Study Recommends Releasing Trailers Over Demos

Madwacker said:
In a world of $59.99+ games... its try before buy. On top of that, if I know the game *might* suck a bit, but I still might like it..I won't even spend $3.99 @ Blockbuster to rent it. Free Demo please.
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly, and even more so since our Blockbuster game rentals are $7.99. You want me to buy your game, game company? Let me give it a whirl.

If automobile companies were to give this a try, you'd have outrage across the nation.
 
TwiceOver said:
I can believe it. If I would have had the chance (I'm sure many would agree) to play assassin's creed before buying it, I'd be much happier with my $60 than that over hyped trailer POS game.
Click to expand...

Actually if they did a demo of just the first mission I would have probably bought the game. (I did buy the game but I mean based on a demo) But only on the second mission and it is the same mission in a diffrente city.

I agree with the study's conclusions though. The majority of people (i.e. not me) will buy into hype from trailers and go out for a first day buy. While if you let people play a demo, the magic is gone and the reality sets in that its not innovative, and it's not special, and it's just another dumb 60$ game.
 
Game companies can't possibly believe this is true. How could they have made Rockstar and Guitar Hero the huge hits they are without in-store demos?
 
I agree with steve, with just a trailer you don't have the ability to see that the game is good or bad so you (some of you not me) plop down dollars just to test it out and then sell it when you don't like it.


I for one am F-ING TICKED that there was no demo for Vegas and now there is a Vegas 2! I was thinking the same thing about Army of Two but now there is a demo. I remember the good old days where you'd get the demo BEFORE the game was released. Hell you could do a "mini" review on the demo and wonder and hope what would be fixed before the release.
 
Unless a game is "known" to be good (like the HL series), I do not buy it unless it has a demo. If a game is available before its demo, I hold my purchase until the demo is released, and I try it hands-on to decide.

So, I agree that trailers may sell crappy games better than demos; but then again, if a game has a trailer but no demo, the chances are that it's a crappy game, and I'd say do not waste your money :)
 
Hapatingjaky said:
LOL at an economic stand point this is true:

Example:

Crytek and Crysis, all the videos looked amazing, performance was awesome and graphics look insane. Pre-rendered and touched up to make it look better then it actually is. Demo comes out, game runs like trash, comes close to looking like the pre-rendered videos. Hurts sales since no one wanted a game they couldn't run as advertised.

Demo's to us the enthusiaste is best because we can determine what type of system is needed to run the title, find bugs and report back etc etc.
Click to expand...

Crysis sales were hurt? Last I heard they hit the 1 million units sold mark a couple months ago. :confused:
 
I rarely buy a game without trying the demo first. I knew NOTHING about the Battlefield series, but liked the Battlefield2 demo. I wouldn't have bought the game otherwise.

COD4 demo let me know that my system wouldn't run the game acceptably, and since a $1000 upgrade isn't in the cards anytime soon, I gave up on that game. I'd be PISSED if I bought it expecting that it would run acceptably on my system.

Same with Crysis.

I had to upgrade video to run Doom3 acceptably, but that was after trying out the demo.
 
GT-Force said:
Unless a game is "known" to be good (like the HL series), I do not buy it unless it has a demo. If a game is available before its demo, I hold my purchase until the demo is released, and I try it hands-on to decide.

So, I agree that trailers may sell crappy games better than demos; but then again, if a game has a trailer but no demo, the chances are that it's a crappy game, and I'd say do not waste your money :)
Click to expand...

Sorry, but the lack of demos by Valve is NOT a good thing. It's that kind of condescending behavior that makes them think they can do it, with no problems. I certainly won't buy HL3 (if it ever exists) without some kind of demo, especially after their idiotic episodic content debacle, which is not even over yet...
 
SPARTAN VI said:
Crysis sales were hurt? Last I heard they hit the 1 million units sold mark a couple months ago. :confused:
Click to expand...

And you heard correctly. Crysis was a success, especially considering it's a PC exclusive, which unfortunately, we have so few nowadays...
 
dj_spanmaster said:
Game companies can't possibly believe this is true. How could they have made Rockstar and Guitar Hero the huge hits they are without in-store demos?
Click to expand...
I think you meant Grand Theft Auto, and you have to keep in mind that as the title implies, GTA3 was not the first game in the series. There were GTA, GTA: London and GTA2. The series had a fanbase on the PC and then they moved to consoles...many years later did they actually make GTA3 and become mainstream.

Anyway, I'm very much for demos because as someone who plays a lot of games, I know the most of them are fairly crappy-to-average at best. That's why I don't waste my money on those games and I wish more people did the same. Unfortunately, too many uninformed, new-to-gaming people just go out and buy all the crappy over-hyped console games that have cool CG trailers on TV. Few of them read or watch reviews, learn about the game, try it out, etc. before buying it and that's why so many crappy games (especially on the console side) make lots of money.
 
Steve said:
I think the statement “publishers shouldn’t release demos” is missing a word here, a word that explains why game trailers sell more games than demos, that word is “crappy.” I am going to go out on a limb here and say that demos only hurt “crappy” games and game videos help sell "crappy" games. With demos, you know if you will like the game or not (for the most part). With game videos, you can only tell if the game sucks…after you buy it. Am I right? How many times has this happened to you?
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. With a demo, it's harder to deceive people into buying your crappy game. A trailer is all about hype. Another potentially overlooked factor is that if you find that you've been lied to in this fashion, you're far less likely to buy whatever the next game is from that publisher.
 
