A demo for brink ?

[tokamak]

actually it had one

got a link?

[Mustkunstn1k]

I don’t really think it’s part of bethesda’s business model. Look at fallout new vegas. How would you have had a demo for that huge thing? People anticipated it and bought it.

Fallout is Fallout. Fallout is not a new ip.
Fallout 3 was very succesful, New Vegas was similiar. People knew what to expect.

Also, demos for RPG games are a lot harder. Instead of just giving the first mission or something you actually need to create some sort of a new contained experience.

[Nail]

got a link?

here ya go
http://ftp.freenet.de/pub/4players/hosted/et/official/wolf_et_test.exe

[Chris2]

I don’t really think it’s part of bethesda’s business model. Look at fallout new vegas. How would you have had a demo for that huge thing? People anticipated it and bought it.

They couldn’t for reasons you just pointed out so they had a massive advertising campaign to get people hyped up about the game, ads on every other bus stop in city centres, ads on public transport, TV ads and online marketing, they went all out for it. Also been a sequel to a smash hit helped enormously which consequently had a similarly large advertising campaign.

Compare this now with Brink, I’ve yet to see any sign of Brink apart from on my PC monitor. If they are not going to release a demo or not market their game, it begs the question what are they going to do in order to achieve sales success?

[Auzner]

tl;dr This is the broadband and HD age and demos are no longer necessary. Also read about the game. If you’re not willing to do these things then you’re a casual gamer.

[QUOTE=Seyu;278668]As far as I know, demos rarely provide any good marketing. It is mainly for people who aren’t going to buy the game anyway but want to see what the fuss is about.

This is worth a read: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/05/22/idle-thoughts-demos/[/QUOTE]
Yes, and they refuse to admit that as well. I decided I would buy Brink after READING about it. A friend mentioned the game to me and I discovered H0RSE’s compendium in August. Video games are a serious hobby for me, when I read about them I can understand and picture how the concepts would play out. After seeing alpha demos and screenshots I got a clear picture of the game. Later came more HD video segments. For me those things all satisfied the demonstration of what the game is.

Now people who don’t really play video games or don’t study them won’t really understand. They play this and that here and there but don’t have a clear picture of how an RTS or FPS works. They have to actually have a playable demo because they’re too inexperienced with video games and don’t care enough to research one. Brink has the compendium; everything is compiled in one place. All the work is done, just sit and read it after watching a few videos. Asking for a demo means they don’t care enough and want something impressionable that sells them. Likely this will have to be from positive reviews (such as high numbers with no description) or buzz (word of mouth).

I feel that if someone is really passionate about video games they’ll explore them on their own. Not spend effort arguing the case of how demos make sense, demos boost sales, demos provide a better marketing angle. Reality is none of these arguments even have a basis. The professionals in the industry who are involved with the creation and sale of a game will know more than a perturbed forum member. If most games do not have demos there’s probably a sound financial and resource cost reason for it.

As I’ve said before, the obvious guess would be the state of digital video technology and widespread broadband. In the 1990’s people didn’t have computers that could decode video and internet connections that could stream it. Today we do and it’s easy to access an HD stream showing a game with audio commentary. The 90’s had to do simple websites that would load on dial up, get articles in magazines, include demo discs, and even create shareware versions that fit on floppy disks. That’s why most games had demos then because it was easier to distribute and show 800kB of software than to digitize a VHS and host an mpeg movie on an ISDN server. And again, a lot of gamers don’t realize it from this perspective because they’ve only recently began the hobby. They don’t know any of this existed and can’t perceive this so that’s why all these entitlement arguments keep forming.

The gaming industry didn’t just start in 2007 or whenever you purchased your Xbox 360. One game doing something you liked doesn’t mean all other games have to do that or else the creators are just stupid and don’t know anything. Every entitlement thread on here has been people with no objective perception of video gaming. They think because they something they saw in Game A that Game B lacks is because the developers had all of the time in the world but not enough experience or skill to come up with it.

After Brink is released there will be plenty of players uploading HD video recordings of the gameplay. That can also be your demo. It’s another form of buzz really. Plenty of people spend their spare time to share with anonymous viewers because they like recording software. That’s a reason why there also doesn’t need to be a post-release demo.

If researching video games for a purchase decision or expanding strategies sounds like too much effort than you’re a casual gamer. Nothing can please you unless it’s already in your hands because you do the hobby for the sake of others or lack of creativity. Consoles and computers are mostly status symbols now and games are purchased for them so they aren’t just book stands. That’s supposed to be the casual gamer’s problem. Asking for a demo for something you’ll never really use much or never really cared much about anyways is just entitlement issues. Eye candy to get two hours out of the shelf trophy. Games are becoming simpler as graphics improve so that more trophies are bought with less to think about. Achievements are added so there’s less confusion about when to shelf it. I have a very cynical viewpoint about this but that’s just how I perceive most gamers around me. I don’t often meet too many people in person who can talk about video games other than the fact they’ve played many titles. Characters? Story? Memories? Strategies? No, they got achievements and closed the box, but they’re proud to own that box.

