• Jesse Schell Releasing a demo harms your game sales
    103 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Im Crimson;39551142]That means you made a too insubstantial game, as I said. You could, for instance, attempted to make a $60 game off a gameplay mechanic that would only hold up a $10 game. If you failed to make a good game I don't see how on earth you'd be able to scrape together a good demo based on that game, seems contradictory. However, even if you do manage to make a good demo based on a mediocre game, you've still provided a better game preview than, say, any TV ads or arranged gameplay videos so (some) power to you for that. However, one could also say you've committed false advertising again by creating a demo that doesn't reflect the real experience (which is essentially equivalent of not providing any demo at all).[/QUOTE] Brütal Legend would be a candidate where the demo made the game look better than it actually is, or rather made it look like a different game to what it was in the end. It made it look like a simple hack&slasher, where in the end it had quite a few RTS elements.
What I'm reading from this is "Not giving people a chance to try your game makes them have to buy it to see if it's shit or not" as in not giving out a demo is a good business strategy for terrible companies who spend more on advertising than on the actual game development
[QUOTE=Rusty100;39550117]i like how there's a really simple solution for this [B]make a better game. [/B] instead of cutting your sales in half a demo of a good game will boost them.[/QUOTE]Seriously, that's all they need to do, obviously sales are going to be hindered if you release a demo for a awful game, [B][U]because nobody wants to waste their money on an awful game.[/U][/B] Now if you release a demo for a very good game (Example would be Just Cause 2), then it's pretty much a guaranteed success. Case in point, releasing a demo for a game will only harm the sales if the game is utter shit, so the easy solution to this is to NOT MAKE A SHIT GAME.
[QUOTE=Killer900;39552500]Seriously, that's all they need to do, obviously sales are going to be hindered if you release a demo for a awful game, [B][U]because nobody wants to waste their money on an awful game.[/U][/B] Now if you release a demo for a very good game (Example would be Just Cause 2), then it's pretty much a guaranteed success. Case in point, releasing a demo for a game will only harm the sales if the game is utter shit, so the easy solution to this is to NOT MAKE A SHIT GAME.[/QUOTE] I tried out the JC2 demo on a friend's PS3 and bought it like an hour later it's an utterly brilliant game with a great demo
This is dumb. I would have never even known of Just Cause 2 if it didn't have a demo. Yeah, I'm sure that's an exception, but it's an exception because the game is really good. If you put a crappy game out and say it's something it's not and then the player sees that in a demo, of course they're not going to buy the crappy game.
"Bad games won't sell if people get the chance to try them before." Thanks Jesse "Cpt. Obvious" Schell.
[QUOTE=usaokay;39549042]Demos are another, but largely, helpful way to see if the game is right for the consumer.[/QUOTE] I wish that for PC games, every game company could be mandated to put out at [I]least[/I] a benchmark demo of the game so that there could be no ambiguity over how well your PC will run the game when you buy it.
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;39550266]But how many times can you count where you didn't buy a game because of a demo? I think there's a lot of selective bias towards demos, with people only remembering the good ones.[/QUOTE] Two times actually! Two Worlds 1 and Nail'd :v:
[QUOTE=n0cturni;39549105]Contrary to what most of you seem to be thinking, I actually agree. I can easily count more times where I've played a demo and didn't buy a game because of it, than the times I've played a demo that drove me to buy the game. Demos can also cost time (and money as a result) to make, depending on how the game works, as well. This can potentially be a lose-lose depending on the game and person playing it. Don't get me wrong, I love demos as much as the next guy, and it kind of irks me that I'm seeing a lot less of them than before, but I also think it makes no business sense and can see why they'd stop making them.[/QUOTE] I think Crysis did it well; they just released a near-final version of the first level of the game as the demo. No extra development cost and we all know how well it sold. I'd rather play the demo and decide that it's not for me whilst keeping my respect for the developers, than get fed a whole bunch of misleading and overhyped information, forking out $80 and realising that I don't like the game. Long term customer relationships vs big sales but low customer satisfaction. I know that many people pirate games so that they can try before they buy; the problem with this is that it's far too easy to say 'well I've already got the game now; I'll keep playing this copy and buy the full version when I can spare the money'. Releasing an honest demo means people don't fall into this self-discipline trap and the developers get whatever money they deserve
Oh shit, guys if we release a Demo they'll know how shit our game is!
Yeah they can drive your sales down because the demo shows players how shoddy of a game you made. If you made a good game and release a demo, you'll gain sales. Look at Just Cause 2. That shows it all.
I used to play a lot of demos because I was too cheap to buy games and it was a good way to kill time. I think people like me probably skewered the data.
[QUOTE=mysteryman;39558409]Yeah they can drive your sales down because the demo shows players how shoddy of a game you made. If you made a good game and release a demo, you'll gain sales. Look at Just Cause 2. That shows it all.[/QUOTE] What about making a good game, but making a bad demo? It'll give people the wrong impression.
I wouldn't have bought HM:BM and Bayonetta if I didn't play them for free (rental abd demo).
