Demos: a new, irritating trend... Your opinions, please!

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 [link lost in import: /'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....

> 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 -snip- > So... what's your opinion? > Jeroen van Engelenhoven 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

>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 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

>> 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 >-snip- >What I find even more annoying is a timelimit or a simple lack of gameplay >in a demo. 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

Quoted text (22 lines)

>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

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.karisma1.demon.co.uk/ ICQ# 11257824 "Oh Shit" - Derek Warwick, Monza 1990

On Mon, 21 Sep 1998 12:00:44 -0400, "Nathan Carter (ARTS)" >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! 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 [link lost in import]

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

Quoted text (9 lines)

>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.

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

10 minutes is almost enough to justify re-starting and restarting the game without ever having buying it.

Well Doom had a demo that was a third of the game and sold bookoo units, as did Doom 2, as did Duke Nukem ... those demos *represented* the actual games, where as today the most typical statement is "you can't judge the full game by the demo". Kind of silly too, because that's what a demo should be for.

Quoted text (8 lines)

>>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. >Well Doom had a demo that was a third of the game and sold bookoo units, as >did Doom 2, as did Duke Nukem ... those demos *represented* the actual >games, where as today the most typical statement is "you can't judge the >full game by the demo". Kind of silly too, because that's what a demo

should >be for. Of course, I played the heck out of the Doom 1&2 demos, loved the games, but never bought them. I figured I owed ID something and bought Q2. -Joel

>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? Doom, Doom2, and Duke were released as shareware becuase they didn't have Activision spending millions on advertising. They needed an alternative method to market their game. Times have changed. Now a lot of demos are considered "tech demos" in order to help test the engine. That's what qtest, q2test, the nfs3 test, sin "test" demo, etc. are. They are more for testing the engine on the bazillion different configurations out there before they ship the full product. Then they ship a real demo after the real game ships when they have more time. It all makes sense. The only problem are the morons who can't "see" this trend and download a "demo" expecting a full 1/3 of the game. Then come on here an whine about this and that. Todd

Nope, less than one fourth of the full game. Episode 1 is a lot smaller than the other episodes. That's another thing - shareware games. A few years ago you could play one third or one fourth of the whole game, a full episode. The other episodes were the same size. These days shareware companies (Apogee, Epic) are releasing smaller shareware versions with each release. Their latest, Balls of steel, is even crippled. Not my idea of shareware. ========================== Martin van der Plas http://home.wxs.nl/~plas0006

>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. You think a demo would change that. They've been trying to "fix" Internet play since the game was released and they've gotten nowhere. Unreal would never have been released if they waited until they got good net play out of their demos. -T

Personally, I find demos of 'so-called-driving-games' that allow no other control of the cars (bikes, etc.) other than the keyboard the most pointless & irritating (after a substantial download). If they can't even put in the essential controls (at least a joystick - if not wheel support) then it just gets the quick 'double add-remove'!!! Regards DM ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- To reply please remove < .nospam > from my e-mail address ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- >> 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

Quoted text (11 lines)

>-snip- >> So... what's your opinion? >> Jeroen van Engelenhoven >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.

On Tue, 22 Sep 1998 02:26:28 GMT, I find these Demos are the best way to decide if a game is good enough to buy. eg: NFS3 I downloaded the 30-mb demo and found the quality to be so poor that I can only assume that the real game will be as good (read "bad") Demos are a way of showing the public how good a game is and if the demo sucks then the game surely will too and should be avoided. Someone said that often a whole range of games in the same genre get released at around the same time. With Colin McRae Rally, Johnny Herberts F1, Grand Prix 3, Grand Prix Legends, etc.. etc.. Who needs NFS3? _ ____ _ (_) / __ `/ / / / /_/ / / / \__, / /_/ /____/

>>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

Quoted text (8 lines)

>>a constant 30fps. >You think a demo would change that. They've been trying to "fix" >Internet play since the game was released and they've gotten nowhere. >Unreal would never have been released if they waited until they got >good net play out of their demos. >-T

We would still be waiting for the full version to be released. Thats my point. They dont have to worry about getting good net play in the demo. Releasing a demo or preview (like SiN, Quake1 and 2) would have let them know we arent going to put up with that crap. They wouldnt have to fix the demo, just the full retail version. When the full version was released we could see if it was fixed. Instead, we had to buy the full version just to see if it worked in the first place. I could have spent the money on something else back then. Now the money is spent and I have to wait for what should have been the full version. Its been almost 4 months now..... The wait continues. Freon98 m | b at mocc com

