Game Demos Cut Sales In Half

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Haven't we heard this same B.S. before? I think what this guy is trying to say is that game demos may reduce the sales of CRAPPY games. ;)

The presentation slide suggests that the average Xbox 360 game that is promoted by a release trailer, but has no demo, on average sells about 525,000 units after six months. But the average Xbox 360 game that carries both a demo and trailer will sell about 250,000 units in the same period. A game with neither, meanwhile, on average sells less than 100,000 units.
Click to expand...
 
What a crock. I'm sure the sales figures are massively skewed by huge franchises that don't have demos included, while games with demos have much smaller advertising campaigns.
 
In order for this study to be truly encompassing they should also study what happens to follow up games from a studio that did not release a demo.

That is to say, if a publisher releases a game without a demo and its a flop (525,000 units after 6 months sounds rather average to me) what are there sales totals for their next game in the series?

I feel like that data point would give too much clarification and point out what you said Steve, that crappy games sell less. So if there is no demo and people don't enjoy the game they are more likely not to buy the next one in the series. Thereby showing it isn't the demo that is at fault for reduced sales but rather more conscience consumers choosing not to buy lackluster titles.
 
lol, that was the reason I subscribed to OXBM w/disc for the first XBox and 360. I would play the demos more than I would play some purchased games.
 
Activate: AMD said:
What a crock. I'm sure the sales figures are massively skewed by huge franchises that don't have demos included, while games with demos have much smaller advertising campaigns.
Click to expand...
I believe getting exposed to a crappy game will cut sales. Most games are crappy so they are mostly hurt by a demo.

I'm not sure how this is a surprise.
 
EEDAR is full of shit. Explain this,

I was informed by lots of people with industry experience that this is commercial idiocy: you want to hold it back so that excited fans buy without trying, then you can release the demo later to tempt those who weren’t convinced. And with some (not all), you get weird responses if you bring up non-money factors in a business conversation.
“You’ll lose sales this way!”
“From people who don’t really like it? I think I want to lose those sales.”
“No, you don’t understand. You’ll have less sales.“
I’m sure they’re right, and as a noob I appreciate the advice. In fact I got so much skepticism that I started to think the lost sales might actually be the difference between being able to become a developer or not. But even if that had been the case, I wasn’t going to quit my job for a career in tricking people into giving me money and regretting it.
Click to expand...

http://www.pentadact.com/2013-06-18-gunpoint-recoups-development-costs-in-64-seconds/

Turns out, if the game is good the demo will sell the game. If the game is terrible, the demo will let us know the game is terrible and it gets the sales it deserves.
 
Game design is supposed to addictive.

How do you sell crack? The first taste is free ...

Game designers have known this for a long time. If you have a good game, you let them play it a little. Then they need more.
 
I've read information before that show game demos actually lower sales, regardless if the game is good or not. Sure, demos please gamers because they have a chance to decide before hand if they like a game or not, rather than just buying it with the hope they like it.
 
Publishers and developers are discovering that game demos on consoles can have a negative effect on game sales, according to newly released data.
Click to expand...
No, they aren't. They're discovering there's a correlation between the two.

I can't even remember the last PC game I played that had a true demo.
 
bigdogchris said:
I've read information before that show game demos actually lower sales, regardless if the game is good or not. Sure, demos please gamers because they have a chance to decide before hand if they like a game or not, rather than just buying it with the hope they like it.
Click to expand...

+1...even if a game is good some people will not like it just due to personal preferences.

It's is a insane scheme to squeeze out sales, especially given you rarely can return a bad game. If you could return a game, then it wouldn't be as big of a deal imo.
 
you should edit this:

Haven't we heard this same B.S. before? I think what this guy is trying to say is that game demos will reduce the sales of CRAPPY games.
 
Wow there's the shocker of a century, if you find out that the game/movie/music is shitty there's a good chance you won't buy it. Did the "We don't have the time or funding to make demos" game industry fund a Harvard study on this mater?

Conclusion from their results, most of their games are not worth buying, and most of their sales are impulse buys perhaps on hype or something similar.
 
Makes sense.

