MS, Nintendo and Sony on demos for downloadable games.

[Queasy]

Link

Over the last few weeks I?ve been asking top people at Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony about game demos for the downloadable games offered via Xbox Live Arcade, WiiWare and PlayStation Network.

I can?t get the same answer twice.

Microsoft ? yes, demos are a must
Nintendo ? no, demos are not required
Sony ? sometimes demos are good, sometimes bad.

Keep reading to find out why they feel differently.

Microsoft
Jeremy Wacksman, Global Marketing Manager, Xbox Live

From my interview with him about Xbox Live Arcade:

?[Trial demos for XBLA games] came from the casual games industry. The thing is that Arcade has an identity. It is about pick-up-and-play games. The trial experience helps drive that pick-up-and-play nature. You have to think about how to get consumers to taste it. And the other thing is that it provides a great marketing tool. We?ve talked to consumers, and trial is one of the big drivers of purchase intent. So it gets smaller-budget games that doesn?t have a big marketing campaign? this is their marketing. We?re going to do a great job of getting the trial into people?s hands, and then the game can help sell itself.?

***

Nintendo
Tom Prata, Senior Director, Project Development, Nintendo of America

From my recent interview with him about WiiWare:

?We?re not inclined to require content creators to create demos. We think the channel I previously talked about, Everybody?s Nintendo Channel that we?re bringing in to the North American market, will be a good vehicle as well as the whole wealth of information that people can get on the Internet from reviews

To which, I asked him: You won?t require it? Can a developer make one on their own? Will it work?

?Again, we?re not inclined to require it from developers.?

***

Sony
John Hight, Director of Product Development, Santa Monica Studios, Sony Computer Entertainment America

From my already-published interview with Hight about PlayStation Network:

?That?s a hotly debated thing. We did a demo on ?Blast Factor? and I?ve got 600,000 people playing that demo but I haven?t translated that into 600,000 people buying the game. ? I think the demo kind of hurt it in a way and people got satiated. They made a presumption that, ?oh, ok, the whole game is going to be like this.? It wasn?t true. The game actually has a lot of depth in each one of the levels. ? We didn?t actually do a demo for ?flOw.? We did a movie. And it was a very conscious decision. Because we were kind of spooked with what we saw with ?Blast Factor.? We thought, wow, we don?t want people to just give up on it. ? So if I artificially put a clock on it, is that time period right experience for you? Or for the average person? I don?t know. So we felt, nah, let?s not do it. Let?s try to tell people that this is a different experience and show them really great graphics and great music and hopefully we?ll just win them over on execution and if they buy the game then they?ll be satisfied with the experience itself. Because it?s really a subtle experience and I?m not sure a few minutes with a demo would do it justice.?

***

Sony PSN Developer
Dylan Cuthbert, president, Q-Games

From a GDC talk Cuthbert did about his small company?s line of ?PixelJunk?:

?From now on I plan to delay the release of demos,? he told an audience of developers and press. He explained that releasing a demo in advance of a game gives people who never intended to buy the game the ability to trash it while claiming to have had hands-on time with it. Delaying the demo, he said, ensures that the first people to talk about the game on online forums are people who were enthused enough to pay their own money for the full game. And they spread less vicious word of mouth: ?It?s like having your own little army, I suppose.? His way ?builds up invested users.? Releasing a demo the day the game is out ?brings out the naysayers.?

 

[oznerol]

I hate marketing.

Jeremy Wacksman is the only one who made even a remote bit of sense.

 

[Modeps]

Demos are what the developers make them, for retail or for digital distribution its the same thing.

If people play a demo, then don't buy your game, your demo probably sucked. Take a look at Full Auto, I was amped about that game until I played the demo which completely sucked so I didn't buy it.

If people play a demo too much and dont buy a game, chances are its because you didn't offer just a taste, you made it too robust. Geometry Wars had a great demo. You got a few minutes to get a high score. A lot of noobs couldn't last till the timer ran out but when you did, you wanted to keep playing and had to buy it.

If you don't offer a demo, and dont get universal good reviews, your game isn't going to sell well... You could miss out on people that don't agree with the rest of the world. Example, I enjoyed the demo for Stuntman Ignition more than I thought I would (reviews were fairly average), and ended up purchasing it.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Modeps
Demos are what the developers make them, for retail or for digital distribution its the same thing.

Yep. One of the MS bloggers wrote a post about how to make a good demo for XBLA and those same tips actually transfer over to the retail demos as well.

A bad demo can hurt sales of a great game just as much as a great demo can help sales of a bad game. It is ultimately up to the devs to put out a quality demo that shows off their game.

 

[pontifex]

Demos should be required for all games, imo, because reviews can't be relied upon.

 

[Aikouka]

I think the Sony guy must be on Cloud-9 thinking that 600,000 demo downloads will translate into 600,000 purchases. The purpose of the demo is to see if you like the game or not and you might be interested from initial screenshots or talk on the game, but you'll end up not liking the game. One of the guys I talk to will ask me if I bought such-and-such game off PSN, and just about every time I tell him, "No, there's no demo to try." The response is usually, "it's only $10!" =/

Unfortunately, I can't really make a joke about the PS3 being so expensive anymore and causing people to be fleeting with their money 😛.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Go Nintendo :thumbsdown:

Way to not even answer the question of whether demos would be possible if the developer wants them. Hey, marketing guy! You already said they wouldn't be required! This is for a printed interview, so it's not like we didn't "hear" you the first time.

