rec.autos.simulators

Lately I discovered more and more companies are releasing 'alpha/beta
demo's'. A few years (months?!) ago a demo was a demo: it would give you a
preview of a final product. After playing the demo you decided if you'd buy
the game or not.
Nowadays you never know what's going to happen. You download a demo only to
find out a new one will be released in a week or so! This is getting
irritating. Especially since demos are quit big these days!
I spend a lot of time downloading the Speedbusters demo. It was okay, but
time limited. Anyway, it didn't look like a beta demo: everything was there.
I liked it. Now I read they are going to release a new, better demo with,
among other things, no time limit! I'd like to have that too, but I have a
phone bill to pay! EA released the NFS III demo. A few days after I
downloaded it (30 Mb), they released a smaller demo (17 Mb) which was much
better! The same happened with NICE 2. And a lot of other games. Just take a
look at the download list at http://www.racesimcentral.net/'ll see the
word 'updated' is the most used word there...

I don't mind if companies makes alpha/beta material available for us all,
but I would like it if they made it clear if a 'final' demo is still to
come. Downloading all kinds of different demos af a single game may cost me
more than buying the final product! (Well, almost.)

I also doubt if it is a wise thing to do. The 'old' NFS III demo, which has
crappy controls, is distributed on all major magazines cover CD's. The new
demo is much better. Still, most people will judge the game on the first
demo, because not everyone downloads demos everyday. Bad move, EA. And this
happens to more games.

I know, I don't have to download demo's. And they are free of charge (my
phone isn't though). Still, this updating demo's trend is getting
irritating. I don't want to download another 20 Mb file, just to get the
time limit out of the game. Or something like that. But I don't want that
time limit too...

So... what's your opinion?

Jeroen van Engelenhoven

Yes, it can be time consuming but it's not a big deal for us in the
U.S. since our phone billing is different.

You could wait for cover CD's....
Cap'n Bludd

snip

http://www.pipeline.com/~cpnbludd

The probability of someone watching you is directly
proportional to the stupidity of your actions....

What I find even more annoying is a timelimit or a simple lack of gameplay
in a demo. Compare, for instance, the SiN demo (last month) and the Duke3D
demo (two(?) years ago).  The SiN demo lasts all of ten, maybe fif***
minutes, while the Duke3D demo included the entire first episode - a third
of the full game!  I can accept the differences in demo size, due to the
differences in technology, but for a 30+ MB download I sure wish there was
more than fif*** minutes of play.

- Mega

/-------------------------------------------------------------------\
|Nathan Carter                  Senior Student Technology Consultant|
|Fine Arts Computing            University of South Florida,   Tampa|

\-------------------------------------------------------------------/

I totally agree!  I've never really liked demos to begin with because
the demo is always released before the game is completed.  So an hour
of downloading ends up giving you the basic idea of what the game is
like, but that's about all you can count on.  Chances are the final
product will be quite different, hopefully better.  The Sin demo had
awful AI.  Based on that demo, I wouldn't buy the game because of the
AI.  But, chances are they're going to fix up the AI some before the
game is released, so the opinion I formed based on the demo may very
well be completely useless.

In my opinion, demos for games shouldn't be released until AFTER it is
completed.  But, much like game companies' tendencies to release their
games at a set date whether it's finished or not, the strategic
releasing of a demo is a business thing.  Ritual figured if they were
to release a demo of Sin before demos of the next wave of 3D shooters
such as Half-Life and Daikatana are released, they'd have an
advantage.  Whatever.

Now they figure they can release demos even earlier by calling it a
"beta" demo.  Do people actually find these buggy things useful?

-X

Of course, (at least for me), a third of the game is all I need/have time
for before I move on to something else.  A limited demo wets appetites and
probably generates more sales.

-Joel

Absolutely- the worst is a timelimited demo, I don't even bother to
download them, at least until after somebody puts out a 'crack', or finds
the loophole (like the 'demo.txt' file in Carma2).

I'm not all that unhappy with the SiN demo being just the first two 'scenes'
of a much larger game, as you can at least wander around and get an idea of
how the game works- you don't have to end the level in just 15 minutes
unless you want to.

As far as the size goes, yes the demos lately are getting overly large,
usually the 30+ meg games a big chunk of that is movie files (such as the
intro movie in Carma and SiN) that contribute little or nothing to playing
the demo, and there should be an option to download a stripped-down version,
though personally I just do it on the office 3Mbps line and can't complain
about the download time :-)

Whine, ***, and *** even more.  Its free so shut up.  If they did not
give you demos, then you would not have a clue on how games looked, feel or
played.  So what if some companies have to patch their demos.  What are you
looking for fully playable demos.  It business.  Think it as a business.
You all would *** if they did not release a demo, so stop worrying about
it.  If you do not want the demo, then don't download it.  If you want, wait
a day or so to see if it is the correct demo.  Expierence should tell you
that they will patch things about a zillion times, before the decide they
are done, demos included.

B

I agree too. Living in the UK where normal use of the internet costs
-way- too much, having to spend all day downloading a demo that proves
to be effectively useless is, shall we say, (-muffled swear-)
frustrating. Buying cover CD's can be annoying too. Magazines are now
averaging about 5-6 and most of them I'll never read.

But that's enough of me whining...

Cheers!

--
Graeme Nash

You know what to do with "don't_spam_me"...
http://www.karisma1.demon.co.uk/
ICQ# 11257824

"We make history, you guys write about it..." - Ronzo Dennis

Wow, somebody got up on the wrong side of bed today... And then probably
fell down the stairs after that, too!

