from poor sales when it came out in 2008. Gibeau thinks that this is because the game was released before it was really ready, and that while the concept was fun, the execution wasn't good enough for the game to be a success.

According the Gibeau, there were problems with pretty much every part of Mirror's Edge. The learning curve and difficulty were all wrong, the story wasn't up to scratch and the game lacked any kind of multiplayer. He said that Mirror's Edge had taught EA that for such a bold concept to succeed, the developer has to take it as far as it can go. "You have to execute," he said. "You have to spend more time on a game to ensure it's polished, and you need to have the depth and persistence of an online game."

He said the lessons learned from Mirror's Edge had helped shape the sequel to another underperforming game: Dead Space. The sci-fi survival horror was much more successful than Mirror's Edge, although still didn't meet expectations. Gibeau said that for Dead Space 2, it was important to refine the concept, making the story and character more engrossing, and making the game work in a multiplayer context. This resulted in previously-silent protagonist Isaac Clarke gaining a voice, and the addition of a human versus necromorph - the name for Dead Space's monsters - death match mode. Gibeau said that EA didn't plan to abandon either IP, adding that while there was a lot of risk involved with new ideas, if done right, they had the potential to be huge.

While no one is likely to argue with Gibeau about the importance of polishing a game before it gets shoved out the door, it's a little troubling to hear him say that games which seem better suited to single-player, like first person parkour games, or sci-fi survival horror need a multiplayer option in order to succeed. That said, if you want people to feel like they've got value for money from their purchase, and perhaps more importantly, not trade it in after they're done with it, there has to be something there to make them hang on to it, and that's a role that multiplayer modes can often fill.
Click to expand...

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/105706-EA-Learned-Lessons-From-Mirrors-Edge-Mistakes


Personally I disagree with this Gibeau because quirky games that might not suit everybody are the heart and soul of gaming for me. The need for every game to be streamlined and have MP "incorporated" heralds the death of gaming for me.

Games like Assassins Creed, CoD, Halo, and Resident Evil scare me. I don't want every game to be a viable franchise title. I want Devs to make games they want to play and throw caution to the wind. Mirrors Edge was what it was. Move on.

Thoughts?
 
I don't game much so lack experience of other games to compare, but I finally just played ME three months ago, and although I'm not much of a gamer, the training in it at the beginning, although I found doing that very important to quickly grasp the game mechanics for someone who doesn't game much, it was good enough for me to finish the game within eight hours.

Big learning curve? I figured it all out. Took eight hours, but some parts were just difficult to figure out. Eight hours for a non-gamer isn't a ridiculous amount of time IMO.

MP? Is this like TMNF, where you run around a course and see who runs it fastest? Eh, even I may not have tried it, and I loved the game. Or is it a cops 'n' robbers chase? Eh, again.

AFAIK, it does have downloadable courses for you to run, and I would imagine you can submit those times to see who's fastest. Wasn't TMNF like that, but TMUF made it easier to just submit those times through the game?

Story? I wasn't expecting a NYT best-seller-list level of story, not a Oscar-worthy voice acting performance.

Eh, I liked the game. If it didn't sell well, well, it's just different. I think the PoP games perhaps are like ME, but I've never played any of those. But ME certainly wasn't a CoD game.
 
Dirk13 said:
My problem with mirrors edge was that it was so short....
Click to expand...

My problem with any game (non RPG) is that their all to short. Seriously how many games are over 9 hours anymore.
 
I thought Mirror's Edge was great for what it was. Something about it clicked with me. It was refreshing to see EA/DiCE tackle a rare concept like it, instead of rehashing the same ol' push-marketed redux for the masses. So what if it didn't meet sales? Sometimes you gotta take a chance to break new ground.

And maybe that's the problem with most games today - nobody wants to take a chance... especially when large amounts of money are involved.

When devs shop an idea to publisher, they've got two choices: 1) go with the safe bet or 2) pitch the so-called "crazy" concept with hopes of not being laughed out of the room.

There was probably a time when option #2 was certainly viable. Unfortunately, those days are pretty much gone. Plus, you still gotta put food on the table.

With the rising costs of AAA titles, there aren't too many companies financially in the position to be able to roll the dice and see what happens. These days, you get your bankroll from investors. If the investors don't see some kind of ROI, it's pitchforks and torches at your doorstep.

