The lights are on
Veteran Member - Level 11
Releasing a demo for a game actually hurts the chances of
that game selling well.
Or at least that is what game industry analyst and Puzzle
Clubhouse CEO Jesse Schell claimed in an interesting presentation at the 16th
annual DICE Awards this year.
In a handy dandy little chart, Schell breaks down Xbox 360
game sales with four different lines. At the bottom of the totem pole are games
that don't have any trailers or demos. Surprisingly, barely above rock bottom,
are games that only have demos released. Games with promotional trailers only soar
far and above the competition in terms of sales.
For Schell, the answer is simple. Games with trailers only
are the most successful.
"The thing is, with no demo, you've got to buy it if you
want to try it," Schell said.
This seems like a somewhat logical conclusion. Curious
players who download a demo and play a game may be intrigued to purchase the
game upon release or leave unimpressed. Players who are curious about a certain
game and don't have a demo to play may buy the game upon release and still be
unimpressed, but hey, they bought the game.
Despite Schell's role as an industry analyst and the numbers
that back him up, I think making the link between lower game sales and games
which release demos is a case of mistaken cause and effect.
Schell is equating demos as the cause, and lower sales as
the effect. But what he completely misses is a simple fact that is apparent to
most of us - we just aren't interested in many of the games that release demos.
Remember these? They are evil, terrible ideas.
Demos are used by developers to further increase the number
of people interested in a game so that they will potentially purchase it when
the full game is released. It is for promotional purposes.
However, you don't often see demos for huge triple A
titles such as Halo, Skyrim or Call of Duty. Why is that? Because there is
already so much player interest and support that a demo doesn't actually help
increase sales. A demo, when almost the entire gaming community is excited
about your product, is pointless and a waste of a developer's time and
resources. When a triple A game does get a demo, it is usually well after the
Demos are instead primarily used for lesser known titles or
games whose success isn't 100 percent guaranteed. Many of these games are less
than great. Let's take a look at some of the recently released demos on Xbox
Live. We will take the first five: The Crysis 3 open beta, Dead Space 3, Metal
Gear Rising: Revengeance, Cabela's Dangerous Hunts 2013, and NBA Baller Beats.
The first three titles on our list are games many would
consider popular. However, none of them are going to even come close to selling
as many copies as games like Halo, Gears of War, Call of Duty, Skyrim and other
AAA games. Metal Gear is a tough sell on the Xbox, as Metal Gear has
historically been a PlayStation franchise. Dead Space 3 is trying to sell
itself as an action title featuring co-op and more gunplay. Demos are being
used to increase awareness about what these products are all about for gamers
who might be interested but not sold on their ideas yet.
Now, Cabela's Dangerous Hunts and NBA Baller Beats is our
other reason for releasing a demo. These are games that are not going to
achieve huge financial success and have very little marketing going for them.
Demos are released then to increase interest with the hope of somebody
downloading the demo, having fun, and deciding to shell out some cash.
Dangerous Hunts 2013 has a metacritic score of 58, while Baller Beats has a 73.
You are telling me this game didn't sell well because it had a demo, and not because it's a game that appeals to a very specific demographic? Not to mention it's Kinect only.
I propose that demos aren't the reason for these games
selling poorly. It isn't because gamers, once they get a taste of the game to
come, decide to opt out of purchasing it at launch. Just think of how absurd
Schell's statement really is. He is saying we, as consumers, would rather spend
$60 to try a game rather than trying it for free in demo form. It doesn't make
The real reason game demos seem to point to lower game sales
is really quite simple - the games that have demos are games not many people
are interested in purchasing in the first place. Demos aren't the cause of lower game sales;
they are more of a symptom that a game won't break any sale records. A
developer releasing a demo says they are trying to get as much attention to
their product as possible, that they aren't 100 percent confident in its
ability to be successful on trailers alone. It's not the demo that is causing
the lower sales, or the trailers causing high sales. It's just the game. It's
really as simple as that.
To some extent it's true although if a game is good and has a demo I will purchase it. Look at World of Warcraft, the demo is what got me hooked into paying 4 years worth of subscription.
A demo of Zombi U for the Wii U also helped me make a decision to not buy it.
It depends on how good a game is in the end, and there are very few good games out there.
If I know I'm going o buy a game or really interested in it I won't try the demo. The only time I try a demo is if I'm bored and don't have any games to play ill just download one and see if I like the game.
A very thought provoking post. With the rumors swirling that the next generation consoles will not support used games I have wondered how a gamer is supposed to try out games before buying. After all, as already stated, from the financial perspective after we buy the game whether we love it, like it, or hate it is moot. I am not sure I agree entirely with your logic, just as reviews posted prior to a game's release can float or sink a game based on reputation so can a demo, but you have made me think.
I've noticed that there is a huge lack of demos for AAA titles. I'd have to agree that there is a false causality between games with demos and sales numbers. His point is valid to an extent, but the link he draws isn't entirely accurate.
A demo can ruin sales for a game if it gives away to much. For example, I do not want Naughty Dog to release a "The Last of Us" demo simp0ly because to much was given away at the E3 presentation. The gameplay, graphics, environmental responses and soundtrack were observable. Releasing the game without a demo would intrigue the gamer to play more since he/she is in the unknown and in turn sales would boost, even if slightly.
A demo is usually a death sentence. Taking some random portion of a game without any context makes for a awful experience. Dead Space 3 had, by far, one of the worst demos I've ever played. The funny thing is the game is absolutely solid.
I agree that demos are judged to judge gamer interest. Demos are also used to see if the market is interested in the game; whether or not the demo purchases are any indication of the sales numbers.