Mirror’s Edge Catalyst’s Story Puts Me On Edge

“I once knew a young woman who would defy anyone and anything in order to do what she felt was right. But you’re clearly not her. You’re broken.” So starts the beginning of Mirror’s Edge Catalyst‘s story trailer, in which we learn that Faith might be broken like some sort of mirror and must jump between edges of buildings in order to prove to the yelling men that, like, shut up no she isn’t. Come see, and find details of the game’s beta in the bargain.

OK, look. My only real problem with the story and the characters here is this: everything else looks incredible. Gleaming skyscraper atriums waiting to be scaled; stark white office interiors highlighted with splashes of brilliant orange and green; an urban colour scheme that seems to be that of the first Mirror’s Edge but with a strong added dose of hot pink. I like the music. I even like the look of the combat.

If you feel similarly, you might want to consider signing up for the closed beta. You’ll need an EA/Origin account to sign up and there’s no announced date yet for when it’ll run. It can’t be too far away however as the full game will launch on May 24th. I’m looking forward to it.


  1. Gordon Shock says:

    Origin only = Completely lost interest

    • mouton says:

      Nobody cares about personal client phobias.

      • Don Reba says:

        And who made you everybody’s spokesman?

      • Pazguato says:

        As a person who share the same phobia, I care.

        • Harvey says:

          I second the caring. Origin (and Uplay while we’re on the subject) means they won’t get a penny of mine. It matters to many.

          • DarkFenix says:

            Thirded, not going to touch anything that’s Origin-exclusive. Judging by this comment thread quite a lot of people care about “personal client phobias”.

      • Apocalypse says:

        Confirming. I am nobody and I do care. I love, I really, really love mirror’s edge. But not on origin.

    • Matt_W says:

      Well it’s good that you have such an unambiguous criterion for making choices about which games you play, even if it is a bit of a non-sequitur.

      • Emeraude says:

        Given we’re talking personal preferences, I don’t know how it’s anyone’s else place to say so.

    • aliksy says:

      I just don’t buy games with EA’s name on them anymore. I doubt anyone cares, but it makes me feel a little better.

    • silentdan says:

      I also have a zero-tolerance policy for Origin exclusives. Don’t have a lot of patience for people who conflate purchasing preferences with phobias, either.

      • Distec says:

        We’re also missing the usual “But I bet you love Steam, don’t you?“.

        But fortunately, there’s still time.

        • Raoul Duke says:

          I’ll do it. I bet you use Steam, don’t you? Even though Origin is a better written, better designed version of the same thing.

        • Apocalypse says:

          No, I used to like steam sales though. Fair deals for rented software. ;-)
          What I can accept are games who use steamworks and thus end up needing steam installed.
          Heck, I even can accept the same for gog galaxy and u(no)play.

    • Rhodokasaurus says:

      This whole series of comments is the most pathetic internet tough guy fight I’ve seen in a long time. No, don’t worry guys, you’ve ALL won the argument. :D

      • Matt_W says:

        With a weary sigh, he climbed onto his high horse, ready to leave the grim fighting of this dusty town behind. Adjusting the brim of his hat just so, he took one long, last drag on his cigarette before flicking it to the dirt in disgust. With brutal, quiet dignity he slowly circled his horse and proceeded to clip-clop away, sneer fixed firmly on his face. He smirked “You lot of tossers need some real work on your wankery before you can best the likes of me.”

        • Rhodokasaurus says:

          Hehe, hilarious! I don’t know why people are always so keen to point that you can’t insult someone without indicting yourself. Yeah, I know! It’s all a big pile of dumb shit, let’s roll in it.

      • horrorgasm says:

        You don’t get around the internet much do you? You are totally better off though, really.

    • Don Reba says:

      Origin only = Completely lost interest

      Yep. Thankfully, the original Mirror’s Edge still exists and is excellent.

      • bill says:

        Although I think you needed an EA account to access the challenge levels, which were the best bit.

        For ages I avoided them because, well, why the hell would I want to have an EA account….
        I haven’t used it for anything since either.

    • TWOpies says:


    • epeternally says:

      I can put up with Origin, at least for items costing < $30 (which is all I'd really consider paying for a game anyway), but Denuvo is a dealbreaker for me, and given recent EA history this is almost guaranteed to have it. We don't need another SecuROM.

    • kament says:

      For me that sounds like “the show airs on (insert a name you have a hate-on for) – completely lost interest.” Or better yet “the book is published by (this time some publisher you love for some equally inexplicable reason) – I’m totally reading the shit out of it just because of this.”