I really really wanted to buy XCOM after seeing the trailer. Then something hit me and I checked out the ACTUAL gameplay in youtube. Instantly dropped the idea to buy it.

In news: Game trailers designed to fool customers and sell them something entirely different (or crappy) work really well.
 
I am actually really curious about these statistics, but the article survey is too shallow and leaves out too many variables.
How does the data break down by age group?
How does the data break down by game budget (big titles vs. indies)
How does the data break down by game price?
How does the data break down by prior gamer behavior: if a user is poor, they will probably buy few games and play a lot of demos. An affluent gamer will probably buy before they try because money is not an issue.

I'd say the availability of game demos on the 360 has decreased over the years, but on the other hand it seems like every Steam game has a demo.

Also freetoplay+microtransactions throw a wrench in this.

Also [H] crowd is not a good barometers since it's a somewhat homogenous demographic, with a lot of Steam users.
 
That negative light is being shined on a positive situation. Expect problems and eat them for breakfast.
 
probably the fastest way to more meaningful numbers would be to take sequels and franchise games out of the equation other than the initial game in the franchise. IF you already have a loyal fan base, you have positive word of mouth, and a demo probably can't help much but could hurt, especially if it is not exactly what each and every faction of the fan base wanted.

For new IP though, demo vs. non demo would be a true match up of try before you buy vs. pure marketing.
 
jpm100 said:
I believe getting exposed to a crappy game will cut sales. Most games are crappy so they are mostly hurt by a demo.

I'm not sure how this is a surprise.
Click to expand...
Exactly, justify your business model in any regard that doesn't account for game quality.
Rationalizing 6 figure salaries is easy!
 
Make better games. Quit blaming the consumers for having sense enough not to waste their hard earned money on rehashed shovelware.
 
bigdogchris said:
I've read information before that show game demos actually lower sales, regardless if the game is good or not. Sure, demos please gamers because they have a chance to decide before hand if they like a game or not, rather than just buying it with the hope they like it.
Click to expand...

I wont side either way but we all know there are a ton of cheap people out there and if given the chance to play a game for free they will do it. Consider that something like less than 50% of people actually finish a game for many the a limited demo could easily be enough.

It appears from this data that a trailer is something no dev should ever not do. Looks like it raises sales in all cases no matter what.

I look at it more from the perspective of exposure. I think with console games a lot of exposure exists that is more focused. So if you are a new game with no fan base on a PC you need demos and trailers to get people to know about your game. But once you establish a large fan base you should probably cut the demo based on this data. But as others said what about follow up titles. Valve has developed one of the most successful libraries in the world with a pretty simple mode. Give the first game entirely away for free. Then start charging for it after you build a massive player base. Valve actually experiments with free games. HL1 came with a ton of huge hits like CS, TFC, DOD and some flops like ricochet and DMC. Then valve made bank on the sequels. They then repeated this with portal, it will be interesting to see if they try with alien swarm.
 
I am guessing since the Aliens Marine demo was good it got people to buy into that pos and yet the game was not as the demo portrayed it....
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Make better games. Quit blaming the consumers for having sense enough not to waste their hard earned money on rehashed shovelware.
Click to expand...

The point of data is to let devs know how to best attack the problem regardless of bad or good games or more likely something in between. It's so senseless to say JUST MAKE A GOOD GAME. Hey you just get a better job.
 
so the study proves that they are mostly releasing demos for crappy games...good demos from good games will outsell bad demos of bad games...
 
GOOD games can have bad demos.

I know I’ve experienced a demo that turned me away from a game. Game releases, people rave about it. Friend forces game down my throat. Play game only to learn I love it.
 
CvP said:
Makes sense.

I really really wanted to buy XCOM after seeing the trailer. Then something hit me and I checked out the ACTUAL gameplay in youtube. Instantly dropped the idea to buy it.

In news: Game trailers designed to fool customers and sell them something entirely different (or crappy) work really well.
Click to expand...

Yup, and just the opposite is true, looking at the Cynical Brit's channel on Youtube in his WTF is... series has gotten me to get certain games as a result of his play through.
 
