Demos...when are they justified

[DavesWorld]

They could offer a demo that lets you play one of only a handful of the preset (story) races, and only lets you play for twenty or fifty turns (or something). Or the demo could give you a single tactical battle to play with.

I get very suspcious when a company doesn't offer a demo these days. The no-demo trend is rapidly becoming a "game has problems" indicator, IMO.

[Skanky Burns]

Civ 3 had the name and reputation - a demo probably wouldn't have increased sales by much.

Demo's don't really suit TBS though. A demo in these types of games generally are limited to 20 or 50 or whatever turns, meaning that most games will get you doing some exploration and possibly some expansion, but not enough time to get a feel for how the end-game plays.

Compare this to say the Deus Ex demo. In that one you played an entire mission, and got to do an "entire iteration of a gaming cycle". By which I mean you enter the level, do scouting, initial attack, ...(other stuff here)... , find the boss' location, finish the mission. It gave you a feel for all aspects of the game, let you try out all the steps you would be doing in each mission, giving you a complete overview of how the full game would perform.

[Kc7mxo]

Is there a rule that says a demo has to come out before the game? lots of companies release demos after the game has been released, and when most of the team can be spared to work on it.

Right now, Moo3 has missed deadline after deadline, but its supposedly, "almost there." There is absolutely NO reason to waste the team's time working on a demo, when they're most likely desperate to get the game itself done. After its released, maybe we'll see a demo. But personally, I don't want to see a demo before the release, I just want them to finish the game.



Ooh! Speaking of demos, I just played the Delta Force Blackhawk Down SP demo, and all I got to say is, SWEET!

[vee4473]

Originally posted by Kc7mxo


There is absolutely NO reason to waste the team's time working on a demo, when they're most likely desperate to get the game itself done.

I guess you don't believe the company when they say that the game is done and just in final testing.

I guess they are lying about something...If they need every last member to finish a game that they said is done except for final testing.

[DavesWorld]

There is absolutely NO reason to waste the team's time working on a demo, when they're most likely desperate to get the game itself done.

Reason 1) To preview the product for consumers so they may make a more eductated purchase decision.

Not issuing a demo smacks of "give us the money before you find out" I still haven't seen any previews discuss gameplay hardly at all (the Wargamer preview did, the gamespy and so far here have been fluff).

Just pointing out there's at least *one* reason. There are a few others, surely.

[Sabaron]

Well, does anyone else remember one of the big problems with SMAC's demo? People would crack it to remove the 100 turn limit... still not as good as the full game, but it still hurt sales.

[Kc7mxo]

I guess you don't believe the company when they say that the game is done and just in final testing.

Its been in final testing for a while. I don't pay attention to news briefs from the forum anymore, I just watch for gone gold statements.

Reason 1) To preview the product for consumers so they may make a more eductated purchase decision.

Not issuing a demo smacks of "give us the money before you find out" I still haven't seen any previews discuss gameplay hardly at all (the Wargamer preview did, the gamespy and so far here have been fluff). Just pointing out there's at least *one* reason. There are a few others, surely.

As I said, they can make the demo AFTER the game is released. Much like blizzard has done with Warcraft 3, and many other companies have done with other games.

I'm not against companies releasing demos, I actually prefer it. I typically play the game before I buy it, regardless of the status of a demo. I've been burned by too many reviews and stores who won't take returns.

But in this case, I want them to finish the product FIRST. Then, when they're done, they can make the demo if they want.

[Bill_in_PDX]

Originally posted by vee4473


I guess you don't believe the company when they say that the game is done and just in final testing.

I don't know about the other guy who posted that to which you are responding, but as for me, yeah, I think at this point I don't believe that the game is done and in final testing. It has now been 5 weeks since it was "going to be gold any day now", and still not done, so clearly something is going on.

I am still looking forward to the game, but this sort of growing problem does not bode well for what will be delivered despite the glowing support of our local BT team.

[Bernie Rubber]

Well, all these delays (like everything) can be taken in more then one way.

1. They could be trying to make the game an instant classic, and need the extra time so that it blows your mind.

2. It could be a bit farther off, and they really aren't sure how long it'll take... a few days, a few weeks.. etc.

3. They could be lying outright, but the beta testers seem to counterindicate that.

Also, it's been just about done for longer then five weeks...

[Bill_in_PDX]

Well, I was going from last missed deadline, when the assurances were given that it will be gold any time now. I am well aware that was just one of several missed deadlines.

[Canadian Beaver]

no demo just the game already

[LDiCesare]

Demos are justified if hardware is a limitation. I use demos mostly to see whether I can run a game on my computer. If I can, I buy, if not I don't.
Otherwise, demos of games I am not interested in always fail to hold me for more than 10 minutes.
If the game is not in a series, a demo may be justified too. I will look at a demo of the new NobodyEverHeardOfIt game, but not of SimCity 4084 because I already know what simcity looks like.

MOO3 hardware requirements are low, so there is little need of a demo on that side, and the name is known, so there is little need for a demo on that one. Not doing a demo was thus understandable. Not doing it now with all their release delays I understand even more.

[Dr Strangelove]

There have been times when playing a demo made a major difference in whether I bought a game or not. I very much appreciate the opportunity to see if a particular game will play on my system. There is nothing like getting a game that technically should play on my system only to find that it doesn't to send me into pledges to never buy that company's products again.

[moomin]

I too, think that demos have a role to play (no pun intended). In fact, I almost vowed never to buy another full-price game w/out a demo some time ago. However, these days you could probably argue that Kazaa and other similar "services" provide much of the same function and that the gaming industry knows it and plans for it accordingly, although I wouldn't expect them to ever confess to that.

I won't buy Moo3 until I see vmxa1's big green thumb-up here, so that'll cost QS a sale if the game is lousy. I probably would buy it first thing if I knew they felt confident enough about their product to release a demo.

[Don K Hotay]

how would you go about creating a demo for this game? Are you a CivIII fan, and if so, did it matter that Firaxis didn't release one?