Sometimes breaking new ground doesn't always work out though. I tip my hat to IO for trying to venture out beyond the Hitman series. Unfortunately, I feel they wasted time and money (not to mention tarnishing their rep) with those lackluster Kane & Lynch games.

The need to explore original ideas is also probably why (finally) Bungie broke free from MS. I know if I were them, I'd have gotten sick and tired of those MS board meetings having the suits ignore any game concept pitched at them that doesn't have the words "Master Chief" or "Halo" in it. Bungie is a great company that has, in my opinion, been shackled to the same game for the past decade. Now that they are freelance once again, I'm anxious to see what they come up with next.

Remedy didn't exactly hit a homerun with Alan Wake either (a triple at best). But, again, they were trying to break new ground there. More than anything, I think hype hurt that game. It did sell well; however, it wasn't the groundbreaking game that everyone made it out to be. It had all the AAA title elements in there, but it lacked a certain charm to it. I don't know what to think about it still. I think Remedy could do better. Having MS put the shackles to them probably didn't help either.

There are probably a dozen other existing gaming companies out there I could ramble on about. When it comes down to it, there is no secret formula for success. I do know one thing: if rehashing the same thing is the only way to make money in the modern gaming industry, then the industry itself is eventually doomed. This is coming from someone who has historically rolled their eyes whenever a thread/article titled "gaming is dead" pops up on the screen.
 
It had poor sales because overall, it just wasn't that much of an "awesome" game, IMO. I could play it once, then every time after that, the game is just stupid. Even Halo: CE had more ways to complete a mission (hell, even the demo...) than ME did. The entire city was there, yet there is only one redlighted path to go through? Not even a "secret" path that let me see more of the city? Basically, this was a 3D version of linerider? Except line-guy has WASD now?
 
It wasn't a success because of the challenging learning curve, because it wasn't consolized enough, because it was too long, because the shooting didn't feel like MW2, because it required you to think and to think fast sometimes, and because there was too much talking and not enough killing.
 
Mirror's Edge flunked, so now they have added a voice for Isac? wtf man, the most immersive games like HL or Amnesia deliberately left out voice to let you get into character. Dead Space was great for me, it would not be better if he spoke
 
Compared to the usual dredge of canned and shipped shooters and sports games Mirror's Edge was something new and different in style. Considering DICE developed it that was even more unusual since they always pump out fps titles now.

I loved it , thought it was kinda a breath of fresh air or one of those games that helps you unwind from the usual fair.

Deadspace was fun but its a typical horror game for the most part , it doesn't reinvent the formula by any means.
 
Parmenides said:
Make it into a 40 hour game and there would be lots more sales.
Click to expand...

I am not sure that is always the case, some RPGs take a lot longer than 40 hours (if you don't rush through it) and some of them don't sell very well.

For FPS/action games, I think a minimum of 20 is good. Too bad most companies are going with 8-10, then offer the extra 'episodes' for more $$$.
 
Mirror's Edge was a rare experience in a game (very enjoyable) and now they are never going to do it again because people want to run around shooting things in the head. I dread to see what ME2 has in store for us.
 
Parmenides said:
It wasn't a success because of the challenging learning curve, because it wasn't consolized enough, because it was too long, because the shooting didn't feel like MW2, because it required you to think and to think fast sometimes, and because there was too much talking and not enough killing.
Click to expand...

Gosh. I guess I'd better catch up and finally get it soon at this rate.
 
Absalom said:
I thought Mirror's Edge was great for what it was. Something about it clicked with me. It was refreshing to see EA/DiCE tackle a rare concept like it, instead of rehashing the same ol' push-marketed redux for the masses. So what if it didn't meet sales? Sometimes you gotta take a chance to break new ground.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately that is the only thing that matters to the people making the decisions. If you want more big commercial titles like a certain game, the best thing you can do is talk up that game and suggest it to others.
 
Q-BZ said:
Gosh. I guess I'd better catch up and finally get it soon at this rate.
Click to expand...

I enjoyed it. I just wished it was longer. It was kinda short but I suppose a few thee hours or so longer than the average modern shooter, so it's still too long. :p

I personally wouldn't get it for myself for $20 because of the length. But I'm stingy anyways. If others disagree, I'm fine with with that. A $5 steam special is a good grab though.

