85 Replies. 5 pages. Viewing page 3.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Older >
 |
| 45. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 22:15 |
Ruffiana |
|
|
Demos more often than not convince me to not buy a game. Unless it's a game I know I'm getting anyway, then the demo becomes like an appetizer.
On the other hand, I have very rarely been so disapointed with a game I purchased, that I wish I hadn't spent the money on it. It has to be a pretty damn dismal game for me to not enjoy playing it on some level.
Making a demo of a game is a real pain in the ass. You rarely know what part of the game you'd be comfortable with represeting the entirety of your game through a demo until long after the point where it becomes feasible to seperate it enough from the rest of the game that it can be released safely as a demo. On top of that there's the seperate alpha/beta/QA requirements for a stand-alone demo going on at the same time you're trying to get your game out the door. I can't fault these guys for being hesitant to do one, but I really don't see it hurting their sales all that much. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 44. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 21:56 |
Richteralan |
|
|
eRe4s3r wrote on Apr 17, 2010, 19:17:
Thats pretty much how i see it as well, in the age of walkthroughs on youtube it takes 10 seconds to see how good or bad a game is. Saves you time of downloading and installing a 2gb demo and saves you space to boot.
Heck, you can judge most games by their screenshots and gameplay videos.
right....now people are too lazy to actually TRY the game themselves.
They just like to sit there, watching a video of some other people TELLING them how the game is.
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 43. |
Re: because it becomes prohibitively expensive |
Apr 17, 2010, 21:52 |
theAntiELVIS |
|
|
As in, you lose many potential "blind" sales when your game sucks.
-tAE- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 42. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 20:00 |
ASeven |
|
|
And let's not forget that for those who may think a screenshot or a video can be enough to base a purchase, need I remind a certain game called Operation Flashpoint:Dragon Rising? Where the screenies and vids were ALL doctored until near release time? Now see how the game is, with the devs having a couple months ago announced they would no longer support the game.
Demos are not only a way for us to test the game, but also a way for us to test the devs integrity and honesty. Yes, demos can be doctored as well but they sure paint a better image than screenshots, videos or having no demo at all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 41. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 19:23 |
migwell |
|
|
I generally base my purchases on demos, not having a lot of money to throw around on junk. Second for me are comments on trusted forums, and I wait for those since often the initial reaction can be positive and after a little while in the game people's opinions change.
The last place I look to are the reviews, since there is so much payola and ass kissing that goes on with reviewers and review sites. So, demos forever! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| I know the amplitude of time. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 40. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 19:21 |
Warrax |
|
|
| I guess making a demo of a full game is not what it used to be? I really don't see how a demo take time and is expensive to make? I always thought it was a very easy thing to do as a programmer, I guess things have changed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 39. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 19:20 |
Ginny |
|
|
Anything on the psn, unless there's a demo/trial, no sale.
List a plenty games that i have bought on the psn because of the trials, and a good few full priced games.
MMO'S are cert, no trials, no signing up.
TBH i think this guy is mostly right though, while there are guys like me, there's far more that jump on the hype train and buy, buy, buy anyway.
As if that isn't stating the obvious:(
Edit for the post below*
Youtube ain't all that, some games draw you in when you play um, infamious did that for me last year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 38. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 19:17 |
eRe4s3r |
|
|
Thats pretty much how i see it as well, in the age of walkthroughs on youtube it takes 10 seconds to see how good or bad a game is. Saves you time of downloading and installing a 2gb demo and saves you space to boot.
Heck, you can judge most games by their screenshots and gameplay videos. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 37. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 18:46 |
StingingVelvet |
|
|
CannibalBob wrote on Apr 17, 2010, 16:58:
TBH I don't really care if a AAA title like Crysis 2 doesn't get a demo. If there was a demo, it'd be like 2GB anyway and chances are I wouldn't bother downloading that (rather watch videos and read reviews).
But Cevat Yerli is wrong about gaming in general. Small games *need* a demo. Shareware was a big hit and still is. Since small games (ie. indie games) are small to begin with, there's no reason to not include a demo.