Agreed Paladyn. I wouldn't worry about a demo hurting my game sales unless that demo highlights the weak points of my game (which in some cases is the entire game...)

I am much more hesitant to buy a game I have never laid hands on, whether it be through a demo or borrowing someone else's copy for a couple of days.

I purchased The Show on the ps3 after having played the demo. Funny thing was, I went into it thinking "I'm not wasting money on a baseball game this year", but after playing the demo my tune had completely changed...
 
If your game sucks and you release a demo everyone already knows not to buy it. A demo can be very deceptive as to how entertaining a game will be. So if you make a really good game release a demo and people will already know that it's good and buy it. If your game sucks release a trailer that way no one knows that it sucks until they have wasted their money on it.
 
sorry. Meant to say in the second sentence that (a trailer can be very deceptive) not "A demo can be very deceptive" damn you no editing.
 
Madwacker said:
That study is retarded. Demos of crappy games, absolutely hurt their sales. Trailers of crappy games usually use CG cut-scenes and best of moments (like the movies do). Demos of good games, sell the games.

In a world of $59.99+ games... its try before buy. On top of that, if I know the game *might* suck a bit, but I still might like it..I won't even spend $3.99 @ Blockbuster to rent it. Free Demo please.
Click to expand...

I agree. If you think about it more you come to the conclusion that, wait a second, maybe that's exactly why trailers sell games. They can be crafted precisely in such a way as to make even the worst of games look top notch. Can't do that quite as well with a demo. You could almost even say trailers are a form of false advertising, choke full of non-interactive FMV's and a slew of 2-5 second teaser clips.
 
Steve said:
Though there is little to know information about how this study was conducted, who was polled and under what circumstances, the conclusion seems to be that publishers shouldn’t release demos because game trailers sell games, not demos. Huh?!?



I think the statement “publishers shouldn’t release demos” is missing a word here, a word that explains why game trailers sell more games than demos, that word is “crappy.” I am going to go out on a limb here and say that demos only hurt “crappy” games and game videos help sell "crappy" games. With demos, you know if you will like the game or not (for the most part). With game videos, you can only tell if the game sucks…after you buy it. Am I right? How many times has this happened to you?
Click to expand...

Its a FIFO Conclussion!!!
 
Steve hit the nail on the head, demo's only hurt bad games. If you can hype it up with trailers that look fantastic and the only way someone can try it out is to buy the game then yes, it will help you sell more games.
 
Big D. said:
I think you meant Grand Theft Auto, and you have to keep in mind that as the title implies, GTA3 was not the first game in the series. There were GTA, GTA: London and GTA2. The series had a fanbase on the PC and then they moved to consoles...many years later did they actually make GTA3 and become mainstream.
Click to expand...

My bad, I meant Rock Band, not Rockstar. I would never have had the desire to pick up either of those games (Rock Band, Guitar Hero) were it not for the in-store demos.

You reminded me well of GTA, though -- the first time I played GTA, it was a demo. Loved it. Shameful that they won't have one for GTA4
 
This has been going on a long time.

asteroidsboxjl1.jpg
 
Madwacker said:
That study is retarded.
Click to expand...
Did you read the article?

"EEDAR heads Gregory Short and Geoffery Zatkin recommended that publishers make playable demos available only after release of a game."
EEDAR=Electronic Entertainment Design and Research Group, the people who made this "retarted" study.

Demos of crappy games, absolutely hurt their sales. Trailers of crappy games usually use CG cut-scenes and best of moments (like the movies do). Demos of good games, sell the games.
Click to expand...
I think that study was damn near perfect. I read it as "If game makers want to sell more shitty games, we reccomend they release trailers, not demos".

Also, trailers are easier to make, from the perspective of making someone want to blow their money. Give me about 30 minutes of time, fraps, virtualdub, dramatic opera music, a thesarus.... I could make SimFarm look and sound orgasmic, to someone looking at buying a game.Its the same for movies. Think of how many worthless movies you have seen, which the trailers were at least decent enough to trick you into wasting your money.
 
bob said:
I think that study was damn near perfect. I read it as "If game makers want to sell more shitty games, we reccomend they release trailers, not demos".

Also, trailers are easier to make, from the perspective of making someone want to blow their money. Give me about 30 minutes of time, fraps, virtualdub, dramatic opera music, a thesarus.... I could make SimFarm look and sound orgasmic, to someone looking at buying a game.Its the same for movies. Think of how many worthless movies you have seen, which the trailers were at least decent enough to trick you into wasting your money.
Click to expand...

The study IS retarded, because it is in fact pointing out that if you have a crappy game, you can deceive your potential buyers, by releasing just an awesome trailer and see the sales fly in the first weeks.
I would kind of understand it if this was a private study, meant for software houses, but it's a public thing and those potential buyers now know that if a game has just trailers, they may be in for a crap feast game. That IS retarded.
 
Silus said:
The study IS retarded, because it is in fact pointing out that if you have a crappy game, you can deceive your potential buyers, by releasing just an awesome trailer and see the sales fly in the first weeks.
I would kind of understand it if this was a private study, meant for software houses, but it's a public thing and those potential buyers now know that if a game has just trailers, they may be in for a crap feast game. That IS retarded.
Click to expand...

If people didn't realize that 99% of games that refuse to release demos are pure crap they're probably too stupid to understand this survey.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top