[Chris2]

tl;dr This is the broadband and HD age and demos are no longer necessary. Also read about the game. If you’re not willing to do these things then you’re a casual gamer.

Reading about a game is the same as playing a game? Interesting.

You assume everyone or the vast majority wanting a demo haven’t bothered to research this title, you base this on what exactly? A few attention seekers who post here? I know quite a few people who have been following Brink for a long time and are still unsure, just because you were sold on words and trailers alone doesn’t mean everyone else is. The desire for a demo is justifiable, the anger towards this desire isn’t. (imo)

Not everybody has disposable incomes and can just buy whatever tickles their fancy, demos when available are of use to people who would like to make a sensible purchase without having to rely on questionable reviews and hype.

I fail to see what broadband and HD have anything to do with matters, if anything surely these things would help distribute better quality demos?

Also what is wrong with been ‘casual’?

I don’t get why some folk here seem to think we should get what we are given and be grateful for it. If I went to work tomorrow on the bus but all the seats were removed and still got charged the same as today I would question this, I guess I should be grateful though that there still is a bus and STFU?

That’s all that is going on here, people questioning some decisions, while some are acting a bit harsh granted (myself included at times) others are not and genuinely would like to know the reasoning behind omissions and additions also to this game and to SD’s credit they sometimes provide some insight which is pretty nice of them if you ask me.

Just an FYI, I’ve pre-ordered.

[n0guns]

i think splash damage should add a team deathmatch mode

same here:D

[n0guns]

Now that you mention it. When is the last time we’ve seen a major Bethesda game have a demo? The only one I can really think of is WET if you consider that one of their major games but that’s the only one I really know of that had a demo.

Quake wars also had a demo to

[Nail]

QW wasn’t a Bethesda game, it was “Lackovision”

[Auzner]

just because you were sold on words and trailers alone doesn’t mean everyone else is. The desire for a demo is justifiable, the anger towards this desire isn’t.

I’m not angry with them, I just think they’re somewhat delusional. I’m probably biased because I’ve enjoyed so much Wolfenstein Enemy Territory. When I witness Brink I just see an improved ET. Even if someone hasn’t played ET they could still understand the dynamics with experience in other games.

I fail to see what broadband and HD have anything to do with matters, if anything surely these things would help distribute better quality demos?

It’s the difference between a demonstration and an interactive demonstration. With HD it fills your whole screen and you can see a lot of detail, a truly clear demonstration of the game. If you want to interact with it then they want you to pay them. It’s not as if the game is kept a total mystery and you’re gambling blind.

Not everybody has disposable incomes and can just buy whatever tickles their fancy, demos when available are of use to people who would like to make a sensible purchase without having to rely on questionable reviews and hype.

Video games are not a necessity. Owning them means you have disposable income. A symbol of status. There is more literature on games than just hyped reviews from major media. Players on youtube will record their own gameplay and talk about what they think. Bloggers will write about their experience and perhaps include annotated screenshots. This is what I meant by “reading” about a game.

Also what is wrong with been ‘casual’?

Popular games are popular because they’re popular. The players think because they’re playing a popular game they know everything about video games. They’re still casual because they have no history or variety. Then they go on a forum to ask why any other game out there is not like the sole game(type) they know about. They make suggestions that usually conclude with that they should resume playing the popular game they started with. Which means they’re only gamers for that sole game, so they’re casual. Their game got popular because it was simple enough to understand and something electronic to interact with the way they do on their phones. They think Halo was the first FPS and PC’s owe that to consoles.

I don’t get why some folk here seem to think we should get what we are given and be grateful for it.

Because I never thought a game like ET would ever be made again. I was losing hope in shooters. ET’s servers are too heavily modded and not enough people play anymore. L4D got sour from the community trolling. L4D2 keeps doing waves of updates and DLCs which bring the once a month weekend noobs back polluting the serious games.

reasoning behind omissions and additions also to this game and to SD’s credit they sometimes provide some insight which is pretty nice of them if you ask me.

They’ve given a lot of reasons for many different topics. At this point it’s been nitpicking over every little thing that a game could have that it doesn’t have. CoD lacks a lot of things and they’ve had over a half a dozen tries to include absolutely every gameplay mechanic ever conceived since the dawn of programming.

[Chris2]

I’m not angry with them, I just think they’re somewhat delusional. I’m probably biased because I’ve enjoyed so much Wolfenstein Enemy Territory. When I witness Brink I just see an improved ET. Even if someone hasn’t played ET they could still understand the dynamics with experience in other games.

