DICE made Mirror's Edge, but it was a commercial flop, so we are unlikely to see a sequel anytime soon :( Personally I loved it.
Slightly OT but interesting: from what I hear from people at EA, it was a huge internal political war that year between the people who wanted to build more sequels and licensed franchises, and the people who thought that EA would die if it didn't innovate on its own IP. The latter won and were given a chance to prove their worth - the two main titles to come out of that were Dead Space and Mirror's Edge. From what I hear management considered this direction a flop (Dead Space, while popular, and spawning a sequel, was not the sort of hyper-blockbuster it needed to be, and ME was an unquestionable flop) and now EA is culturally back to the sequel-mill mentality.
A sad opportunity that didn't pan out :( There are precious few new IPs being worked on at EA right now.
A lot of the presentation techniques from DICE's upcoming Battlefield 3 borrow very strongly from Mirror's Edge. I was watching a shakeycam video of B3 from last week's GDC and the influence was very apparent.
"[...] a lot of the physicality of Battlefield 3 comes from the thinking behind Mirror's Edge. So the fact that your hands are a part of the world—it's not just a gun on a stick—it's actually a character that moves around. You can see your feet, you can see your hands, you can touch stuff, you can interact with the world. A lot of thinking comes from Mirror's Edge and that's what you want."
The economics of the games industry mean that you can't turn a profit on AAA games without sequels. The new IP push was about reducing EA's dependence on sports titles and externally-licensed IP. (Also, to a degree, an attempt to reinvigorate EA's corporate culture) It was always in the game plan that the successful new IP games would receive plenty of sequels.
I wouldn't say it was a total failure. Mass Effect and Dragon Age are pretty good. =)
This is very true. The first title establishes a buzz about the game, the second (and third, etc.) game often make more money because the brand has been established and demand created. There are a large number of people who don't want to spend the whole $60 when a new IP is released and will instead wait for it to be discounted, or buy it used.
EA circa 2003/2004 was pumping out sequels yearly for titles that should have long been put to pasture. This has changed quite a bit in the last 5 or 6 years with IP's like Skate, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Battlefield (and Bad Company), Dead Space, where the sequels aren't rushed out the door without much thought, not to mention other new projects like Dante's Inferno and Mirror's Edge.
Slightly OT but interesting: from what I hear from people at EA, it was a huge internal political war that year between the people who wanted to build more sequels and licensed franchises, and the people who thought that EA would die if it didn't innovate on its own IP. The latter won and were given a chance to prove their worth - the two main titles to come out of that were Dead Space and Mirror's Edge. From what I hear management considered this direction a flop (Dead Space, while popular, and spawning a sequel, was not the sort of hyper-blockbuster it needed to be, and ME was an unquestionable flop) and now EA is culturally back to the sequel-mill mentality.
A sad opportunity that didn't pan out :( There are precious few new IPs being worked on at EA right now.