Bitmob_vb_ Bitmob is now a part of VentureBeat
Separator

Demos – can it win the audience?

Default_picture
Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Can demos be the answer to our Hamlet neurosis?

 

“To buy, or not to buy: that is the question.”

 We all know how important the success of a game must be for any developer. Hell, even developers who have been marginally successful have had to face the axe. The pressure of EA’s top dogs to pull out the winner this year and Activision’s rampage of cutting costs makes 2011 and 2012 look more like the antithesis of 2010.

And “Winning” may well be defined not by the metacritic scores attached to games but by first hand consumer reaction. The demo may actually play a critical role in a year where so many great games are being released into the market.

 

 

 

For me, to purchase a game really rests upon “the hours spent playing it”. If it’s a single player experience, then the choice to buy or not to buy really comes down to me; however, the multiplayer aspect of a game requires not only my personal approval, but also the views and opinions of my close nit community of gaming buddies. 

 

I don't see no WoW factor here boys!

For me, Multiplayer has true value if I can have a session with my mates. We call it the WoW (World of Warcraft) Factor.

If a small majority of us decide that a game is worth investing time in, then you can be sure that the rest of us will follow suite and part with our hard earned cash. Demos play an integral part in the group decision to buy or not to buy.

The demo of Battlefield: Bad Company 2 and the momentum it gained by the 1943 experience has definitely secured the cash from my group of gamers. Considering half of them weren’t even interested in the game before Christmas (as they felt Modern Warfare 2 will give them all the multiplayer fun they needed) the demo did wonders.

Has EA’s D.I.C.E demo stolen a small portion of Activision’s clientele? In my case - Yes.

Was the Demo well executed and did it provide us with a clear idea of what the group would be investing their time in? Yes.

In this case, the demo worked for D.I.C.E. not because the demo was competent, but because it was the final push on what (I believe) D.I.C.E has spent many months building momentum on.

From the release of Battlefield 1943, to the hook in the closed beta to the final drive in the demo. The demo was proof to a small group of buyers that the suggestion of one of their friends was worth investing time and money in.

   

Demos can do wonders for the developers who aren’t Rockstar, Infinity Ward or Kojima Productions.

Developers, who are trying to present a new concept or win over a slice of in a highly competitive and saturated market, may be wise to consider the demo as more than a taster. Demos may be the “make or break” of a game and  even possibly its developers.

Where D.I.C.E may have succeeded, Rebellion may have faltered with my group of friends.

 

Again, a large number of us were really excited about Aliens Vs Predator – we knew the lore, we knew the world, we loved the films and the dream of “experiencing it” sparked a lot of pre-order talk.

However, the poor experience by a few of my friends have left the group avoiding the franchise. Some argued that the small numbers of people playing the demo made the game feel anaemic, whilst others argued that the Deathmatch only option created an uninspiring gaming experience.

Strange to think that before Christmas, so many of my friends nostalgically committed to the AvP franchise and so few of us felt BF:BC2 could ever break out from the shadow of MW2.

In the end, Demos can be highly influential because it taps into the power of “word of mouth” and the inner circle of approval. For a gamer who enjoys the community aspect, a demo can sway the views of the relevant masses in my life and steal precious gaming time from its competitors.

Do you and your friends hold any value in a demo?

 
Tags: Battlefield: Bad Company 2, demo, influence, Aliens vs. Predator
Problem? Report this post
BITMOB'S SPONSOR
Adsense-placeholder
Related Stories
 