I've had many, many games I wouldn't have paid money for if they had a demo. There are several, though, that I would not have purchased except the demo actually made me like it. So, yeah, I think you're right, Steve. Demos just allow us to avoid the crappy games.
 
I think his numbers are likely spot on. I mean lets face it a trailer does not represent true game play and gives a false sense of what the game will be like, driving people to want to buy the game. An actual demo gives an accurate representation of game play and with less false hype the numb er of people wanting the game likely declines.
 
Just another reason why so many people use torrent sites to first download a game and play it before buying the game since they also don't allow you to return a game for a different one or get your money back. Lol the game companies are a joke and they deserve what they get.
 
rudy said:
The point of data is to let devs know how to best attack the problem regardless of bad or good games or more likely something in between. It's so senseless to say JUST MAKE A GOOD GAME. Hey you just get a better job.
Click to expand...

Plenty of good games with good demos have sold like hotcakes. Statistically, I'm way more likely to buy a game with a demo than not. However, not being swayed by typical marketing fluff makes me an outlier. The problem is that people who get burned by bad games with good marketing will become less and less likely to continue buying products from devs they no longer trust.

As far as me getting a better job; don't mind if I do!
 
Computer Ed said:
I think his numbers are likely spot on. I mean lets face it a trailer does not represent true game play and gives a false sense of what the game will be like, driving people to want to buy the game. An actual demo gives an accurate representation of game play and with less false hype the numb er of people wanting the game likely declines.
Click to expand...

Interpreting data is a very difficult comprehensive pursuit
 
Man, I miss the days of shareware. The old Apogee/3drealms/ID days... Guess that pretty much dates me as a old coot gamer. :D
 
ir0nw0lf said:
Man, I miss the days of shareware. The old Apogee/3drealms/ID days... Guess that pretty much dates me as a old coot gamer. :D
Click to expand...

I LOVED when my dad would take us to the Shareware store in the mall and we all got to pick out a new game to check out.
 
Yup, I'd love to know how much money was wasted on this "study" when anyone that's played video games for 10 years can tell you

Crap games get crap sales. Going even further, even if it's a great game, it might get crap sales when a company weighs it down with DRM and DLC. If your game sucks - people will find out even in the most limited of demos.

Just like drugs - if you know you have something good, you give away a sample to get them hooked. Being 31 years old -- I long for that feeling I'd get as child paying the original Doom, or Total annihilation. Feelings like those are worth money -- too bad most companies don't realize that.

When a company takes the approach of limiting any sort of taste or real preview of a game, I'm automatically wary. With our (general) lack of the ability to get refunds here in the US for software, most people know teh feeling of being left with a broken 60 dollar pile of crap software.

Just a time or two of that will drive any normal, sane, PAYING customer to check out things with an ISO download via bittorrent.

If a game is awesome, even after having a pirated copy I'm happy to go and buy it. Pre-orders generally are a crap shoot, giving someone an interest free loan for what could be empty promises.

Personally I'm super excited for the new RTS "Planetary Annihilation", and I will even admit, I'm getting more excited for "Battlefield 4" as well. But I've kept my credit card in my pants (heh - pants) because I'll wait till I see more details before blindly forking over my money.
 
Its not a waste of money to confirm or deny anecdotal data. Second it probably cost very little to do the study.

You say a lot of things college boy but the who point of a study is that people can say anything they want but data may just point in a different direction. That is the case here. The point is you may not be representative of the population as a whole. This study does not address quality of the games. In fact you would expect that companies that know they have a bad game will probably have a lower incidence of demos because they don't want to show that.
 
Would love to see the data normalized by metacritic scores or something.

I think he's right though. If most of your sales are going to happen in the first couple of weeks, you're better off putting an extra week of effort into creating a better game than releasing a demo.

Anecdotally, I'm having trouble coming up with a single game where my decision was swayed by the demo. There have been games that I've gotten after having tried them out.
 
And I hope consumers wises up and not jump on all the hype created by these companies. If a company is going to obscure their lack of quality by not making any demo, then consumers should not trust the quality of their games either by pre-ordering or day-1 purchase.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top