Cheers!

--
Graeme Nash

You know what to do with "don't_spam_me"...
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
ICQ# 11257824

"Oh Shit" - Derek Warwick, Monza 1990

On Mon, 21 Sep 1998 12:00:44 -0400, "Nathan Carter (ARTS)"

But then the first episode of Duke3D was actually a shareware release.
In other words, you were basically getting a game for free and, if you
liked it, the idea was that you'd then purchase the full version.

The SiN demo was just that -- a demo. It wasn't a shareware product.
All the demo intended to do was give you a brief demonstration of the
game and whet your appetite for the full product.

/\/)ark

http://www.racesimcentral.net/

I agree that companies should make it clear as to what level of completeness
their demo is so that you can make a decision of whether or not to bother
downloading it, although I personally don't mind and am glad that companies
release beta demos as well.  This still gives you a chance to get an idea of
what the game will be like, even if it isn't 100% accurate.  I was still
impressed by the first NFS 3 demo myself, and had already decided that I
would probably pick it up.  Of course downloading a demo doesn't cost me
anything but time, since my monthly internet fee pays for unlimited usage
anyway.  I

acegamer

demo's'. A few years (months?!) ago a demo was a demo: it would give you a
preview of a final product. After playing the demo you decided if you'd buy
the game or not.

Which is as it should be, esp. with the exchange policies at many major
chain stores either goin' the way of the dodo or gettin' drastically
overhauled.  It's nice to at least have a general idea of what you're
gettin' into before you plunk your $$ down.

find out a new one will be released in a week or so! This is getting
irritating. Especially since demos are quit big these days!

So wait until the new one comes out and download IT! Or better yet, wait
until the game is out and their attention is shifted to somethin' else,
download the demo available at that time, and that way, if you like the
game, you can go right out and buy it.

<snip>

but I would like it if they made it clear if a 'final' demo is still to
come. Downloading all kinds of different demos af a single game may cost me
more than buying the final product! (Well, almost.)

I'll be honest and say I've never had to do that, but then, the kind of
games I play generally don't require more than one demo, i.e., BBMogul.

crappy controls, is distributed on all major magazines cover CD's. The new
demo is much better. Still, most people will judge the game on the first
demo, because not everyone downloads demos everyday. Bad move, EA. And this
happens to more games.

Sounds almost Sierra-esque.  <g>  Companies should just finetune what
they've got until it's at least playable...

phone isn't though).

Hmm...time for a T1.  <vbg>

download another 20 Mb file, just to get the time limit out of the game. Or
something like that. But I don't want that time limit too...

I dunno 'bout 20 meg files, but what I like about the demos I play is that
you get a decent amt. of play time out of 'em.  BBMogul99, for example,
allows you to play an entire season + playoffs.  Quite fair, IMHO.  Now if
only they'd release the real thing.  <g>
I wonder if there's a way to circumvent the one-season thingie? <innocent
grin>

              Josh

A. It helps get a better full version out the door.
Really, imagine what a game like Unreal would be if a pre-demo was released
to the public...  Nope, thousands of us had to buy this great game to find
out Internet play was pretty crappy and you need a super computer to achieve
a constant 30fps.

B. If you get sick of downloading 30+MB demos, just buy a game magazine and
get all the current demos on a CD.  It wasnt long ago when demos were $$$ at
the software store.  Internet download? Ha!  Nobody even used the Internet.
:)  If you were lucky, you had a local BBS that had demos for download.  Of
course, a measly 5MB on a BBS (usually with time limits) with modems at 14.4
was a major pain, if you could even get on the thing...  Wanna go back to
that?  :)

The bottom line is simple.  Wait for others opinions before you download it.
If you are still uncertain, buy a magazine.  If your line usage costs $$$,
why bother downloading 30+MB demos anyway?

<snip all>

Timelimited demos are ok if the time is long enough.
1 min= *** no, takes longer to load the damn game for christ sake
1.5 min= hell no, what is this company hiding thats so bad in the game
2.5 min= not quite, so is there really a game in here?
5 min= ok, so this is what this demo is like
10 min= ahh, at last, like wow, the full must really be something

I hear what you're saying.  Somewhere between the angry blathering and
cursing, "B" has a good point.  It is free, and we don't have to
download it or like it or anything, so who are we to complain.  That's
fine.  I'm not trying to say game companies are bad if they release
early demos with bugs and missing features.

But why do they release demos in the first place?  They want you to
play it and think, "Gee, what a great game!  I can't wait to buy it!"
But is a demo loaded with bugs, gameplay issues and bad AI with the
words "This is a BETA" printed clearly in the readme file supposed to
make me want to buy the game?  Not likely.  No doubt it's business,
but it seems like bad business to me.  If they can just keep their
pants on long enough for the game to reach a point where everything is
in fairly good shape except for maybe a few minor glitches before
releasing the demo, it would be better for the gamers AND the company.

The problem is that games are coming in waves these days.  Five or six
games of the same genre are all planned for release around the same
timeframe.  So not only are they in a race to see who can shove the
game into the market first, they're also racing to get a half-assed
working demo out first, too.  They're probably thinking if they
release the demo before their competitors, it'll make people talk
about their game instead of their competitors'.  When the Sin demo
came out, how many people were talking about Half-Life or Diakatana
compared to those talking about Sin?  They probably don't really care
what people are saying about it, as long as people are talking.  It's
like free advertising.  That's great for the company, but it doesn't
help the gamers.

-T