Quoted text (16 lines)

>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. >We would still be waiting for the full version to be released. Thats my >point. They dont have to worry about getting good net play in the demo. >Releasing a demo or preview (like SiN, Quake1 and 2) would have let them >know we arent going to put up with that crap. They wouldnt have to fix the >demo, just the full retail version. When the full version was released we >could see if it was fixed. Instead, we had to buy the full version just to >see if it worked in the first place. >I could have spent the money on something else back then. Now the money is >spent and I have to wait for what should have been the full version. Its >been almost 4 months now..... The wait continues.

Hmm. Good point. However I don't think they would have waited this long to release the game. They probably would have released it with bad net play anyway (all the while claiming to have fixed it). But I guess having the demo first would have at least made people wary and cautious about the game instead of jumping at the hype the way we did. But I'm not against demos. Just the demos that are released way before the game is close to completion. If Epic released an Unreal demo several weeks before they released the game, then yes it would have been very helpful indeed. But if they released a demo before they even implemented multiplayer, as soon as they got the engine and a couple of levels put together, and when the game required a super computer to achieve a constant 20fps, what good would it do? That's the sort of trend we're seeing now. Rush the demo, then rush the game. -T

Quoted text (10 lines)

> On Tue, 22 Sep 1998 02:26:28 GMT, > I find these Demos are the best way to decide if a > game is good enough to buy. > eg: NFS3 > I downloaded the 30-mb demo and found the quality > to be so poor that I can only assume that the real > game will be as good (read "bad")

It's not that simple. If everybody had taken the demo for F1RS serious, it would have been a flop. l8er ronny -- Toys'R'Us '99: "So, would you like a hand gun with that action figure, kiddo?" |\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather, ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep. |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car, '---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!

Considering that a demo, as opposed to a beta; is supposed to convey a good idea of what the FINISHED game is like; i.e. is demonstrates it; I can see a time in this instant internet transaction age; when "preferred customers" who join mailing lists and sign webpage guest books and that sort of thing are offered time limited "tasters" for maybe $5. You know you'd go for it; and spread the word here and further. Good bye half the online reviews. In fact; judging by the RB2 fans; you could make a good living selling sims by installments. In the end; if you're here, you're an online gamer. It could happen. Seeker

Ok Ok ... I went against my better judgement and bought the full version of NFS3 even though the demo was poor. My reasons were simply that the game's RRP is 50 % less than the normal price of new games and for that I got a game that was 1000% better than the 1st demo. It still amazes me why the 1st demo has so many bugs and is no where near being representative of the final product.

Quoted text (26 lines)

>On Tue, 22 Sep 1998 02:26:28 GMT, >I find these Demos are the best way to decide if a >game is good enough to buy. >eg: NFS3 >I downloaded the 30-mb demo and found the quality >to be so poor that I can only assume that the real >game will be as good (read "bad") >Demos are a way of showing the public how good a >game is and if the demo sucks then the game surely >will too and should be avoided. >Someone said that often a whole range of games in >the same genre get released at around the same >time. With Colin McRae Rally, Johnny Herberts F1, >Grand Prix 3, Grand Prix Legends, etc.. etc.. Who >needs NFS3? > _ > ____ _ (_) > / __ `/ / / > / /_/ / / / > \__, / /_/ >/____/

_ ____ _ (_) / __ `/ / / / /_/ / / / \__, / /_/ /____/

Speakin' of demos, all...the WEIRDEST thing happened to me today. I was playin' the Mogul 99 demo, or at least gettin' ready to. I click on "Resume Game" for the hell of it, and it gives me the standard "This feature isn't included" message, and the two buttons for more info and continue with the demo. I clicked continue, and not only did it spit me into the game, it spit me into COMMISSIONER mode, with full control of ALL the editors! Only thing still unavailable is the Hall of Fame, and I haven't completed a season yet, so I dunno 'bout continuing a season...more as it develops!! Josh

I've got another one. Try downloading the Frontier : First Encounters demo, and then patch it. Now it's the full version ! (Well, almost. Without music or video.) They should release more demo's like that :) ========================== Martin van der Plas http://home.wxs.nl/~plas0006