Aside from Bayonetta, I don't think I've played a good demo since somewhere around 2003, whenever MGS 3's demo came out.
If I play a demo and like the game, I'll buy it If I play the demo and I don't like the game, I won't buy it Demos make it easier to decide if i want the game rather than watching some obnoxious youtuber's commentary gameplay walkthrough lvl 50 dicknight pvp
[QUOTE=rosthouse;39549088]He is correct though. First, he has the data to support him and second, he isn't the only one to say this. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QM6LoaqEnY[/media] Of course this is the perspective of the developers and publishers and it's obviously counter-intuitive for the customers/players.[/QUOTE] I was gonna post this too. It's not beneficial for customers since we can't try before we buy but we as a whole are to blame. [editline]12th February 2013[/editline] and besides, it's not that big of an issue. Some games have beta releases. (which are pretty much demos anyway, like the Crysis 3 beta) You can also look up Let's Play videos and the likes. I'm surprised at the negative responses in this thread.
Christ this thread is so full of bullshit. You people list all the things that a dev can fuck up with a demo and then go "see all these things can go wrong, why risk it?". Well yeah, if someone fucks up then it's gonna have negative effects. Lets say you have a good game, if you make your demo have too much content then your sales will be worse because you essentially gave away your game for free and that's your fault. If your demo is horrible and portrays your good game as shit, it's your fault. And so fucking on. Not only the game but also the demo has to be done well. You don't get demos from lottery without knowing how good the demo will be. You fucking make it yourself. Saying that they shouldn't make demos is like saying, "nobody should make video games because they can be bad and we will loose money". And of course your sales will be worse if your game is shit and people have a demo to see it. Do I really have to explain how wrong it is to release a shit game, without a demo but with good marketing? It's false fucking advertisement. Tricking people into buying shit they don't actually like. The guy in the OP might have as well said "false advertisement is good for sales". And you're not thinking long term. If a company hypes their games but they turn out to be shit, people will stop buying them to see if they like it. They will assume the games are shit. Even if you start making good games people will hesitate to buy your shit. Also you know what happens when you don't release a demo? People still try it out. By downloading illegal copy. Now go on and draw on your cute little chalkboard in how many cases people will still buy the game for full price when they already have it for free. /rant
[QUOTE=ashxu;39559380]I was gonna post this too. It's not beneficial for customers since we can't try before we buy but we as a whole are to blame. [editline]12th February 2013[/editline] and besides, it's not that big of an issue. Some games have beta releases. (which are pretty much demos anyway, like the Crysis 3 beta) You can also look up Let's Play videos and the likes. I'm surprised at the negative responses in this thread.[/QUOTE] Of course a demo is often bad from a business standpoint, but it doesn't change the fact that choosing not to make a demo to keep potential customers unaware of the quality of the product is unethical. About the video, there are some points that bothered me. He says that demos are expensive to make, and suggests an episodic release (with the first episode being free) as an alternate solution. But this is basically the same as a lot of existing demos (e.g. Crysis) which are actually the first level of the game. And it's cheap to make. Also, except the "good game but bad demo" case, his analysis can basically be summed up to what has been said in this thread, aka "if people play the demo and find it terrible then they won't buy the game". Regarding the "good game but bad demo" situation, if the devs can't manage to make a demo that reflects their (good) game, I wouldn't blame them if they don't release one.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;39561163]Christ this thread is so full of bullshit. You people list all the things that a dev can fuck up with a demo and then go "see all these things can go wrong, why risk it?". Well yeah, if someone fucks up then it's gonna have negative effects. Lets say you have a good game, if you make your demo have too much content then your sales will be worse because you essentially gave away your game for free and that's your fault. If your demo is horrible and portrays your good game as shit, it's your fault. And so fucking on. Not only the game but also the demo has to be done well. You don't get demos from lottery without knowing how good the demo will be. You fucking make it yourself. Saying that they shouldn't make demos is like saying, "nobody should make video games because they can be bad and we will loose money". And of course your sales will be worse if your game is shit and people have a demo to see it. [B]Do I really have to explain how wrong it is to release a shit game, without a demo but with good marketing? It's false fucking advertisement. Tricking people into buying shit they don't actually like.[/B] The guy in the OP might have as well said "false advertisement is good for sales". And you're not thinking long term. If a company hypes their games but they turn out to be shit, people will stop buying them to see if they like it. They will assume the games are shit. Even if you start making good games people will hesitate to buy your shit. Also you know what happens when you don't release a demo? People still try it out. By downloading illegal copy. Now go on and draw on your cute little chalkboard in how many cases people will still buy the game for full price when they already have it for free. /rant[/QUOTE]And now that Aliens: Colonial Marines is out we have an amazing example of what happens when a shit game is made and they never release a demo so nobody knows it sucks. And they got people hyped up with all the amazing trailers and whatnot, but never released a demo, and people go tricked into paying $60 for a sub-par game that was advertised as a AAA title, false fucking advertisement assholes.