      I mean, fair enough, some people don’t like some things, but this I just don’t get. And in any case – why do you even bother? It’s mind-boggling.

      Me, I’m interested in what’s the game (show, novel) like first and foremost, everything else is – well. I absolutely hate uplay, for instance, and with good reason – doesn’t everyone? But like hell it’s gonna stop me if that’s what it takes to play some game that caught my eye.

      • Don Reba says:

        Your analogy loses the fact that Steam is a social network and adds tons of value to a game. And at this point, there are so many games competing for my attention that they can’t afford to put up barriers — if I don’t get to play Mirror’s Edge 2, well, there are better games I still have to finish.

        • Premium User Badge

          alison says:

          Bingo. Steam is a platform, not just a web store. Every game i’ve bought in the last 10 years (bar Mass Effect 3) i’ve bought on Steam. At first because it was a web store and it was convenient. Then i realized how great it was that every time i get a new computer (or log in on someone else’s) all my games are already there. Oh, and my save games are too. Then, much to my surprise, i started enjoying seeing the little “how long you played this” metrics in the same way i enjoy how my phone counts my steps every day. But the killer feature, for me, is in-home-streaming, which has now become my sole way of consuming games. Lying on my bed playing in 1080p (streamed from the Alienware Alpha) is a much more pleasant experience than hoping my tablet can manage 30fps in 800×600 on its own.

          Of course, i could do all these things without Steam, but the point is i don’t have to. I don’t need 5 different web store logins or have to set up personal cloud backups or remote desktop or whatever – i don’t have to, because Steam takes care of all that for me. Which means i can spend more of my time actually playing games. I know they’re a big evil corporate giant and hitching my wagon to Steam as a platform feels a bit like becoming a console gamer who doesn’t know about anything outside of their little sandbox, but the truth is i value convenience over customizability when the goal of the exercise is simply to have a bit of fun on the weekends or after work. But i also love playing PC games with mouse and keyboard. So Steam gives me the best of both worlds.

          • Raoul Duke says:

            But apart from the very recent addition of in-home streaming, ALL of that is exactly what Origin and even Uplay do.

            So basically, you have chosen to lock yourself in to one platform over another for semi-arbitrary reasons (presumably, Steam got to you first) and now the others are Bad Forever.

            If anything, Origin is a more lightweight, nicer looking version of Steam that doesn’t overload itself with unnecessary crap.

            I say all of this as a person who generally despises DRM of any sort. I find people’s position on Steam utterly hypocritical and irrational. It’s more invasive (it runs random services in the background, for example, and sends “stuff” back to Valve all the time), bloated (it takes at least 3x longer than Origin to load), and fiddly (the forums are rife with tales of woe about technical issues caused by bad programming which Valve never fixes and people have to kludge together workarounds for).

          • Premium User Badge

            alison says:

            I choose to use Steam because it solves my problem the best. Its library includes a wealth of indie, amateur and small publisher games, which is the vast majority of what i play. I just loaded up Origin on the weekend to see how much Mirrors Edge 2 was going to cost, and out of curiosity checked if anything else on there might interest me. There was nothing.

            I respect that some people apparently have a passionate hate-on for Steam, but it is deliberately obtuse to argue that there is some kind of DRM-free magical drop-in replacement for it. Sure, there are possibly more lightweight platforms like Origin. Sure, there are possibly more interesting libraries like itch.io. But clearly a lot of people (like myself) enjoy the blend of both worlds that is available in Steam. I don’t understand why this choice is something people need to attack in every second thread where platforms come up. Who cares?

          • Emeraude says:

            I respect that some people apparently have a passionate hate-on for Steam, but it is deliberately obtuse to argue that there is some kind of DRM-free magical drop-in replacement for it.

            There would be had people resisted the client platforms altogether.
            I mean, when Ubisoft tried their always online DRM, it killed their PC market. Did they pack and leave? Nope, they just abandoned the scheme.
            No reason to believe that wouldn’t have happened had people resisted Steam. Those companies are not going to suddenly decide to close their doors. Their infrastructure is set up. There *is* money to be made. They’d continue to provide.

          • Premium User Badge

            alison says:

            I get your point, but platform gaming on the PC is a thing now. I remember when we had different tapes we had to put in and type |CPM or RUN”WHATEVER to load a game. I remember when i had to create custom config.sys/autoexec.bat menus so i could CD GAMES and play whatever game worked with that memory config. I’m happy those days are over. I like having console-style simplicity with the variety of content that we enjoy in the PC gaming world. I know some people would still prefer DRM-free games that they can select in their Start menu, and fortunately those guys can still get that via GOG and Humble and whatever other stores are doing that, but personally i am happy to trade off the freedom of being able to play games offline forever for the convenience of having all my stuff centrally available in the cloud. Just because one thing exists doesn’t mean the other has to die. There are so many games out there that really this decision simply comes down to taste.