Comments (11)
Add a new comment
Lance_darnell
Lance Darnell
February 15, 2010
Even though I don't like to admit it, I do. There has been many a game I have bought due to the demo - Prince of Persia, Braid, Ninja Gaiden... There has been many a game I have avoided due to the demo - Marvel vs Capcom 2 With most companies offering a free demo over Live or PSN, I don't see how a demo could not influence opinions of the game. What I really have been digging is online multiplayer demos - they are such the way to go! Great post, Christopher! (as always)
Default_picture
Jonathan Betonio
February 15, 2010
@Christopher: In my extremely theoretical armchair analyst theory, demos are worthless to the commercial developer. Scenario 1: A demo showcases the mechanical/interactive features of the game adequately (including multiplayer), in which case the astute gamer may recognize that there's nothing else for the full game to show them except more of the same. Scenario 2: A demo fails to showcase all features, arguably becoming a different game and leaving gamers who play the full game to deal with unexpected surprises, good or bad. Scenario 3: A demo's features are selected so poorly that gamers get a bad impression of the full game. Stupid theory and assumption making aside though, in the real world a commercially viable portion of the market is totally okay with playing more of the same, if the original was good. In this sense, there's a parallel between originals and sequels, and demos and full games. This doesn't even get into the demos that are more teaser than game, including FMV/movielike teasers, or demos that lay out the game mechanics but treat them more as toys for players to fiddle with instead of providing objectives and a context to use the mechanics. There are also people who don't consider themselves gamers first, people who go into a game with its non-game components first in their minds: to see the game's visuals/textures/graphics, architecture/landscaping/sculpture, narrative/characterization, ambience/music/sfx. ==== Personally, I find it amusing to consider that a demo can be so practically good that it rivals a good/great mini-game/arcade/flash title. I also recall the awesome Onion fake-trailer for Iron Man ("plans to adapt the Iron Man trailer into a full movie"), which itself reminded me of an old pre-Batman Begins fan-trailer based on an 80s-style burly Dark Knight (which I could have sworn was turned into Batman Begins). I myself haven't played demos since maybe ZDNet's heyday as shareware/demo central (mid/late 90s?). Back then that's how I got into Spidweb/Vogel's Exile series (RPGs are very demo-appropriate). In recent years I rely more on an evaluation of a handful of review sites and services that have actually gotten their hands on the full games. Maybe I just like to read, but I think I also soured on a few demos from big studios. If anything, since I haven't found good indie/"small" game review sources and made a habit of checking them, I think demos would benefit these the most, so long as the demos are minimally invasive (as in, minimal to no install), and the demos get wide promotion. They'd have to manage a fine line between representing their games in the best light without giving too much away (especially since they tend to be short to begin with), but at least they tend to be much more affordable so demos might actually translate into sales. Come to think of it, I'm not sure how effective an action/FPS demo would be, considering many FPS clock under 10 hours already. If Battlefield 1943 had been a demo but with gameplay unchanged, I'd bet the full game would have been lucky to get anyone but well-meaning supporters to buy in (although a DLC model might have worked as addons to the demo).
Lance_darnell
Lance Darnell
February 15, 2010
Jonathan, I believe your comment is longer than the post! :D
Default_picture
Jonathan Betonio
February 15, 2010
Oh, and you made an excellent point that, as I interpret it, demos should ideally not be a subset of the full games they demo. To be clearer, demos should clearly inform the player of the direction a studio/team is going in for their next project while giving away as little as possible about the details of the next project. As a suggestion, demos for sequels might take the parts of the first game that will be carried over into the next and enhance those instead, as hints of what will come. Demos could also be more like demos in the "demonstration" sense, to demonstrate the capabilities of a studio as a means to develop a reputation for quality and capability. A demo for the studio more than a demo for a particular game. Even more effective would be an honest reporting of the resources that went into a particular "studio" demo, information that could inform the efficiency of a studio in using its resources so that outsiders (reporters, gamers, financiers, etc.) can have some information about what is practically feasible for a promised upcoming project (I'll call this "informed hype"). I think that latter point though starts to border on insider/geekiness, of people speculating about what is possible based on conceptual demos, hints of what full projects might be, showing only parts of the elephant instead of a photo of the elephant that people can eventually go and visit and check out for themselves. Tech demos. But hey, this hype works too right? Gadget companies do it a lot now, Apple especially. Sometimes I wonder if the game industry and all its related people producing and consuming are simply behind, culturally, from other industries, with games borrowing development, production, engineering, marketing techniques from the playbooks of other industries (software, film) maybe a decade old (but that'd be hijacking your topic, so I'll just leave that dangling).
Brett_new_profile
Brett Bates
February 15, 2010
I generally play demos of games I don't have any interest in purchasing but want to get a taste of. So in that sense, demos are a loss for publishers but a win for me!
Default_picture
David Matos
February 15, 2010
I go through the same process with my group of gaming buddies. The snowball effect is present there as well. I believe demons can be good and bad. Good because they may convince you to get a game you have been on the fence about but bad in the sense that a game you have been really excited for may have a lousy demo.
Default_picture
Jonathan Betonio
February 15, 2010
@Lance: Ah, but who is more efficient and effective at using the space? Even I confuse and bore myself on subsequent reads... @Brett: I sometimes think about how I might collect or design from scratch a bunch of demos, package them together, and have them work as course material for a survey in video games course. The Grail would be using games to demonstrate the medium of games and how it works, like McCloud's Understanding Comics used comics to illustrate how comics work in a fully-enclosed self-commentary.
Lance_darnell
Lance Darnell
February 16, 2010
@Jonathan - I am not complaining. The longer the comment, the better! More for me to read!
Default_picture
Harold Burnett
February 16, 2010
Demos for me are the most important part of pre release coverage.I can read a ton of preveiws on a game,and I can hear the buzz on a podcast, but nothing compares to playing a game in a demo. I hear companies talk about how it can hurt a game's development time when they have to put togather a demo for the public.I just feel the best way for a developer to talk to their audience without having to worry about the game's point being lost ,is with a demo.
Default_picture
Jonathan Betonio
February 16, 2010
@harold: I think demos might work best for both parties if done early in the development process. Companies and designers get to field test ideas and build some early cred/confidence with the market, and gamers get a taste as well as the opportunity to give input that may or may not be heeded to. And, that early in development, you can probably expect not to have too much of a final playable game that the market won't buy the final game. Plus, in an ideal situation, there can be some kind of consensus that satisfies gamer "requirements" for fun, the designers' vision for the shape of the final product, and hopefully the best chance for the publisher/marketer to identify the real selling points of the game. I kinda liked the idea behind Mount & Blade too, but for me, I had other things to take up my time to really get into the pre-release "playtesting" and previewing. But it might be a good thing to try sometimes, to charge different amounts depending on what part of development a gamer opts to buy in.
Default_picture
Christopher Quach
February 16, 2010
@ everyone, Apologies for never being online for the discussions, time differece between U.K and U.S complicates things ;) @ Harold, I think your point definitely has scope for a post! I'm not sure what you mean by charging gamers to opt into different parts of development points, but the concept sounds interesting to explore... @ David, I hear what you mean about poor demos bro! I really think the AvP demo really doesn't do the game justice, but then I've never played the whole game to really know-Catch 22 really :o @ Jonathan, thank you for such an in-depth response! I hear what you mean about the importance of referring to reviews of full games "In recent years I rely more on an evaluation of a handful of review sites and services that have actually gotten their hands on the full games." In the end, demos are just a peep hole into the game, what lies behind that door is anyones guest until they unwrap and play the full release. Again, thank you for your post :D @Brett, if you liked the demo, would you buy the game? especially if you weren't sure about it before the demo? @ Lance, I know what you mean about online multiplayer demos! especially when multiplayer is attached to so many games now, you have to wonder if its there because the market wants it or if its because the game actually plays well in a multiplayer environment (I'm looking at you Bioshock 2). ;)

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.