Thanks for saying what I was trying to say in a better way. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 36. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 18:40 |
PHJF |
|
|
| I bought Crysis because of its demo, and I just bought JC2 because of its. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 35. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 18:29 |
wtf_man |
|
|
Beamer wrote on Apr 17, 2010, 18:16:
In fairness, how many of you play demos? How many of you often make purchasing decisions based upon them?
Let's see... the last demo I tried was Crysis... and it convinced me NOT to buy the game.
EDIT: And no I did not pirate it... I never played the full game.
But yeah, you're right... I rely more on reviews and word of mouth in forums than Demos. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 34. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 18:16 |
Beamer |
|
|
In fairness, how many of you play demos? How many of you often make purchasing decisions based upon them?
I can't remember the last PC demo I grabbed. It had to be years ago.
On consoles I grab maybe one a month. I play maybe a third of those, so I'd figure I play 4 demos a year on average. I also can't remember the last time I made a purchasing decision based on one. The last two demos I grabbed were Splinter Cell Conviction and Just Cause 2. JC2 I'm still not buying. SCC I may buy, but it would be based solely upon the co-op missions, which were not in the demo.
Most recent games I've purchased were Borderlands, MW2, Mass Effect, Batman, Dragon Age (which I have had for four months without a chance to play yet) and Halo ODST. I was plenty informed of what each game was going into it. A demo wouldn't have changed my purchasing decisions at all. Word of mouth on the internet and from friends handled it just fine. Some of them were solid single player games. Some of them were bought solely for co-op. They were all 100% as expected. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 33. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 18:15 |
siapnar |
|
|
Surf wrote on Apr 17, 2010, 17:43:
and many have been burned by games that are in an Alpha or Beta state (Gothic 3, Bad Company 2 and many others) BC2 was not a "beta state" release.
Does the release have to be absolutely technically and visually perfect to be worth buying?
Practically ANYTHING you buy or pay for, is by no means a perfect product, or a perfect experience.
Why gamers have this idea that they deserve more pristine shit than anyone else is beyond me.
And don't tell me my standards are low, cause they're definitely not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| I have projectile dysfunction. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 32. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 17:43 |
Surf |
|
|
So many of you assholes on here always say under no circumstance is piracy good where I, as many of you know, have advocated some aspects of piracy.
Not having a game demo?
Not being able to test a game?
Not being able to return a game for any reason, ever?
I mean, can the ball be any more in the distributors/developers court?
Piracy is there for many reasons, the main reasons are cost (most people cannot afford the price of these games, which is going up) and many have been burned by games that are in an Alpha or Beta state (Gothic 3, Bad Company 2 and many others). Or what about a game like GTA4, a port which makes everyone cringe, but GTA4 exceeded my expectations!
Soooo, piracy again wins the argument this time and in this case. To those that disagree, fuck off.
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 31. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 17:42 |
siapnar |
|
|
Warskull wrote on Apr 17, 2010, 15:00:
The concept of "paid demos" actually could be good if they handled it right. Release a small chunk of your game for $5-10, then allow the player to unlock the rest for $40. The key is the money put into the "demo" must go towards the full purchase. Basically, make the full game, but release it episodically. The total cost of the 3-4 episode would be equal to the total cost of the game. This would encourage them to make their game quality the whole way through, so people don't stop half-way through.
That said, this is EA, so they are just going to screw the customer over. That makes sense, but it won't happen, just as you stated in your last line. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| I have projectile dysfunction. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 30. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 17:01 |
Bla |
|
|
Great idea there...... Hay.. Maybe we should start charging game developers and publishers for our opinions. Maybe then everybody can profit from the golden entrails of this obese goose.
Edit: Anyway.. didn't Sony copyright self destructing demo's?
This comment was edited on Apr 17, 2010, 17:29. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 29. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 16:58 |
Ray Marden |
|
|
So what exactly am I supposed to base my purchases off of? Especially in the case of new franchises, genres, or gameplay mechanics?