            And, in fact, that’s exactly the argument that these anti-Origin guys have. There are so many other games out there, so many other platforms to play on, if a publisher elects to veto a platform, that’s their loss. I totally support DRM-free gaming as a concept, and if people want to release that way, fine. If they don’t, well, also fine. I probably won’t see it. Steam fanatics will veto it altogether. Sad for the publisher they aren’t reaching their full market. But hey, life goes on.

          • Emeraude says:

            I call bullshit on the argument. None of the services you value demanded the DRM scheme. You could have all of them without others being imposed the DRM platform (as the example of GOG galaxy shows). You didn’t have to trade freedom for convenience. If piracy is indeed a service problem as Gabe Newell claims to believe (though his company’s actions speak a dissimilar language), then the quality of service alone should be enough to ensure people want to use the platform.

            And personally, the averaging out of PC and console is not something I find good. I liked it better when PCs were PCs and consoles where consoles. If I wanted convenience I took the later. If I wanted the ability to customize extensively the way I would play and use a game, I had PC.

            No what we have is platforms whose original qualities have been willfully lessened, diluted.

          • Apocalypse says:

            Actually steam itself profes that services steam provides are not necessarily related to DRM as steam itself is offering games without any kind of DRM. Games which will run completely without steam and only use steam as steams original intent: Updated and install directly over the cloud.

        • kament says:

          Sorry, but I think it just proves my point. It’s not about games per se, is what I’m reading. Because a) social stuff; b) too many games, and good ones at that. So your choice is determined by something else entirely.

    • Raoul Duke says:

      Out of interest, do you apply this policy to the buggy, bloated piece of junk that is Steam? What about the nightmare that is Uplay?

      • Apocalypse says:

        To be completely honest. If uplay would have been from EA and be to late to the party while origin would have been from ubisoft and get itself installed via a game from a steam-sale? I totally would be using now origin and not uplay.

        But hey, google plus would be totally big as well if they launched before facebook. They are actually the better platform even. But now I am using steam, uplay and gog galaxy and 3 is the golden number for me. Origin was late, from EA and had a horrible eula and a PR disaster. Now they are basically out of the game for me. EA used to sell on steam, EA is actually selling on GOG.com, I can wait and get their games once they come to gog.com, I waited for some of them over a decade already and they did come finally to gog.com and I actually bought them all there ;-)

  2. kud13 says:

    On the bright side, not once in the trailer is Faith holding a gun.

    I also have fears for the cliche story. Especially since it looks like a lot of runners will die to make Faith feel guilty and motivated to prove that she’s not just being mule-headed (and getting anyone that cares for her killed/hurt in the process), but exposing THE CONSPIRACY (TM), and SAVING THE CITY.

    • Rhodokasaurus says:

      It’s interesting that as game cutscenes get closer to movies that they don’t step back and go “Oh no, if this was a movie it would be terrible!”. I really enjoyed the first game, hopefully a dreadful teenage “GET OUT OF MY, DAD” plot doesn’t overshadow everything.

      When you writers gonna learn? I want all the characters to be likable, and do things that make me like them.

      • Rhodokasaurus says:

        That should say “Get out of my way, dad!” but you probably figured it out.

        • Josh W says:

          “Get out of my dad!” is waiting to become an iconic line of some franchise though.

      • Emeraude says:

        I think part of the problem is that a lot of good game stories would make for terrible movie stories, and vice-versa.

        I have a feeling that, as in, say, most television serial drama, there’s a direct negative impact of the production line’s necessities on the end product.

        • king0zymandias says:

          I think in all my life of playing games there has been at most 3-4 games that had what I would consider good stories. And the reason they would not probably translate to movies really well is because the greatness of the narrative is linked with the interactivity of the medium.

          On the other hand most games have such awfully uninspired and cliched plot that is completely divorced from the gameplay and game mechanics anyways that I believe liberal sprinkling of interesting narrative aspects from good films would only make them better. And it’s certainly not done enough. More game developers need to bring inspiration from outside of games, is what I am saying. Because as a medium in it’s infancy there isn’t much to learn from the past of gaming when it comes to telling stories.

          • Rhodokasaurus says:

            Fair enough, but I don’t need my games to have an interactive story. I’m ok with a linear game and a linear story (I doubt Mirror’s Edge 2 will have choices). But man, in the few lines of dialogue they gave us, we’re playing a pouting child whose surrogate parents don’t approve of her wild ways, but she’s just gotta be herself! So bad.

