So.... do you think after decades of PC gaming and demos, that game developers don't have a clue about their value? And maybe the reason why they're less common is because they don't actually affect sales as much as you assume?

What data do you have that proves the value of demos?

Originally posted by nullable:

So.... do you think after decades of PC gaming and demos, that game developers don't have a clue about their value? And maybe the reason why they're less common is because they don't actually affect sales as much as you assume?

What data do you have that proves the value of demos?

It's basic salesmanship that goes beyond gaming. Enough research that free samples work in retail, and the same is true about test drives at car dealerships.

But of course you rejected a test drive when buying your car, right?

Originally posted by elysium:

Originally posted by nullable:

So.... do you think after decades of PC gaming and demos, that game developers don't have a clue about their value? And maybe the reason why they're less common is because they don't actually affect sales as much as you assume?

What data do you have that proves the value of demos?

It's basic salesmanship that goes beyond gaming. Enough research that free samples work in retail, and the same is true about test drives at car dealerships.

But of course you rejected a test drive when buying your car, right?

https://www.pcgamer.com/analyst-game-demos/
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/game-demos-can-hurt-sales-suggests-research/1100-6410863/
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2008/04/study-suggests-game-demos-are-bad-business-for-publishers/
https://kotaku.com/demos-are-great-for-gamers-not-so-great-for-game-sales-608603895

So far, research has found that demos hurt developer sales OR have little to no impact on sales. Considering the cost to make a demo (you can't just use part of a game, you have to actually build a demo) it may not be seen as worth it to the game's developer to have a demo.

Developers can offer free weekends. These typically happen some time after gong on sale and cost no extra to do. May want to ask the developer of the game you want to try, to do so.

on the other hand, there are more and more demos available.

Steam organizes its “Next Fest” on a regular basis.

https://steamhost.cn/sale/nextfest

Originally posted by Mickey:

on the other hand, there are more and more demos available.

Steam organizes its “Next Fest” on a regular basis.

https://steamhost.cn/sale/nextfest

Do note that many of those demos will go away after the Next Fest is over, though a very few will still be here until launch of the game.

yep
I like the Next fest, it's a good way to found some good games, better than the "discover list"

Originally posted by elysium:

Originally posted by nullable:

So.... do you think after decades of PC gaming and demos, that game developers don't have a clue about their value? And maybe the reason why they're less common is because they don't actually affect sales as much as you assume?

What data do you have that proves the value of demos?

It's basic salesmanship that goes beyond gaming. Enough research that free samples work in retail, and the same is true about test drives at car dealerships.

But of course you rejected a test drive when buying your car, right?

What's the time and cost of free samples or test drives compared to creating a demo?

Do all sales methods work equally well for all products? Maybe you're oversimplifying the problem with your folksy wisdom. No wait, I mean baseless assumptions that depends on developers and publishers being unaware of "basic salesmanship". Do you really really think a multi-billion dollar industry knows less than you do? I mean that would be a bold assumption. You might ask yourself some questions why your opinions seem to differ from reality and see how well your claims hold up.

do we really want another alien colonial marines fiasco?

If playable demos are considered "bad business", then developers should in return be held to the standard of delivering well-designed, high-quality products.

Instead, the market is increasingly dominated by games that feel shallow, uninspired and technically sterile. Often prioritizing monetization and extensive data collection over genuine gameplay experience.

Consumers are frequently presented with insufficient information and end up purchasing products that fail to match the advertised features or quality. Due to consumer-unfriendly return policies and licensing models, they often have no practical way to return disappointing or defective titles and are left in the rain with the damage.

Added to this are countless restrictive agreements, violations of applicable data protection laws and often a complete lack of contact options... let alone any willingness to fix or improve a product.

There is also a persistent issue of misleading marketing: trailers, screenshots and store descriptions often paint an overly polished picture that does not reflect the actual in-game content. A problem that has been criticized repeatedly in the past.

Of course it's considered "bad business" when customers can already tell from the demo that the main product is unappealing or has significant flaws.

It's even worse that so-called "games magazines" are also supporting consumer-hostile trends.

When it comes to consumer protection and customer rights, much more needs to be done. Rights have already been significantly eroded on Steam, or are being bypassed through questionable mechanics.

The only positive aspect of the current trend is that playable demos were becoming more common again, a practice that had nearly disappeared for years.

And even if demos aren't widely used, they still fall under the customer's fundamental "right to information". A right that should not be disregarded.

Originally posted by ペンギン:

If playable demos are considered "bad business", then developers should in return be held to the standard of delivering well-designed, high-quality products.

Instead, the market is increasingly dominated by games that feel shallow, uninspired and technically sterile. Often prioritizing monetization and extensive data collection over genuine gameplay experience.

Consumers are frequently presented with insufficient information and end up purchasing products that fail to match the advertised features or quality. Due to consumer-unfriendly return policies and licensing models, they often have no practical way to return disappointing or defective titles and are left in the rain with the damage.

Added to this are countless restrictive agreements, violations of applicable data protection laws and often a complete lack of contact options... let alone any willingness to fix or improve a product.

There is also a persistent issue of misleading marketing: trailers, screenshots and store descriptions often paint an overly polished picture that does not reflect the actual in-game content. A problem that has been criticized repeatedly in the past.

Of course it's considered "bad business" when customers can already tell from the demo that the main product is unappealing or has significant flaws.

It's even worse that so-called "games magazines" are also supporting consumer-hostile trends.

The only positive aspect of the current trend is that playable demos were becoming more common again, a practice that had nearly disappeared for years.

I think the fact that a studio takes the trouble to work on a demo gives an added impression of seriousness.

Originally posted by ペンギン:

And even if demos aren't widely used, they still fall under the customer's fundamental "right to information". A right that should not be disregarded.

Developers can't stop information about a game getting out. And only accepting information in specific ways is a choice, it does create rights or requirements that developers are responsible for. Games are popular there's almost endless resources for them.

Sure, but the truth is, you never really know for sure if you like the game after 2 hours, 6 hours, 20 hours, 50 hours, 120 hours, week after finishing it, 5 months after finishing it, 2 years after finishing it, 10 years after finishing it, in short you never really know.

Unless you're aiming at specific niche of people who want to explore early game with no limit, question is, how many are there people like that and is the developer/company willing to sacrifice resources such as time and money for that group of people.

Nah, I think demos are almost always a poor representation of a game.

They either show you the boring AF tutorial, then stop once you learn to play, or they show you the one part of the game that's engaging.

Reading and watching reviews then critically thinking about what you witnessed and read, is a far better way to analyze if you should purchase a game.