A pretty screenshot is easy to make. I believe the industry has all sorts of issues with integrity, payola, and fanboys. These are programs with a wide range of performance, compatability, and technical expertise. The industry doesn't let you return bad products. I already have a personal history of demos encouraging purchases of games I might otherwise neglect and completely avoiding games that were incredibly bad. Most important, this is something that I directly control (the game playing experience) and I am the single best source for determing what I enjoy playing.
But what, I should just buy every game the marketers and/or publishers claim is great? Because they're already so good at honestly citing their faults and failures, right?
If ever I was going to be much more selective with my purchases as well as push down the average purchase price to minimize any personal loss I may suffer, this is certainly the way to encourage me to do it.
Morons. Thanks again for f*ck*ng over a lover of games.
Rolling my eyes,
Ray |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 28. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 16:58 |
CannibalBob |
|
|
TBH I don't really care if a AAA title like Crysis 2 doesn't get a demo. If there was a demo, it'd be like 2GB anyway and chances are I wouldn't bother downloading that (rather watch videos and read reviews).
But Cevat Yerli is wrong about gaming in general. Small games *need* a demo. Shareware was a big hit and still is. Since small games (ie. indie games) are small to begin with, there's no reason to not include a demo.
I also think his statement that piracy is worsen due to the market going online is BS. You'll always get stupid kids who pirate the game, but most of the time it's the Russians or Germans who pirate since *they cannot buy the game*. It's the distribution that is the problem, as well as the price. Charge $50 for a $30 game and of course you will get piracy. The lack of a demo also doesn't help, since people do not want to spend $50 on a game they're unsure will work on their computer. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| "If you like it, they will stop making it" - Herblock's Law |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 27. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 16:46 |
StingingVelvet |
|
|
I continue to maintain that in the days of 30 minute unedited walkthroughs we don't need demos nearly as much as people say we do, but still... demos are nice. I like demos.
The odd thing with making this statement right now is that I would argue Xbox Live is a statement of great success for demos. Every game on there has a demo, you try, then you buy. On the flipside Steam and PSN release these small games with no demos and I say to myself "why bother?" Great games like Shatter have gone unnoticed by me for months because of having no demo. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 26. |
Re: Crytek's Demo Doubts |
Apr 17, 2010, 16:38 |
ASeven |
|
|
Beamer wrote on Apr 17, 2010, 16:12:
Ah well, it seems we're devolving into some kind of new backwards pre-history in gaming. Thankfully indies are doing it the right way, no publishers to stamp their ideas with stupid directives.
It tends to be developers that want to avoid demos, not publishers.
As pointed out, demos can increase sales. They don't always, but they can.
...
Though you present valid points, I would consider myself a real stupid person if I bought a demo. It's just a concept that's not meant to be at all. You don't go to a cinema and have the waivers ask you to pay $.50 for each trailer you see, and trailer also take away time and resources from movie studios.
I present you two cases where demos are making a difference.
Just Cause 2. Many people bought the game because of the demo. Now imagine the demo was $1. Those 2 million downloads would be reduced to hundreds of thousands most likely, and of those only a part of them would buy the game. This alone would not compensate all the sales of the full game.
Mount&Blade:Warband. The demo is the whole game, multiplayer and all, but you're restricted to a certain level. The demo then asks you if you want to buy the game after you've played the demo. Besides the level restriction there's no other restrictions in the demo. Warband is probably considered by now the best indie in terms of sales, and there's been a small rise of sales after the demo was launched.
These two examples are how demos should be handled. Demos are like trailers, you're trying to convince a buyer that your product is the awesomest ever! on the market. If you pay, even if it is $1, to get what in fact amounts to an interactive ad, then just the thought of paying to see an ad makes me sick to my stomach. It's capitalism at its worst and greediest. What next, pay to get a patch that fixes bugs? Pay the game then pay per minute you download the game?
There are some lines that must not be crossed, Ubisoft's DRM and paying for demos are two such lines. It reveals the seedy underbelly of corporate gaming and how far devs heads are stuck in their own asses. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
85 Replies. 5 pages. Viewing page 3.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Older >
|
|
Twitter 