          • king0zymandias says:

            I agree with you, the writing here seems pretty bad. I was more replying to Emeraude’s comment that good film stories don’t make good game stories.

          • Emeraude says:


            Personally, I’m the opinion that if they can’t tailor their story to the medium, then the best they can do is put none at all. It’s a pure waste of resources that needlessly gets in the way of the game itself. Give just enough context for the mind to latch on your game and be done with it. A good artistic direction can be the most appropriate story your game will ever need.

            I think at the core any good game story is an imperative of sort. “Kill the aliens”. “Explore the world”. “Find who’s guilty”. “Save the princess”. Then from this core you can built and subvert things to interesting effects (see, say, for example a game like Shadow of the Colossus where the core imperative “save the girl” becomes completely disconnected from what the game allows you to do). Which is not something other mediums really need.

            And all that is before even going into whether the story will be interactive or not. That’s another matter altogether.

    • Phasma Felis says:

      What’s really weird to me is that modern AAA games put so much thought and effort and concern and, God knows, money into producing really excellent, coherent, evocative imagery and soundscapes, and then so often just completely fluff the story/dialogue/voice-acting. Honestly I can even put up with a shitty plot, but if the characters are going to talk at me at all, they need to sound like actual humans, saying things that actual humans would say! It’s like going to a gourmet restaurant and receiving a flawlessly marinated and grilled filet mignon, a salad of artfully selected local vegetables and artisanal dressing, and a bowl of burnt instant mac&cheese.

      • Cleave says:

        At least you can move the mac and cheese to the side of the plate and leave it alone. Most of the time game plots are like drenching the whole thing in watery Bisto.

    • Raoul Duke says:

      The story in the first one was cliched and generally idiotic too. The passage of time seems to affect people’s expectations in strange ways.

  3. Thirith says:

    I hope they haven’t toned down the stark, stylised colour scheme too much; judging from the material that’s been released, it seems to have been toned down somewhat, but I like that they went for a bolder, more stylised visual design in the original game.

    • Matt_W says:

      Most of this trailer looks like cutscenes. The few first person sections do seem like they retain the sharp, geometric lines and bright color pattern of the original. And not all of the original was white and glowing either; I think particularly of the level in the giant storm sewer.

    • Emeraude says:

      Yeah, the original had that really interesting artistic direction that made UI and scenery blend into one another, and it works just so beautifully on all levels. Here, sure the game does look like it has more going under the hood, but I can’t but find the end result underwhelming in comparison.

  4. neoncat says:

    Glad they added back some color, though it’s still not quite as brilliant and clean as the original.

    I’m slightly worried that there will be too-many set pieces, given the amount of flying things / falling platforms / jumping out windows. The joy of the original was running through a course that felt like an open world rather than a corridor.

    • Ancient Evil says:

      Funny you should say that considering Catalyst IS open-world, whereas the original was linear.

      • neoncat says:

        An open world can be made to feel like a corridor, and vice versa. The original did a wonderful job of pretending it wasn’t a corridor and generally letting me go at a range of paces (until the guns come out, that is).

        If they have crazy set pieces going off every five minutes, it doesn’t matter how open the world is, because they’re not letting me sit and appreciate it.

    • Eleven says:

      The original also had a really awesome soundtrack by Solar Fields. I’m hoping they’ve put as much effort in to the audio in the sequel.

  5. Aitrus says:

    I just hope to god that none of these cutscenes in game will be anything other than first person. “Cinematic” cutscenes in games are always always always awful. Games like Dishonored and Bioshock did it right. Has there been any word on this? Now I’m going to go check…

    • basilisk says:

      Considering just how much of the trailer features Faith’s face, I’m guessing you will be disappointed. Unless they’re taking the “Mirror” part very literally.

    • TechnicalBen says:

      Homeworld would like a word with you… all of them.

      • TechnicalBen says:

        Sorry, reading fail. I read it as “cartoon cutscenes” are horrible.

        I’m torn on “cinimatic” ones. Depends how linear the story is. Has no place in an open choice/world game. But linear stories it’s fine.

  6. Morte66 says:

    I am entirely underwhelmed. Don’t like the colours, don’t like the combat, the dialogue is cringeworthy.

    Well, bugger. :(

    • Sirnizz says:

      So you don’t like Mirror Edge the game ? You can’t like the 1st one and don’t like this it’s just more of the same.