Lots of BS here. Also, agreed on the naïve Sony guy. I almost LOL'd for real when I read his comment on not selling as many copies as the number of demos that were downloaded. MS is definitely the only company here who really understands how online gaming works and should work. Sony will take one more generation to get it right; Nintendo, two more (if ever).

 

[mugs]

I almost never buy a game that doesn't have a demo, whether it's on PSN or a full-price game on a disc. I hate getting burned by a game.

 

[Aikouka]

Originally posted by: mugs
I almost never buy a game that doesn't have a demo, whether it's on PSN or a full-price game on a disc. I hate getting burned by a game.

Some games are probably easier than others. I mean for example... GT IV you can already tell if you'll like it if you've tried a previous game and then maybe read a review to see some differences and possible bad aspects of the game. In other words, a prequel kind of serves as your "demo" in those cases.

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: Aikouka

Originally posted by: mugs
I almost never buy a game that doesn't have a demo, whether it's on PSN or a full-price game on a disc. I hate getting burned by a game.

Some games are probably easier than others. I mean for example... GT IV you can already tell if you'll like it if you've tried a previous game and then maybe read a review to see some differences and possible bad aspects of the game. In other words, a prequel kind of serves as your "demo" in those cases.

not always true. i loved the previous GTA games but the latest one, San Andreas, I couldn't stand to play because of the whole gangsta rap thing going on.

 

[mugs]

Yeah, I preordered GTA IV. Don't need a demo. I bought Rainbow Six: Vegas 2 based on Vegas, bought Halo 3 based on Halo, bought CoD 4 based on the hype. For a new IP, you really need a demo. For a middle tier game, you really need a demo.

 

[RandomFool]

I don't generally play demos anymore. So it doesn't bother me if they have them or not. Most games I buy I know I'll like (SSMB for example) and for the rest I rely on reviews and feedback from random internet people (like you!) as to whether a game is worth buying.

 

[blurredvision]

I generally agree with Dylan Cuthbert's view, atleast from a developer/publisher point of view. I've often wondered how many times a demo has hurt a game's sales. Sometimes it's just a complete mistake to release a demo before it hits shelves, because if it sucks, what hype it may have had will go right out the window. However, sometimes a demo does a huge favor for the game, boosting sales. It's definitely a guessing game.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: blurredvision
I generally agree with Dylan Cuthbert's view, atleast from a developer/publisher point of view. I've often wondered how many times a demo has hurt a game's sales. Sometimes it's just a complete mistake to release a demo before it hits shelves, because if it sucks, what hype it may have had will go right out the window. However, sometimes a demo does a huge favor for the game, boosting sales. It's definitely a guessing game.

He's definitely got a realistic take on it. I hardly think theres a game where a *good* demo will hurt it. The demo should demonstrate the overall quality of the game, give the gamer an idea of what else is in store, but not be so complete that the demo is "satiating".

The whole "first level for free" model is a pretty terrible way to demo a game, as it often doesnt give an appreciation of what else is really there, and the first level is often the slowest, most boring part. They really need to take a cue from movie trailers and find a way to touch on the entire product without spoiling the entire thing. Timed demos are often useless as well, as you often dont get to see enough to know if you want it.

When I hear a game doesnt have a demo, it usually tells me that theyre afraid to show the game to people, because its not very good. If theres ever a time that a demo does a huge favor for the game, it's because it was a *good* demo. It might take a bit more work, and a lot more data to download, but if its done right, its worth it.

For your average FPS, start with the first level, with the starting weapons/enemies etc, then periodically and unexpectedly (preferably at a good time), fade out and switch to another level, with different guns, slightly different mechanics etc - make it painfully obvious what to do and how to do it, give us a taste, and then move on to another reason to play. Artificially lower the difficulty, give weapons that wouldnt normally be there, etc - do whatever has to be done to allow the player to experience different parts of the game without frustrating or satiating the gamer, then pull it away and leave us wanting more.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: blurredvision
I generally agree with Dylan Cuthbert's view, atleast from a developer/publisher point of view. I've often wondered how many times a demo has hurt a game's sales. Sometimes it's just a complete mistake to release a demo before it hits shelves, because if it sucks, what hype it may have had will go right out the window. However, sometimes a demo does a huge favor for the game, boosting sales. It's definitely a guessing game.

The demo for the Simpsons Game gave me a very bad impression of the game. I expected the game to suck, but it was actually pretty enjoyable. It wasn't an 8/10+ game, but it was better than I expected from the demo.

 

[mlm]

I can understand Sony's stance with demos. I'm never going to buy Lumines on 360 or Sudoku on PS3 because those demos are enough of an experience for me. I could imagine the same happening with games like flOw and Calling All Cars.

 

[Aikouka]

Originally posted by: mlm
I'm never going to buy Lumines on 360

Surely missing out on a good time... although, the PSP version is still better as I prefer it announcing the new theme.

 

[PingSpike]

I can certainly understand not wanting to lose the valueable element of surprise by releasing a demo. After all that work building a marketing hype machine to convince customers that a shitty game is awesome it must be demoralizing to see them get a realistic take from a demo and avoid paying for that turd you just spent months polishing. 😛