Was not entirely directed at yourself there but yeah can’t fault you there.

It’s the difference between a demonstration and an interactive demonstration. With HD it fills your whole screen and you can see a lot of detail, a truly clear demonstration of the game. If you want to interact with it then they want you to pay them. It’s not as if the game is kept a total mystery and you’re gambling blind.

Yeah you do have a point there, I still feel a demo is a much better representation though.

Video games are not a necessity. Owning them means you have disposable income. A symbol of status. There is more literature on games than just hyped reviews from major media. Players on youtube will record their own gameplay and talk about what they think. Bloggers will write about their experience and perhaps include annotated screenshots. This is what I meant by “reading” about a game.

You got me there!

But some don’t have as much to spend as others, while they should perhaps ‘read’ more if that is the case, a demo when done right can be a much better decision maker in my opinion.

Popular games are popular because they’re popular. The players think because they’re playing a popular game they know everything about video games. They’re still casual because they have no history or variety. Then they go on a forum to ask why any other game out there is not like the sole game(type) they know about. They make suggestions that usually conclude with that they should resume playing the popular game they started with. Which means they’re only gamers for that sole game, so they’re casual. Their game got popular because it was simple enough to understand and something electronic to interact with the way they do on their phones. They think Halo was the first FPS and PC’s owe that to consoles.

Agree in part.

Because I never thought a game like ET would ever be made again. I was losing hope in shooters. ET’s servers are too heavily modded and not enough people play anymore. L4D got sour from the community trolling. L4D2 keeps doing waves of updates and DLCs which bring the once a month weekend noobs back polluting the serious games.

And again.

They’ve given a lot of reasons for many different topics. At this point it’s been nitpicking over every little thing that a game could have that it doesn’t have. CoD lacks a lot of things and they’ve had over a half a dozen tries to include absolutely every gameplay mechanic ever conceived since the dawn of programming.

And again again, excuse my brief reply, I’m just about to go.

(need more discussions like this!)

[Jess_Alon]

i think splash damage should add a team deathmatch mode

Because THAT can’t be found in every other online shooter ever.

[TiN_TiN]

I think the common attitude for demos is “If I haven’t experienced it, I want a demo” which is why I can see certain games like WET had a demo. To help it sell because people want to try out something new before fully committing. Yes a lot of people decide to buy games based on demos and that’s how they are looked at. But for Brink, to me it’s what you see is what you get. Doesn’t need one. It’s also kinda difficult to wrap a game with many options into something short that teases and makes you want the full game. Which is why you don’t see a lot of demos for RPGs. Only one I can ever recall is ME2 which came out way later than the actual game.

[trigg3r]

Because THAT can’t be found in every other online shooter ever.

thought it was obvious i was being sarcastic but oh well… i’ll be sure to add the :rolleyes: smilie next time to avoid confussion

[BioSnark]

But for Brink, to me it’s what you see is what you get. Doesn’t need one. It’s also kinda difficult to wrap a game with many options into something short that teases and makes you want the full game. Which is why you don’t see a lot of demos for RPGs. Only one I can ever recall is ME2 which came out way later than the actual game.

http://www.splashdamage.com/forums/showpost.php?p=278650&postcount=65

http://www.splashdamage.com/forums/showpost.php?p=278112&postcount=41

[dandragon]

Origionally I just wanted a demo like a kid opening 1 present the night before christmas to ease the excitement. But some of the posts here made me think about the whole process more and I see why some things get demos or not very insightful.

Popular games are popular because they’re popular. The players think because they’re playing a popular game they know everything about video games. They’re still casual because they have no history or variety. Then they go on a forum to ask why any other game out there is not like the sole game(type) they know about. They make suggestions that usually conclude with that they should resume playing the popular game they started with. Which means they’re only gamers for that sole game, so they’re casual. Their game got popular because it was simple enough to understand and something electronic to interact with the way they do on their phones. They think Halo was the first FPS and PC’s owe that to consoles.

I agree and I think that this is a valid point for more brink ads outside of the internet. Reason bieng to lure these casual fish to a game like brink in hopes that they see the brighter light.
Not that theres anything with casual gamers, to each thier own tastes

[Jess_Alon]

[QUOTE=dandragon;279012]Origionally I just wanted a demo like a kid opening 1 present the night before christmas to ease the excitement. But some of the posts here made me think about the whole process more and I see why some things get demos or not very insightful.

I agree and I think that this is a valid point for more brink ads outside of the internet. Reason bieng to lure these casual fish to a game like brink in hopes that they see the brighter light.
Not that theres anything with casual gamers, to each thier own tastes[/QUOTE]

Glad to help. I hope I wasn’t too harsh.

[dandragon]

nah your fine. I may be new but I jump right in.

[Nail]

we grow on ya, well, some of them do

[dandragon]

Like most things