      • Arkayjiya says:

        It’s not more of the same though. The story in the first was a mess and forgettable but it was never that laughable, everything they’ve shown so far is faaaar worse. The look of the game has changed tremendously, we don’t have enough to say if it’s for the worse or the better (some of the set piece I’ve seen in the video are magnificient (the pink/blue neon night look is impressive, other images I’m more ambivalent about but it might be very good), but still different enough that you can like the first one and not this one. The combat was always bad, I feel like this one will do better (although I would have preferred no combat at all) but once again it’s different enough that people might complain.

        Personally I like it (apart from the dialogues, seriously those were terrifyingly bad) but it is different.

  7. Premium User Badge

    gritz says:

    Lots of negativity in the comments, so I’ll just chime in and say it’s neat to see an entire preview video with a female protagonist without a single slow-rising butt shot.

  8. Ex Lion Tamer says:

    The most exciting thing I’ve learned from this trailer (which was announced months ago, apparently) is that Solar Fields is returning to compose the music for this one as well. Highly subjective, of course, but I think his score for the first might be the best score I’ve heard in games.

    • heretic says:

      You get a +1 from me, Solar Field’s work in Mirror’s Edge one is sublime.

      Cautiously optimistic, I’ll wait for a WiT to decide what price point I should get the game. Origin only will probably mean a while before any discounts sadly.

    • TechnicalBen says:

      Thanks! I was wondering why/how Solar Fields was in my Spotify playlist. Now I know why. :D

  9. santouryuu says:

    the game looks pretty good to me,imo.the art seems a bit like the original,but modified and evolved,and i have to say i like it.the city looks amazing,and the music’s great!the story seems okay,at least seems better than the original(which frankly is not that hard,but still).hope the gameplay remains awesome.

    • kud13 says:

      This is highly subjective, obviously, but what exactly makes you think the story will be better than the original?

      To recap: in the original, a run goes bad, Faith runs into her cop sister who gets framed for something bad and Faith spends the rest of the time unraveling the bad stuff to save her sister.

      Here, (from what I’ve seen), Faith purposefully bulls into a hi-sec facility against everyone’s advice, steals something “incredibly valuable” and has to unravel a conspiracy before she gets hunted down and killed, painting a target on all her fellow Runners in the process. All the while trying to prove that her hard-headed, destructive action was “the right thing to do”.

      I honestly dunno why I’m so negative on a game I fully intend to buy, but the “making fatal mistake due to a TRAGIC CHARACTER FLAW” trope is one of the surest ways to turn me off any piece of writing since I first had to read Shakespeare in Grade 9. From the side, the flawed character just looks like a moron. And the older I get, the less sympathy I can harbor for morons.

      • santouryuu says:

        well,the original story was frankly non-existent imo.Faith fights the “corrupt people”,but no characterisation is done for either Faith or other characters.The government was told as totalitarian,but it was not shown as such properly,so i don’t think we as viewers had much to feel invested in the fight.
        the story i can surmise from this trailer looks to be about accepting your mistakes,taking responsibility and actually improve yourself.i mean,yeah the dialogues are just bad and everything looks all cliched like hell,but i feel the characterisation could be better.
        of course,the story may be worse than ME1,it’s very hard to tell at this point.
        but at the end,i don’t really care about the story,as that was not the strong point of the original anyways.it all comes down to whether they can replicate probably one of the best parkour gameplay of any game from the original,or you know,even improve it.(one can hope)

      • Muzman says:

        It’s a good point that the original’s story is at least something other than a typical McGuffin driven, grand conspiracy hero narrative, at least to begin with. But I would submit they try to turn it into one and fail badly(and perhaps that is why it’s such a muddled mess).
        The sister Kate arguably becomes the McGuffin herself, as Faith has to run hither and yon to ‘save her’, while the badguys go to extraordinary lengths to hang onto her. I mean if the Mayor and P-K’s control is as complete as implied they could make sure the frame sticks and/or simply kill her off at numerous points. Plus Faith “rescuing” her doesn’t solve this problem at all, unless wrecking the Shard’s servers somehow cancelled all legal proceedings into the bargain. Even if Faith and Kate somehow skip town, the frame up still works. As far as the public is concerned a cop with a runner sister still killed Pope. Scapegoats in place, any and all ’emergency powers’ they feel like granting themselves thanks to this incident can still be done. They could even ‘accidentally’ let Kate escape and save a lot of man hours and helicopter fuel. They certainly don’t need a clown like Jack-knife helping them.