Yeah it hurts your sales if your game is shit. On the flip side of the coin if it's great it's probably going to gain interest. How many people didn't buy Duke Nukem Forever after playing the demo? After Farcry 2, if Farcry 3 put out a demo, don't you think that would have boosted the sales initially? Without an easy to get Demo, people will turn to torrenting to try it, at which point a lot of them go Why bother I have the whole thing right here And to the above, Gearbox should be required to put out demos from now on. They are just so insanely hit and miss it's like watching Helen Keller target shoot. Brothers in Arms, Borderlands...... Duke Nukem Forever, Aliens
[QUOTE=RichyZ;39573598]you'll never have a bug free game with no glitches on release never players will find a way to break something[/QUOTE] Some basic QA would be nice though. (Looking at Bethesda here specifically.)
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;39561163]Well yeah, if someone fucks up then it's gonna have negative effects. [/QUOTE] Well yeah, if you fuck up and buy a bad game it's going to cost you $60. Should have read up on your game and its developers first! [QUOTE=Silly Sil;39561163]And you're not thinking long term. If a company hypes their games but they turn out to be shit, people will stop buying them to see if they like it. They will assume the games are shit. Even if you start making good games people will hesitate to buy your shit. [/QUOTE] it would be pretty awful if they released a bad game, which resulted in bad sales and being shut down by the publisher - there won't be a long term to think about then!
It does harm game sales, idiots. Look at colonial marines - would it have been a top seller if it had a demo?
[QUOTE=Juniez;39584100]Well yeah, if you fuck up and buy a bad game it's going to cost you $60. Should have read up on your game and its developers first! [/QUOTE] Oh okay. False advertisement is okay because it's the consumers fault for falling for it...
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;39584156]Oh okay. False advertisement is okay because it's the consumers fault for falling for it...[/QUOTE] you'd have a pretty tough time building a legal case for the false advertisement of not developing demos - it's marketing, it's supposed to make the game look desirable so you buy it you could argue that that's wrong morally, but then you'd also be pulling in the morality of marketing in general
[QUOTE=Juniez;39584244]you'd have a pretty tough time building a legal case for the false advertisement of not developing demos - it's marketing, it's supposed to make the game look desirable so you buy it you could argue that that's wrong morally, but then you'd also be pulling in the morality of marketing in general[/QUOTE] Utter bullshit. I never said it's illegal. And no, you're not telling me that all marketing is false advertisement. And how the fuck is advertising a great thing but selling shit not a scam? It's just like making an internet auction for a car and then sending someone a toy car when they pay. You tell people they will get this but when they pay you give them something else.
well it's more like McDonalds advertising a perfect burger and then giving you an unappealing piece of shit [t]http://www.visualnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Alphaila-Fast-Food-False-Advertising-vs-Reality-7.jpg[/t] which i haven't heard too many complaints about or promising an aliens prequel and getting prometheus instead mind you I'm not offering any moral guidance on advertisement itself - maybe I think all advertisements are "false advertisements" because they don't tell the complete truth! but that's a pretty subjective topic
You can see the devil in his eyes
[QUOTE=Juniez;39584338]well it's more like McDonalds advertising a perfect burger and then giving you an unappealing piece of shit [t]http://www.visualnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Alphaila-Fast-Food-False-Advertising-vs-Reality-7.jpg[/t] which i haven't heard too many complaints about or promising an aliens prequel and getting prometheus instead mind you I'm not offering any moral guidance on advertisement itself - maybe I think all advertisements are "false advertisements" because they don't tell the complete truth! but that's a pretty subjective topic[/QUOTE] Wait wait wait. Back up. Is a sign saying "you can buy furniture here" or simply "furniture" morally questionable or false advertisement? No, it tells you the truth (as long as there actually is fucking furniture there). Is an add on TV saying "holy shit look at that vacuum! You can clean your carpet with it!" false advertisement? It doesn't promise you anything specific. It will only fail to deliver if the thing doesn't work at all, it never said it will clear your carpet in 100%. Is an add for coca-cola showing happy people false advertisement? It doesn't say "you will be this happy if you drink coca-cola". It does not fail to deliver because it didn't promise anything. However when someone shows you one thing but when you pay him you get something else, it's false advertisement. I could tell you that I'm gonna sell you a light bulb that will last for 2 years but it will break after a month. Is that false advertisement? Yes, I promised you something and you got something else. Just like I'd tell you that for 10$ you will get 8 liters of gas but when you pay me I'll give you only 4$. It's the same thing. Morally at least. Now about the McDonalds, if no one gives a fuck, who made that picture? The problem is, people got used to being lied to. You and other people make false advertisement acceptable because "you'd also be pulling in the morality of marketing in general". That's simply wrong. The difference is, an ad that promises something but it's fails to deliver is false advertisement, a lie made to make you buy something you don't actually want. The one that doesn't promise you anything cannot fail to deliver. In case of movies or games, they will sometimes try to trick you into thinking that the movie/game is something entirely different than what it really is. See Colonial Marines. Their presentation of the game is not representing the real product. They are selling you a lightbulb that breaks after a month but they advertise that it's gonna last years.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.