Hello everybody. Opening this thread was an idea that came into my mind while playing demos. I noticed there are quite some different demos and thus thought I'd open up a discussion what the community thinks demos should best be like.
Everybody who has anything to say about this, please give your opinion here. I am sure that many people could benefit from getting the opinion of people on this topic.
Now to my own thoughts. I think first of all, one has to think "what should a demo do? What is its purpose?". I think there are different views on that already maybe. But I, personally, think the main task of a demo is getting people interested in the full game. On a commercial project, this might be to show people what the game is like so they are willing to spend money on it. On a project in development it might be to attract other makers who can contribute. Or to give an early taste, simply. ;) another important task, while in development, is to get input on the game. Demos provide a maker with a potentially quite big number of playtesters who can report anything from bugs over logic issues to things just looking ....bad.
Now how cana demo achieve these goals? Well, there are several types of demos, I think. Let's look at them:
-Passive Demos:This covers everything which is not really a demo in strict sense, but still demonstrates parts of the game. This can be descriptions, artworks, trailers, and much more. They all can achieve both goals mentioned above, and are most focused on the visual part of the game, usually (though trailers can give MUCH more, of course!).
-State-of-Development-Demos: This kind of demo just gives the player more or less everything the game has at the moment of uploading. Thus, it may be more a beta, than a true demo. It will usually be updated with the development process, up to a certain point. This kind of demo serves the feeedback goal very well. It is not too perfect, imo, for getting someone into a game, because of several reasons. First, it is long to play, more the full meal already, but not completely cooked, instead of a light, but tasty appetizer. Second, it tends to have more bugs than the other demo types, because it is bigger. And bugs do not really attract you to a game, do they? Third, if regular updating happens, issues with the demo-playing may arise. Are the safe points still compatible? In a senseful way? Do I have to play from the start again? and again? and again?
-First-Chapter-Demos:This is a quite common type of demo. You simply play the beginning of the game, in a more or less finished version. You get to know the start of the storyline and basics of the setting, experience the gameplay a bit and, of course, get an impression on graphics and music. It allows for both goals to be accomplished, imo. Positive is that, if that part of the story is good, players will get hooked (cliffhangers can help here, really ;)). Also, they can get a good impression on the style of the game. (and give you feedback on that) An issue I personally have here, is that if they then decide to get and play the full thing, they will have to play the same part they already finished last. I experienced once or twice that phenomenon of a good demo....but faced that it was hard for me to do it all again, when what I truly wanted to do is go ON in the story.
-Gameplay-Impression-Demos:This type is not as common as the one before, but not unheard of. The focus here is not the storyline, usually, but the gameplay. It can be placed in any part of the game's storyline. It might even be exclusive plot for this demo purpose. It highlights the key aspects of the gameplay and lets the player experience these. This allows for feedback on these aspects. It also might get the player interested on the game, but with less spoilers than First-Chapter-Demos. Yet, they might be more complex to make and mean more work for the devs.
So, that were my few thoughts. What do you think?
Everybody who has anything to say about this, please give your opinion here. I am sure that many people could benefit from getting the opinion of people on this topic.
Now to my own thoughts. I think first of all, one has to think "what should a demo do? What is its purpose?". I think there are different views on that already maybe. But I, personally, think the main task of a demo is getting people interested in the full game. On a commercial project, this might be to show people what the game is like so they are willing to spend money on it. On a project in development it might be to attract other makers who can contribute. Or to give an early taste, simply. ;) another important task, while in development, is to get input on the game. Demos provide a maker with a potentially quite big number of playtesters who can report anything from bugs over logic issues to things just looking ....bad.
Now how cana demo achieve these goals? Well, there are several types of demos, I think. Let's look at them:
-Passive Demos:This covers everything which is not really a demo in strict sense, but still demonstrates parts of the game. This can be descriptions, artworks, trailers, and much more. They all can achieve both goals mentioned above, and are most focused on the visual part of the game, usually (though trailers can give MUCH more, of course!).
-State-of-Development-Demos: This kind of demo just gives the player more or less everything the game has at the moment of uploading. Thus, it may be more a beta, than a true demo. It will usually be updated with the development process, up to a certain point. This kind of demo serves the feeedback goal very well. It is not too perfect, imo, for getting someone into a game, because of several reasons. First, it is long to play, more the full meal already, but not completely cooked, instead of a light, but tasty appetizer. Second, it tends to have more bugs than the other demo types, because it is bigger. And bugs do not really attract you to a game, do they? Third, if regular updating happens, issues with the demo-playing may arise. Are the safe points still compatible? In a senseful way? Do I have to play from the start again? and again? and again?
-First-Chapter-Demos:This is a quite common type of demo. You simply play the beginning of the game, in a more or less finished version. You get to know the start of the storyline and basics of the setting, experience the gameplay a bit and, of course, get an impression on graphics and music. It allows for both goals to be accomplished, imo. Positive is that, if that part of the story is good, players will get hooked (cliffhangers can help here, really ;)). Also, they can get a good impression on the style of the game. (and give you feedback on that) An issue I personally have here, is that if they then decide to get and play the full thing, they will have to play the same part they already finished last. I experienced once or twice that phenomenon of a good demo....but faced that it was hard for me to do it all again, when what I truly wanted to do is go ON in the story.
-Gameplay-Impression-Demos:This type is not as common as the one before, but not unheard of. The focus here is not the storyline, usually, but the gameplay. It can be placed in any part of the game's storyline. It might even be exclusive plot for this demo purpose. It highlights the key aspects of the gameplay and lets the player experience these. This allows for feedback on these aspects. It also might get the player interested on the game, but with less spoilers than First-Chapter-Demos. Yet, they might be more complex to make and mean more work for the devs.
So, that were my few thoughts. What do you think?