It would be really interesting if someone could incorporate elements from Mirror's edge into a combat system for a shooter. That would be too much awesome. The combat in Mirror's edge was quite fun.
 
Dirk13 said:
My problem with mirrors edge was that it was so short....
Click to expand...

THIS A THOUSAND TIMES THIS.

Despite some flaws, Mirror's Edge was an absolutely AMAZING experience, but it's far too short. I played the entire story, start to finish, in between turns during a four-day Civilization IV LAN :/ While it's an awesome memory, I was so sad when I saw how quickly I could finish it.

I actually played through it yesterday, since it was the first day of PTO I'd taken in almost three months :)
 
mirrors edge is one of my favorite game i played in the last 10 years. Just do a sequel already!
 
I loved both Mirror's Edge and Dead Space. I thought they were both refreshing breaks from my usual games. Granted I may not have liked them as much if I didn't get both of them for less than $10...

I just can't bring myself to pay more than $10 for a game I know I will play once, uninstall and never play again, even when it's unique, refreshing and tons of fun. It's something of a gamble when I don't know if I'll like it, so until it's in the bargain bin, I hold off. Hell, I paid full price for Far Cry 2 and AvP and both of those were fun but average.

Bottom line, people are just as much focused on their money as the developers/publishers and are afraid to drop cash on anything but a sure thing. That's why CoD, Halo, Gears and GTA sell like hotcakes while games that do something different wind up in the bargain bin. I think THQ was right when they said games should be cheaper. If they released Dead Space and Mirror's Edge at $30 ($40 for console tax), I bet they would have gotten much more exposure and gotten some people that were on the fence to take a chance.
 
I would happily pay a full $50 for the Mirror's Edge PC game again. It may have been really short, but my memories of playing through it the first time are priceless.

Subsequent playthroughs have been just as enjoyable, if not as memorable.
 
I really enjoyed Mirror's Edge as well. Dead Space didn't keep me engaged long enough to finish it.
 
Funny thing was I was waiting for Mirror's Edge to be released, but it was so quiet that I missed it. When I finally got a copy at Game Stop, they sold already had it discounted.
 
pojut said:
I would happily pay a full $50 for the Mirror's Edge PC game again. It may have been really short, but my memories of playing through it the first time are priceless.

Subsequent playthroughs have been just as enjoyable, if not as memorable.
Click to expand...

How does it feel to be one of only a handful of people on Planet Earth that feel this way? I have yet to meet anyone else on the net or in RL that would have paid 50 bucks for Mirror's Edge, or even 30 for that matter. I had a friend who bought it on sale shortly after release for 20 and he was pissed. I was very much anticipating the game leading up to release, but it was a major disappointment that totally unfulfilled any reasonable expectations. It's a 5 dollar game, no more, exactly the price I eventually paid for it on Steam. I do not want a sequel.
 
You're one of the few people that I have met on the net or IRL that does not want a sequel. And of the people I have met that don't want a sequel, when they played the original, they were expecting COD4 or Half-Life shooter. Most didn't understand the concept of "running" from the cops, or even tried it, they tried to fight back.
 
requiem99 said:
How does it feel to be one of only a handful of people on Planet Earth that feel this way? I have yet to meet anyone else on the net or in RL that would have paid 50 bucks for Mirror's Edge, or even 30 for that matter. I had a friend who bought it on sale shortly after release for 20 and he was pissed. I was very much anticipating the game leading up to release, but it was a major disappointment that totally unfulfilled any reasonable expectations. It's a 5 dollar game, no more, exactly the price I eventually paid for it on Steam. I do not want a sequel.
Click to expand...

::shrug:: what can I say, I love it :)
 
Did they release the full game of ME? Because the version I played seemed like a generous demo rather than what should have been stamped as finished. Any single player game that is 6 hours or so long won't get over $5 from me. Fool me once, and all...
 
Mirrors edge was an awesome game, there was nothing wrong with it. greatness is not always defined by sales. just because bioshock outsold system shock 2 doesn't make it a better game.

It sounds like they are going to turn dead space 2 into another generic shooter, damn.
 