        Secondly; as part of getting tangled into the conspiracy for the sake of Kate, Faith uncovers something given great drama in the story, it seemingly being a huge reveal. That reveal is….! the cops and P-K have secretly infiltrated the Runners and have set up a special division to chase them (why regular policework won’t do it, I don’t know. But it is more fun this way).
        That’s not a big reveal. You announce that sort of thing on the evening news. Isn’t the assumption already that the police are trying to smash the runner network? Why are they even surprised?

        It’s kind of a mess. There’s elements there that are interesting and could be made to work with some thought and effort. But for whatever reason it didn’t happen.

      • sosolidshoe says:

        Hey, you never know, they might be setting up a Spec Ops: The Line style trope subversion where she spends the whole game digging an ever deeper hole to prove she was right all along and in the end her own actions are her undoing.

        It’s not likely, I’ll admit, but it’s possible :P

    • Arkayjiya says:

      Mostly, I like it like you, but the story, for me, looks faaaar worse than the original. The original story was forgettable, it also was a drop of water in the ocean of corruption so it felt kind of insignificant, it also ended abruptly, kind of too soon, before we got to do anything really. But this story just look like a generic mess filled with all the worst hollywoodian tropes they’ve put their hands on. There was not one redeeming line of dialogue, not one worthwhile interaction, I burst in laughter in the middle of it frankly.

      • Laurentius says:

        Yeah, first game story was simple and rather fluff, goverment is bad, city is corrupted, runners are cool. But it was not hampering the flow of the missions, nor particularly intrusive. I think it simplistic nature was a blessing under the cricumstances. This trailer looks really bad, charcaters and dialouges are cringe-worthy terrible and indicates how much of it they gonna cram into game, not looking good at all.

  10. The Sombrero Kid says:

    It’s so funny they changed the villain because he looked too much like their boss.

  11. Emeraude says:

    Everything I’ve seen thus far about this game has been worryingly disappointing.

    We’ll see, it’s not as if anyone cared about the story of the first. As long as it can still be completely ignored and the game is decent enough…

  12. gunny1993 says:

    Writing seems generic as fuck again, kind of hoping faith is just like “fuck this shit, you cunts are using me” then starts blaming motherfuckers left right and center, maybe starts working for the corporations.

    That would be fun

    • gunny1993 says:

      Addendum: Hell people being broken is one of the cornerstones of cyberpunk.

  13. Urthman says:

    Has anybody, anywhere ever said, “I wish they’d make Mirror’s Edge 2 so I could see more of Faith’s story”? Is there really anybody asking for this at all?

    The only thing I’ve ever heard anyone praise and wish for more of from Mirror’s Edge was the great parkour. Why do they think this story stuff is the way to sell people on the sequel?

    • Sinjun says:

      Yes. I like stories and attempts at emotion in games. You’re welcome to endless amounts of time wasting trash online games if you don’t, but stop pretending like anti-intellectualism reigns supreme in gaming these days.

      • Arkayjiya says:

        A story can appeal to your emotions without being about your protagonist. They already tried that once, it failed (it was not terrible but it failed), this time it looks far worse. It could be a story of freeing and protecting the weak against the oppression, a story about the city and its people, not a band of edgy rebels against an evil industrialist.
        In Mirror’s Edge the city should be the main actor. And in such a story there would be interactions and emotions, life broken by the city, other saved by it, a real representation of the edge of the mirror.

    • Muzman says:

      I think the world building in the first game, almost in spite of itself, was one of the best things it had. I did want to explore more of it and get more stories about the politics, the runners etc etc.
      So, yeah. Sorry.

      Someone always says this though, about just about any game. I’ve heard ‘online shooters could just be white cubes in a white cube arena’, ‘Dota would still be just as good without graphics’, ‘no one cares about cutscenes. They just want to get to the game’, etc etc.
      It’s always utter garbage. It’s either said by people so hard core they’ve lost touch with reality, or folks with no self awareness about why they like the things they like and what drew them in the first place.
      Every game is improved in enjoyment and appeal by some kind of fantasy narrative and scenario, implicit or otherwise. Characters and so on aren’t essential, but very strongly linked to that.

  14. racccoon says:

    I gave the first game away.

  15. Stupoider says:

    Watching the trailer I was constantly reminded of the kind of trailers we saw for Watch_Dogs. Ubisoft have become recognisable for their really pathetic trailers where the script is a cliché ridden mess of empty lines ‘full of gravitas’ in a desperate effort to emulate Hollywood action blockbusters.

    Here we have EA falling into that trap too. Can we all take a moment just to consider that this is actually a line in the trailer?
    “I thought-”
    “No, you didn’t think, Faith. You never do!”
    Are these people creatively bankrupt?
    On top of that you get other trailer trash, like Faith doing an impressive acrobatic then looking up at the camera at the end. I couldn’t count the number of times I groaned watching this.