RangerXML said:
Early rumors, like before BF3 info was accidentally unveiled by an exec, there was an article how they wanted to incorporate elements from Mirror's Edge into next generation shooters from EA. I personally believe with the way things turned out, this idea went the way of the dinosaurs.

http://www.totalgamingnetwork.com/s...s-May-Incorporate-Mirror-s-Edge-s-Physicality
Click to expand...

lol, I'm ticked off enough with droppshotting in Black Ops (somehow, I fall for it every time when I am using a SMG class).
 
Mokkat said:
Mirror's Edge flunked, so now they have added a voice for Isac? wtf man, the most immersive games like HL or Amnesia deliberately left out voice to let you get into character. Dead Space was great for me, it would not be better if he spoke
Click to expand...

System Shock 2...your character says one word. "Nah" :)

But hey, games like Mass Effect (err, most bioware games) do GREAT with voices for all chars. It CAN be done...
 
Absalom said:
I thought Mirror's Edge was great for what it was. Something about it clicked with me. It was refreshing to see EA/DiCE tackle a rare concept like it, instead of rehashing the same ol' push-marketed redux for the masses. So what if it didn't meet sales? Sometimes you gotta take a chance to break new ground.
Click to expand...

RangerXML said:
Mirror's Edge was a rare experience in a game (very enjoyable) and now they are never going to do it again because people want to run around shooting things in the head. I dread to see what ME2 has in store for us.
Click to expand...

Yea I really liked the game. I do wish it had a few more paths to take but overall I was really impressed. I also wish you could carry a gun from scene to scene. I will say the idea of a shooter using the mirrors edge setup would be really interesting.
 
Wrench said:
My problem with any game (non RPG) is that their all to short. Seriously how many games are over 9 hours anymore.
Click to expand...

Not all of us need games to last 20-40 hours. Jobs and real life take my 60+ a week. I want a killer game that will thrill me non-stop, be it 2 hours or 200 hours. I personally prefer 4-8 hours a week, but then again, I don't day one pay 60 for games either.
 
pigwalk said:
Not all of us need games to last 20-40 hours. Jobs and real life take my 60+ a week. I want a killer game that will thrill me non-stop, be it 2 hours or 200 hours. I personally prefer 4-8 hours a week, but then again, I don't day one pay 60 for games either.
Click to expand...

I only really ever run through the single player aspect of games on holidays when I'm home all day. I was hooked on Mirror's Edge, played a couple chapters a night for a week and beat the game (the subway lvl I kept playing over and over again, very Matrix feel to it). COD is like my yearly fix where I take a day to play through the SP in a day or two (I know people bitch about the SP, but I rather enjoy it, even if its silly). Other then that its just MP or an MMO on Thu/Fri/Sat nights.
 
I am one of the few people that loved ME.
I am a true shooter fan, and thought it was a breath of fresh air, AND and adrenaline rush.
I would have gladly paid full price (which I did) for it.

Dead Space, on the other hand.
Got it for $9, and was SUPER pissed about losing $9.
Piece of crap console port that you cant play with a mouse and keyboard. THATS why it didnt do better. Spend more time (or ANY time) getting the pc port kb/mouse and FOV and other options down, THEN release it.
 
Dave3d said:
Dead Space, on the other hand.
Got it for $9, and was SUPER pissed about losing $9.
Piece of crap console port that you cant play with a mouse and keyboard. THATS why it didnt do better. Spend more time (or ANY time) getting the pc port kb/mouse and FOV and other options down, THEN release it.
Click to expand...

Or, you could just do the sensible thing and hook up a dual-analog game pad and play the otherwise vastly superior PC version. Oblivion, Fallout 3, and any other games where the interface is clearly intended for consoles should be played with a gamepad.

Don't be a K/M fanboy...if one form of input doesn't work, just use a different one :p

EDIT: I understand your point, as far as shoddy ports are concerned...but the three games mentioned above (Oblivion, Fallout 3, and Dead Space) all were superior on the PC in every single way...except the interface. Plugging in a gamepad eliminates that discrepancy, meaning you end up paying less for a better-looking and less-buggy version of a game your friends are playing. I realize that using a gamepad doesn't FIX the issue, but it does make it irrelevant!
 
Doesnt 'fix' the issue for me.
Because I CANT play with a gamepad.
I have extremely large hands, and trying to play with a controller KILLS my hands.
So, no.
No fix.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top