    Furthermore the setting looks like it has taken a hard right into cyberpunk territory which isn’t really what the original Mirror’s Edge was doing at all. This city is full of fog and lens flare, it looks more like a bleedin’ Mass Effect game than a parkour one.

    Not only had the city gone through a tiring, uninspired redesign, so too has Faith. It seems fairly obvious that they’re taking inspiration from the Tomb Raider that came out recently, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Faith’s character arc ends up being exactly the same. I’m not really happy with the changes made to Faith herself who looks mixed race or even white (I’m mixed asian/white myself and she now looks a bit like my sister) compared to the original Faith. Not a fan of her outfit either when you consider how simple yet effective her original costume was.

    Overall I’m utterly alienated.

    • Stupoider says:

      Also in lieu of an edit button:

      When I talk about the recent Tomb Raider I mean the one that came out a couple years ago, the reboot.

      I also want to say that the music and tone of the original Mirror’s Edge seemed to make the freerunning almost spiritual. For me the music in Mirror’s Edge was some of the best I’ve ever heard in a game, ever since the first trailer I loved that particular track. While Solar Fields are returning to do the music for Catalyst, what I’ve heard so far hasn’t hit the right tone for me.

    • kud13 says:

      If I’m not mistaken, the story is being done by the same writer as Tomb Raider: the rebooting.

      I don’t want to point fingers and blame the writer (I expect white knighting, cuz the writer is Rhianna Pratchett), but yeah.

      • Muzman says:

        White knighting isn’t a thing unless you’re 12 and still accuse people of getting ‘girl germs’.

        But anyway- Pratchett did the first one. I’m not crazy about her teen lit sensibilities at the best of times, but she implied it was meddled with somewhat.
        If she’s back on the second game now (which is effectively a reboot) that’d be weird. Not saying it’s wrong, but it’s weird.

        • Geebs says:

          AFAIK Pratchett has stated she isn’t involved in this one; unfortunately the new writes seems to have adopted her terrible BBC-esque “You don’t have to do this!” “I’ve got to do this!” “Don’t do this!” style.

          Graphical style looks good although they’ve totally whitewashed Faith.

          • Josh W says:

            I was thinking about that, I’m not sure if I’m more prone to noticing anatomy changes in characters, but comparing the two games (I put them side by side in two windows to compare):

            Her chin is thinner, in terms of bone structure not body fat, and her nose bridge is more prominent, she also has a lot less of gap between her eyes and eyebrows. The peak of her nose curves up instead of down, and her lower cheekbones are more prominent relative to the original character’s higher less centrally placed ones.

            The overall result is to make the whole central region of her face more prominent, centring the view on her top lip, whereas the original design centred on her eyes.

            My brother reckons looks like Olivia Wilde”, and that’s probably because the visual artist used her as a reference for the eyebrown line-eye region and central chin section, as they are almost identical, although that actress actually has a nose shape more similar to the original character.

            The combination of these effects is to make her look less asian, I suppose, but I don’t think it’s intentional.

            What I find more weird is that it’s like people don’t seem to realise that these are different faces. The implied bone structure is obviously different, it’s like the visual equivalent of a continuity error, nowhere near the extent of tomb raider’s constant morphing, but this is a modern franchise, it’s only the second game!

            I’ve also noticed a similar weirdness comparing xcom 1 and 2’s central officer, but I’m sure male characters normally get treated better.

          • Josh W says:

            On the other hand, like a continuity error, this kind of thing comes in large and small forms, not massively bothered about this one, even if it is still strange.

    • Don Reba says:

      [quote]Furthermore the setting looks like it has taken a hard right into cyberpunk territory which isn’t really what the original Mirror’s Edge was doing at all.[/quote]Uh, yeah it was. Definitely.

      • Apocalypse says:

        Especially towards the end :D

        Still gameplaywise cyberpunk was irrelevant you just did your parkour thing for the most part. (Or started using miniguns and killing everyone, but that was frowned upon by most fans.)

  16. Sinjun says:

    The people in the comments here deserve eachother. I’ve been browsing gaming sites for 20 years, and every year the level of hate and whinyness increases. No surprise that reasonable and level headed people don’t even bother with message boards and comment sections anymore, save for a small minority.

    • Aitrus says:

      We express worry and doubt because we care. <3

    • Hmm-Hmm. says:

      You’re not improving things much, though. It would help if people (me, included) would focus more on discussing interesting bits rather than lashing out (again, me included).

      In fact, it shouldn’t prove too hard to do, we have plenty of reasonable argumentation going on here on RPS as it is.

      • Sinjun says:

        There are, yeah, but not here. Between the stuff about Mirrors Edge and Doom you’d think these folks absolutely hate video games. It’s not constructive criticism, it’s straight up vapid negativity. There is no desire to look at the reasons why a thing is how it is, simply to hate.

        • Emeraude says:

          Failure in marketing.

          Had they managed to make us enthused about the release we would be a lot more positive.

          One thing you might want to consider about the growing negativity: maybe it’s happening – if it’s happening at all – because it’s deserved. I mean, it’s good to look for positive things to say, but it doesn’t have to detract from the necessity to call a spade a spade.

  17. Premium User Badge

    Ninja Dodo says:

    Looks great. Had a conversation once with some devs from DICE and told them “hey, if you make another one, I’ll buy it” and they were like “YAY, one sale…” but I guess sales improved since then cause evidently EA changed their minds about the viability of a sequel. Glad they did.

    Also apparently DICE were as surprised by the 2D Flash-style cutscenes for Mirror’s Edge 1 as everyone else – not their call – so that’s why elaborate in-engine cutscenes now, I guess.

    I hope the cutscenes don’t interrupt player agency too much, but I don’t mind some big set-pieces.

  18. Unsheep says:

    The gameplay in the first game was too monotonous for me. I don’t mind platforming in first-person games as long as there are other gameplay elements as well, like combat or puzzles. I hope they can expand on the gameplay for Edge 2.

    The first game was also far too short given the asking price. I know gaming journalists and critics don’t give a damn about the price-to-playlength ratio, but I certainly do.

    • Don Reba says:

      That was just the tutorial. The bulk of the game is in the time trials.

      • Hawkseraph says:

        Which, some unfathomable reason, wasn’t included in the steam version. What the fuck, people?

        • Muzman says:

          Yes it was. You’re thinking of the DLC maps (which were all abstract and not very good, if you ask me)

    • Apocalypse says:

      Get a job and you will start to consider the quality as well more important as the quantity of the content. Time is spare, money not. Well, at least in regards to the small price tags on videogames.

  19. Premium User Badge

    alison says:

    I’m not sure how i feel about changing the cutscenes to cinematic. I loved the manga-esque look of the original’s cutscenes, it fit perfectly into the stylized minimalist vibe of the whole thing. I really hope the new art direction still manages to keep that dream-like feeling of the original.

    In any case, i’m glad RPS keeps posting about this, because i tend to forget about games that don’t appear on Steam. This might be the impetus for me to figure out how to get In-Home Streaming working outside of Steam.

  20. Synesthesia says:

    Man, those are some pretty buildings.

    The art direction looks top notch, on par with the first one.
    Also, here’s the obligatory deadendthrills gallery.

    link to deadendthrills.com

  21. craigdolphin says:

    Personally I think the trailer looks pretty good. Almost enough to get my interest, actually. But I won’t be buying the game because:
    1. I hate parkour-stye runner/platformer gameplay (I hated it in Ass.Creed too)
    2. Origin client requirement (Clients should be entirely optional)

    • Premium User Badge

      Ninja Dodo says:

      Why are you commenting on Mirror’s Edge if you hate parkour? Do you also visit forums for bands you dislike to go “yeah, you know I really don’t like this at all…”?

      • craigdolphin says:

        Because I was interested in much about the franchise: not a shooter, minority female protagonist, and an interesting concept for a futuristic world that’s not ‘blah blah space marine’. Was hoping there’d be more to it this go-around *shrug*

        • Premium User Badge

          Ninja Dodo says:

          That’s a bit like complaining DOOM is a shooter, but you like Mars and demons so you were expecting something more from the sequel maybe.

  22. Laurentius says:

    I like ME a lot, not the story and shooty bits and bad difficulty curve but graphical designe, the levels and getting better at the game were fantastic. This cut-scene ridden trailer looks awful.

  23. Scumbag says:

    If the trailers are anything to go by I imagine they are a reflection of how edgy this will be.

  24. Jason Moyer says:

    I fully expect that, in trying to please everybody (which is a cornerstone of modern AAA game design), the amazing use of agility to avoid confrontation that was the core of the first game is going to end up being reduced to an alternate playstyle and that combat will always be feasible and probably the most efficient way to progress through the game. One of the reasons I adore the original game as much as I do is because Faith is one of the very few really vulnerable protagonists in mainstream gaming, standing alone in the corner somewhere with the original incarnation of Garrett.